There are two interesting points about spore and its "review" scores. The first is the anti DRM amazon user review issue. I think this really exposes how gamers consider low review scores to be a slap on the wrist rather than any objective indicator of the content.
Don't get me wrong I agree that DRM is retarded, useless and only hurts the ones you love.
However, deciding to give an otherwise perfectly good game a low score over something that the developers have no power over is dumb. Let me say that again, the people who made the game have no power to change this, it's a publisher decision, driven by publisher brains, it is a decision made simply because they believe doing so will net them more money. It doesn't actually mater if it does or doesnt, they believe in it and that is what is important.
Publishers love the idea of DRM, it makes them feel empowered.
This response is however the same mentality that decides a game is worth 20% less because you where expecting techno or only like games with cars or cowboys in them. This is what review scores represent to the fanboys. A vindication of their continual love for yet another sequel in their favorite JRPG or a slap on the wrist to developers who didn't suck up to the gamer press enough and had the hordes of morons unleashed upon them.
Most developers understand that at best DRM is pointless and at worst counter productive. If you want to get that message across to publishers you need to empower the developers. All that is being proven with the Amazon backlash is that review scores are bullshit random numbers that people arrive at for all sorts of wrong reasons.
Next we have the professional review scores, some people are upset that spore is scoring "low" in reviews with the comment being that it lacks depth.
Well yes, it lacks depth, it's designed to be accessible to the average gaming moron, the sims player if you will. Do you have any idea just how dumb this person is? I really wish there was some hidden game play depth to spore rather than the simple grind it is but I've met the audience and I agree. This is all they can understand, it is probably already too much and needs to be dumbed down even more.
I say spore is not dumbed down enough :)
So armed with the understanding that the grindplay is mediocre some reviewers decide its an 80% sort of game rather than a 90% sort of game. This number is of course meaningless and as random as any other number reviewers are expected to give a game.
So again, we hit another prime example of how a final review score is pointless useless information.
It seems unfashionable to suggest that games, just like all other forms of media can be designed for different audiences but this is a perfect example of just that.
So there we have it, two different issues, both exposing the same underlying problem of review scores not really meaning anything, to anyone.
PS I still suspect spore will not generate the revenue that EA needs it to generate to be considered a success. Remember we are talking replacing the sims as a cash cow here. The result being a pulling back by EA of this sort of funding. Maybe pulling back is the wrong word, as it indicates an existence of funding in the first place :)
