Comments on: Cut the shit! – Are reviewers too nice?

By: adam

adam — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 11:04:06 +0000

all i remember is that reviewers said that the new prince of persia(the cell shaded one) is good. the game has a shit story, no gameplay mechanics, no levelups, no diffuculty, i wouldnt even take it for free, they gave it an 8.6! every game i see now they just say that its good? wtf have you ever played infernal? video game review websites are a joke. there is no perfect game.

By: David Macphail

David Macphail — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:52:39 +0000

Real Gamer??? Change your name now. Judging a game based on the Demo is no different than judging the game without playing it AT ALL. If you ONLY played the Demo for “Race Driver: GRID” then you probably thought THAT was a clunky, awkward mess as well. Whereas any REAL gamer knows that the final version was far, FAR different and was easily one of the best racing games of all time. Gamer god??? LOL……only complete noobs think the Demo of a game = overall experience. Like i said – anyone who’s actually played the GAMES would know how great they are.

If you really could tell what is good and evil in gaming then you would know how ridiculous you sound. Reviewers judging games based on portions of the game (That would include a Demo) is exactly what’s wrong with reviews today.

By: Real Gamer

Real Gamer — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 18:23:15 +0000

I have played the “WANTED” and “Sonic Unleashed” demos, and the whole “Simpsons Game”, and I found them to be very horrible games. The controls made you feel like you were controlling a drunk alcholic, the graphics were PS2-era at best, and there really didn’t seem to be much of a story in any of them (don’t judge me on the story for the two games I only played demos of, since you really can’t tell a story from one level). If you are a gamer, then I must be a gamer god because I can actually tell what is good and evil in gaming.

By: LordCancer

LordCancer — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 15:28:35 +0000

Reviews scores are artificial, they mean nothing. Most reviews are not critical at all. Whether it’s a paragraphs or 10 page monstrosity, reviews are nothing more then fans of games talking about how great a game is as though there obligated to say so, and they are. We all know review scores from the big names like ign, game informer, gamespot are bought and payed for. Game and journalist don’t be long in the same sentence. Game reviewers are hacks.

By: David Macphail

David Macphail — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 13:33:30 +0000

No, reviewers are not too nice, they simply have “Favourite” games that they will award a near – perfect score too without even playing it first and then they’ll overlook and poorly rate any game that doesn’t fit into their favourite genre.

One of the better games of this year was “Wanted: Weapons Of Fate”. Anyone who’s ACTUALLY played it knows it’s far better than Call Of Duty yet it got a terrible Metascore. I’d say that most of the people who reviewed it probably just looked at the front cover, realised it was based on a movie and gave it a score based on that, without even playing any of the game.

The same thing happened 2 years ago with “The Simpsons Game”. Again, anyone who actually played it would have realised it was one of the most fun games of it’s launch year but because it didn’t get the “Hype” of some games that came out that year (Halo 3 or Bioshock, which weren’t NEARLY as good) it’s Metascore doesn’t reflect that.

Then there was “Sonic Unleashed” last year – one of the most fun games i’ve played this entire generation but becuase it wasn’t a “Traditional” 2D side – scrolling Sonic game it was labelled as a franchise breaking title rather than the fantastic, innovative game it was.

Reviewers give in to hype…………most of them probably don’t even know what games they’re rating, they just give it a good score if it’s really anticipated and a low score if it’s not.

By: gumgum99

gumgum99 — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 04:37:17 +0000

Yeah, the review system is broken. If your game has a large fanbase, and is really popular, it will get a 9.5 at the lowest; Franchises that have strayed far from their roots, but aren’t broken in design get a 4.5 or lower, and if a franchise is overhyped enough, it will even cause it to get a perfect score, regardless of any flaws that appear in the game’s design.

By: Digitaldude

Digitaldude — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 03:35:18 +0000

Honestly do they know what 10/10 means!
It means perfect. As its a equals 1.
God reviewers have lost it, giving 9s out like candy, IGN gave 3 9.5s in like a month. countless 9s this year.
Remember the times when games scored over a 9 was ground breaking.
Now 10s dont even matter, how sad.

By: KiRBY3000

KiRBY3000 — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 03:34:22 +0000

GTA4 is at 98 and its not even the best GTA in the serie.

By: LeonSKennedy4Life

LeonSKennedy4Life — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 02:05:33 +0000

What?

MW2 had a great story!

By: TheTeam06

TheTeam06 — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 01:16:58 +0000

I know. I’m not hating the system, because I like it. It’s just everything from the way they talk about it to the popularity of that franchise. Sometimes, they’ll just give obvious hints that can give you the score indirectly just to try to be funny.