Favourite/Least Favourite Easy Allies Reviews

  • Considering that Easy Allies is almost 5 years old, I think it's a good milestone to look back at the best and worst reviews you think they did. If you think "worst" is too harsh a descriptor then replace favourite/least favourite reviews with EZA reviews you agree/disagree with most. Personally I find it difficult to find EZA reviews I thoroughly disagree with but I do think Blood gave ONRUSH a bit too high of a score when he dished a 9.0 out to it. ONRUSH is a really cool game and very fun but a 9 would suggest something of a classic which I don't think it is.

  • @jdincinerator Onrush is amazing, innovative, and deserves the 9.0. It deserved way more appreciation than it ever got.

    There's all kinds of stuff I could point to, lots of Huber reviews, no quarrel, just has pretty opposite tastes to my own most of the time. Trying to recognize that though and pick something I think is just more in the spectrum of objectively wrong, that I don't have a personal passionate interest in skewing my view of it, my mind always goes back to Damiani's Star Fox Zero review.

    As for favorites, the majority of my favorite reviews usually end up being from the master, Ben Moore. Of course his Persona 5 review is an easy example to display, but honestly the majority of his reviews are the same level of excellent or approaching it to the point that I always get hyped when there's a new Ben Moore review to watch, even if I'm not particularly interested in the game it is around.

  • @mbun I'm not arguing that it doesn't deserve appreciation but a 9 is too high in my opinion. Just thought about another review that I don't agree with that is far more worthy of a lower score-Brandon and his review of Watch Dogs: Legion. An 8.0 is far too high for Legion, I found it to be largely boring and bereft of charisma despite the few things it does commendably-but it's more of a 5.0.

    Huber does a fair job of reviewing games but I do sense the ones he'll really love to the ones he may not enjoy as much. As for Damiani I always find that he's very particular and knows what he wants from his games and I find that rather refreshing.

    Ben Moore is just brilliance when it comes to game reviews, his articulations really are something else.

  • Worst is Damianis 9.5 for ni no kuni 2. I like that game but that score was mental. Near perfect I think not.

  • Favourite would be Ben's Fallout 76. He destroyed it in a way where he was fair informitive & brutal without being a wanker about it.

  • The Best

    Uncharted 4
    Youtube Video

    Huber started off in the GT days of having relatively simple reviews but he's definitely become a pretty great writer over time. This is just a prime example of actually describing the game accurately as well as bringing himself into the review and adding personal taste into the mix.

    Persona 5
    Youtube Video

    This is one of the best reviews I've ever watched or read. Just a full overview of the entire game with clear description and original thoughts added when describing all the minutiae in the game.

    Fallout 76
    Youtube Video

    This review is just hilarious. More reviews today need to be more informative like this one is. Too many reviews critique games through the lens of somebody who might already be into the genre or type of game that's being reviewed and therefore are more lenient on it. Ben has even done that himself. But this review is just objective and brutal and I think it might've saved a few people their money.

    The description on YouTube just cracks me up:

    Fallout 76 is barren of good ideas and littered with giant bugs, far too closely resembling the wasteland it depicts.

    The Worst

    Quantum Break
    Youtube Video

    Huber is just too light on this game. I remember being shocked at how awful the combat was. You can quite literally stand still and the AI won't hit you or make any attempt on your life. This review just outright misrepresents and glances over objectively awful AI and combat.

    Youtube Video

    I don't have one specific example, but this most recent review from Brad sorta encapsulates how he just needs to describe the games a little less and add more original insight. Sometimes his reviews read a bit like a back of the box description rather than critical commentary. And his descriptions are usually pretty great. If I want to inform myself about what type of game this is, a Brad review will do that job. A lot of running and jumping? Okay—got it! But in terms of getting deeper with it, I find he's too shy about really just digging in and saying how he feels about the game as opposed to describing it.

