Je suis joined jewels.
- Jan 19, 2009
Completely false.josemlopes said:You cant base an entire review on personal preferences, that way if the reviewer of this site for this game was another one we would get an all together diferent opinion/score. One thing is saying that the minigames are just fluff, the game has technical issues or the story is dumb (if trying to be smart) and another thing is that the main characters arent the type of protagonists that you like.
There are a lot of things that I dont like but respect and see why people like it and its good, as a professional reviewer there is a certain responsability to not let you personal view to get that much in the way (it can get but make it clear that it is a personal view). Moviebob fails a lot of times on that too and the Gamespot review goes all out with political views and shit, thats even worse.
I really dont agree with the 10/10 being handled out there but most real issues we seem to get with GTA V are framerate drops and pop-ins. If the game managed to be all it wanted to be (and it wanted a lot) with only those flaws I think it deserves to be a bit more then "average".
I mean, "the story is dumb" is based on personal view, so your own list of critique-able things fails.
I've never been under the impression that reviews are anything BUT based on personal preferences, it's bizarre to see so many people trying to grasp at the concept just now. Yes, if a different reviewer reviewed it, then the score would be different, but that's not a problem. If you're not supposed to include personal preferences in a review, then metacritic would display one score across the board.
Add the interactive element and the fact that this is ostensibly "the most entertaining game of the year" (according to users), and it's easy to see why people don't want to mix "fun" with "horrific death and violence", but they're OK with mixing fun with "derpy death and violence".Carrots_macduff said:"You can only embody a vicious psychopath a short time before it becomes boring, at best, and soul-crushing, at worst.
Forcing players to murder people, not in a gamey "I killed you to complete a goal" way that defines this medium, but in a terrorizing and demeaning way, is not what will make videogames great."
why not? why is it comparatively boring to have an actual, human emotional reaction(negative or otherwise) to doing bad things when compared to killing without context like in most other games?
Maybe thats the perfect way to make video games great
Most people playing Spec Ops: The Line weren't having the time of their lives. Some even said it was "anti-fun". GTAV... is not that.