Thursday, June 16, 2011

Link roundup

1. NY Times' review of the first Chrome notebook:

How well does Google’s newfangled concept hold up in the real world?

Unfortunately, not very well.
It's ludicrously expensive considering its shortcomings.

2. Did you see earlier this week that a PR company promised to punish sites running negative video game reviews? I couldn't help but think of it in reading the uselessly contradictory conclusion to Destructoid's review of Alice: Madness Returns:
In spite of tedium and technical faults, I quite enjoyed Alice: Madness Returns, which says quite a bit for the extraordinary world McGee has created from the blueprint of Caroll's original tales. Fans of the original Alice find plenty of here to love, and will certainly want to return to Wonderland to work towards a satisfying narrative conclusion. For others, putting up with the game's monotonous design may prove to be a personal spiral into madness they may want to avoid.
UPDATE: To be fair, as the commenter points out, Destructoid gave Duke Nukem a terrible review.

3. There's a theme park in Las Vegas where you can operate excavators and other machinery. But packages start at $400 and no kids under 14, so I can't imagine it lasting.


  1. The Alice: Madness Returns conclusion isn't really contradictory.

    It is pretty much saying that if you liked the first game, then you will like the sequel. If you didn't like the first game, then you won't like the sequel. If you never played the first game, then it is honestly up in the air. The game is flawed, but there are people that like it despite those flaws.

    Maybe it isn't the most helpful, but the reviewer apparently thinks the game falls into one of those questionable divides where it is hard to tell what people will decide.

    My biggest issue isn't with the review, but rather that Destructoid classes as "Very Good" and "well-above average" a game with "hard-to-ignore faults" that is still fun. But that is just how their scoring system works, as they have preset text descriptions for each possible number, and that is the text that happened to get paired with the "Very Good" "7".

    That you mention a Destructoid review is a bit interesting, as the PR tweets may themselves have referenced the Destructoid review of Duke Nukem Forever. One of the tweets mentioned rating the game a 2, and Destructoid is one of two sites that gave it a 2.

    However, I think Destructoid's "2" was a fair assessment, as again Destructoid has text descriptions for each number of their numbering system, and the text description for "2" does fit the review better than any of the other numbers.