    His Lawbreakers review is perfect. He describes the type of game, how it stacks up against the marketplace, the studio it was made by, then how he feels about the game mechanics personally. That one is just nail on the head perfect and he should do that more often.

  • I commented on the review originally and Blood felt like it was just a different "style" but I really don't like the Watch Dog's Legion review.

    Youtube Video

    Easy Allies as a publication tends to lean more towards the "review video games as art" side of things more than the "review video games as a consumer product", but I find that this one leaned much too far. I think it does an exceptionally poor job of helping the watcher make any kind of purchase decision, and instead focuses on whether Recruitment mechanics work, to a fault.

    It sort of reflects the disconnect I often feel with Jones and sometimes Huber, where I feel they often take for granted the position they find themselves in. Jones especially I find really does not appreciate how expensive this hobby is for the general public. The complaints about Assassin's Creed Valhalla being 'way too long' especially reeks of entitlement.

    Thankfully these occurrences are few and far between, but I make a point to take some of the things the Allies say with a pinch of salt.

  • I'm with the homie @Mbun that OnRush deserves a 9. It was one of the best and most original racing games in a long time and NOBODY CARED.

  • @hazz3r

    I tend to agree with what you're saying here but it ultimately depends on who is reviewing the game. Because my complaint is that Brad reviews games as a product to a frustrating degree and it isn't really very insightful to me at all. Reviews like that are dime a dozen.

    Per the Valhalla length discussion; Jones' criticism of Valhalla being way too long can also be useful to the consumer who wants to spend their money and time wisely. Back when I was a little kid or a poor student, I wanted my games to have a solid bang for my buck but also have some sort of rewarding payoff in the end. If the game is needlessly long, then that is a problem in my eyes—regardless of how many hours I got out of it for $79.99 + tax.

    So my point is that this isn't one sided. Criticizing a game for being too long isn't necessarily an entitled slap in the face of the average consumer, when you can look at it as a criticism that can save you time and money.

    I've been on both sides of that coin where I can only afford one or two games per year, and my current self who can buy what I want when I want. In both instances, I want somebody to tell me if a game is needlessly long. I feel like every MGS V review mentioned the unnecessary bloated length of 80+ hours. I was a "starving student" in 2015 and even my love of Metal Gear Solid was challenged with the length of that game, despite getting a good bang for your buck. I think most reviews hit the nail on the head in the case of MGSV and AC Valhalla.

    Also, for what it's worth, I don't think any film, music, or literature critic reviews a product from a mostly consumer standpoint. So many bullshit movies get solid to good reviews but forget that these movies are impossible to see in standard 2D nowadays so we're already at a minimum of $21.99 for ONE ticket let alone wife and kids. Then the popcorn combo and all that nonsense is an easy $20-40 right there. So the average family probably spends $100+ for a movie theatre experience for what amounts to 2 hours of some bullshit Star Wars sequel.

    I even read a Telefilm report a few years ago that said most families and consumers in general opt to switch from film to TV viewing habits and watching movies from home because of the cost issue. Yet I've never once read NYT, RogerEbert.com, Variety, and the others really dig into the consumer aspects of a film review other than where to rent, stream, or view it.

    It's nice that most gaming outlets, EZA included, have some of that consumer product POV (i.e. cost, platform, genre, length, modes, etc), but I don't think it's necessary to go far beyond the basic info in a review.

  • @hazz3r said in Favourite/Least Favourite Easy Allies Reviews:



  • @hazz3r said:


    I've got to say, this bothers me too, but I know what they actually mean, and it just doesn't match up with what they say. Being long isn't the problem. Being long and boring is the actual problem. Being long when the gameplay doesn't significantly evolve or change up throughout the length is why the games are bad. Alternatively, I've got some tiny beef with Persona 5 for setting up a main bad guy, then having you defeat said bad guy, then dragging the plot and extremely slow goodbyes for the ending another 20 hours or something. (Maybe closer to 10, but I'm a slow player, and that's still entirely too long.) Just let the damn game end when it is already plenty long and you already had a satisfying story loop. If you really need that extra shit, go the postgame or true ending route for the megafans. All this was before Royal made the game even longer...

