New Review Posted: ChoroQ

Daniel Weissenberger · 12-15-2004, 02:24 PM

Thom Moyles reviews ChoroQ and is reminded of his youthful gameplaying adventures:

"When I was 14, I spent hours upon hours playing Road Rash on the Sega Genesis, going through the same race over and over with the second-worst bike in the game (it was best to get the second-worst bike because it's pretty much impossible to win a race with the worst bike). After winning some large amount of races, I would have enough money to buy the best bike in the game. I would then happily tear through the middle portions of the game with little effort expended beyond holding down the accelerate button and avoiding obvious crashes."

The rest of the review is available at http://www.gamecritics.com/review/choroq/main.php (very little of the remainder is about Road Rash)

Mike Bracken · 12-15-2004, 02:52 PM

Who actually wrote that review? My pic is on it, but it wasn't me...

Mike B.

Daniel Weissenberger · 12-15-2004, 03:00 PM

It was Thom - sorry about the confusion Mike, I didn't have the info when I posted it, and you just happen to be the lucky guy with his face on the default template.

Mike Bracken · 12-15-2004, 03:04 PM

Hehe, no problem at all--I just didn't want to steal someone's review.

Mike B.

EnduroGamer · 12-15-2004, 06:51 PM

Thom, did you happen to play Gadget Racers at all? If so, how did ChoroQ stack up?

It seems from what you're saying that ChoroQ is a poor man's Gadget Racers. And since Gadget Racers is already pretty low-budget, I'm thinking this might be pretty bad.

Also, the ChoroQ cars are essentially those "Penny Racers" we used to have as kids, right?

EDIT: I just wanted to add that thanks to Thom's expansive vocabulary, I learned a new word today. Upon googling it over to dictionary.com, I came across the following definition. Albeit slightly edited.

Quote:

The videogame publisher, Electronic Arts, has a size problem. A monstrous, staggering, stupefying one. Brobdingnagian even.

QXZ · 12-15-2004, 07:24 PM

Quote:

The Honorable Horror Geek wrote:
Who actually wrote that review? My pic is on it, but it wasn't me...

Kinda reminds me of one incident were Brad "took multivitamins" and looked like Chi.

What I want to know is, who wrote on the front page, "Somebody races through Choro Q..."? And no -- I'm not making that up; Thom gets no credit for his piece.

GC_Thom · 12-15-2004, 09:05 PM

I think it's likely because I forgot to put my name on the Word Doc when I sent in the review. Go me. This probably caused the problem with the picture as well.

Enduro - I haven't played Gadget Racers, I can't be of any help to you there. And yeah, the cars are the penny racers from back in the day. Also, when you say 'pretty bad'--I gave it a 5.5. That's above-average (this isn't IGN), albeit only by a slight amount. But I don't see it appealing to you, since I already know your tastes and preferences when it comes to car games.

EnduroGamer · 12-15-2004, 09:36 PM

Thom, I'm confused. You said you played Gadget Racers, but can't compare the two? Come again?

I know that 5.5 is an above average score--I don't need you to remind me that this isn't IGN--but I sensed that you weren't all that high on the game. I'm actually intrigued by the caRPG aspects of the game and I think it would like to mess around with it. I liked Gadget Racers to an extent but the flying and boating and whatnot kind of ruined it for me. It was just too wacky. If ChoroQ is like Gadget Racers but without the flying and stuff, I might really be interested.

As for my racing preferences, I can get into just about anything (except the hardcore Indy racing sims). Don't sell my tastes short

.

GC_Thom · 12-15-2004, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EnduroGamer

Thom, I'm confused. You said you played Gadget Racers, but can't compare the two? Come again?

Er, I meant to type "haven't", sorry. I've gone back and changed it to avoid confusion and to make you look like you're crazy.

Quote:

I know that 5.5 is an above average score--I don't need you to remind me that this isn't IGN

That was mainly an excuse to link a very amusing article that they recently put up--if you want a laugh, I'd go and follow the link I gave.

Quote:

I liked Gadget Racers to an extent but the flying and boating and whatnot kind of ruined it for me. It was just too wacky. If ChoroQ is like Gadget Racers but without the flying and stuff, I might really be interested.

Yeah, there's no flying and no boating. If you're really into the caRPG concept, there are a lot of wacky mini-games in the Story Mode with a widely varying level of quality, so be forewarned about that.

Quote:

As for my racing preferences, I can get into just about anything (except the hardcore Indy racing sims). Don't sell my tastes short

.

My apologies, Enduro. Just be aware that PGR this ain't.

QXZ · 12-15-2004, 10:28 PM

In response to Thom and Enduro: Isn't the concept of equating a score to the word average really based on the critic's own standards?

One person's opinion is that a rating of 5.0 is "average" because it lies in the middle of the road. Another person would be just as willing to call a rating of 6.0 the same thing, and with a higher "standard", as it were, labelling a 5.0 as "poor".

Just a personal thought.

EnduroGamer · 12-15-2004, 11:04 PM

Thanks, Thom! I was wondering if you mean't to type "haven't" (with anyone else I would have figured that was the case) but I know you're so careful with what you say that I confused myself by giving you the benefit of the doubt. LOL!

And thanks for considering my PGR fondness. But I also rank "Wacky Races" and "Karnaaj Rally" high on my list of favorite racers too, so there's no telling with me.

GC_Thom · 12-16-2004, 03:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QXZ

In response to Thom and Enduro: Isn't the concept of equating a score to the word average really based on the critic's own standards?

One person's opinion is that a rating of 5.0 is "average" because it lies in the middle of the road. Another person would be just as willing to call a rating of 6.0 the same thing, and with a higher "standard", as it were, labelling a 5.0 as "poor".

Just a personal thought.

This is a fair point to bring up--I'll just have to say that 5.0 is 'average' to me and I try and rate every game I play according to that scale. I try and bring this up every time we talk about score not just because I've got a big mouth but because I want to make sure that people know where I'm coming from.

That said, I also always say that I'd rather have people rely on the written review rather than the score and I think from the review it's fairly clear that ChoroQ isn't that good but isn't that bad.