    But you don't see Ben complaining about how long Xenoblade is or such. Damiani does about 2, but that's because he already wasn't having a good time due to refusing to learn the systems for so long, not vibing with the cast, and his inability to control his Pyra male gaze, plus it was an obligatory game for him to begin with because he liked 1 so much. Long games should not be a negative as long as they remain engaging for their length, and it is a bummer to hear the Allies talk like they wish all games were super short when some of us out here depend on the longer ones to last us because we can't afford to buy every new release, and so we're not scrambling through a dozen games back to back and getting fatigued like them. Some of us squeeze beloved games for every drop we can get, and we appreciate all the content they offer.

  • @mbun

    Man... I love P5 but that game forced me to do one of the things I hate most in gaming. I ended up staying up reeeeeallllllly fucking late on a Monday or Tuesday because I thought I was close to beating the game, but the actual ending came like 3 hours later.

    So it was either A) plough through until I'm tired at like 2am and going to have a bad day at work the next day, or B) put the game in rest mode right when I perceive the game to be at it's finale. And who wants to do that? Nobody pauses Lord of the Rings during the final battle.

    How could I have even avoided that?—play the game with a clear 4 hours on a weekend only? I'm kinda hoping that the PlayStation 5 corrects course for some of this stuff in the cards system or whatever it's called. Like just tell me if the game is gonna end or not or how far away I am until the next chapter or finale.

    No reason for that last extra "dungeon" so to speak. I could understand a 1-2 hour closing action but it's more like a Climax, then another Rising Action to another Climax, then a sudden 5 minute Conclusion.

  • I never saw anyone complain about a long game if it's not boring. So I automatically assume game becomes boring after a while if they say it's ''too long''. So I don't have any problems about using ''too long'' as a complain. Also as long as game is not too short(<8-9 hours) I don't mind the full price because I know that I will only pay the full price for a game if I really want to play it on launch, other than that I can simply wait. Another thing is I am really frusturated about people want games to be 30+ hours because they pay for them. That's the main reason why we have so many open world borefests, because you can play them 30+ hours while paying the same amount like 8-9 hours linear games.

    @dipset said in Favourite/Least Favourite Easy Allies Reviews:


    I hate this so much, especially the bold part and I can't even describe the frustration without using my face and gestures. It also causes for me to less appriciate the ending of the game most of the time because I feel like it should had ended way before.

  • This post is deleted!

  • @scotty I feel like this happened at the end of 3, 4 and 5 and it's why I am pretty certain I said "fuck, finally" after each one finally ended.

  • @e_zed_eh_intern

    I've never played them but I can imagine. It's really awful for a game to make its player say that.

  • I think the criticism is about games being too long AND unengaging.
    For instance I've spent about as much time playing AC Odyssey as I spent playing TLOU2 (45 hours give or take) and while I can't force myself to go any further in Odyssey, I am chomping at the bit for more The Last Of Us.

  • @dipset
    Death Stranding did the same to me, was st one point at about 10pm I thought I was near the end, the credits....the real credits didn't roll until 7am. Although at that point I was Stuck at home during quarantine (and dealing with a lab that had lost my COVID test, alongside like 75K others), and just needed anything to do that wasn't playing phone tag with my job's HR department, the case handler for my leave from work, or arranging the delivery of whatever notes or paperwork my employer needed to approve my leave.

  • Reeks of entitlement was a strong phrase. I think they lack the appreciation that for many people, as long as they enjoy a game, it being longer can only be a plus.

    If you go back to Jones and Huber's discussions, they don't talk about engagement or anything of the like. Huber says "it's just too long". If what they mean is more nuanced than that they they should be the ones to explain it.

    My main point is that I sometimes feel that their privilege biases their critique towards what's good for them, rather than the general consumer, or even an enthusiast.