How come now one can understand this?

[TheTygerfire]

*Game someone doesn't like or enjoy gets a high rating by a critic*
Someone: OMG they had to have been bribed or they're a fanboy!!!

Maybe they just liked the game and you have a different opinion. Grow up.
(I know that this is obvious but some people need to get it beaten into their skulls sometimes)

 

[GenHellspawn]

Maybe they just liked the game and you have a different opinion. Grow up.

Some people are still wrapping their heads around this. As annoying as they are, just be patient.

 

[JokerGrin]

Halo anyone?

I've given up reading reviews now. I used to read loads, but now I do it how I used to as a kid, play a demo or just go for blind luck when purchasing a new game, back when I didn't have internet and couldn't afford magazines.

 

[TheTygerfire]

I still read reviews to see if the game is any good or just to see opinions. When a game I have no interest in gets a low score I laugh, and when a game I like gets a low score I say "well they're wrong." and move the hell on with my life, probably to play said game.

If a game I have no interest in gets a high rating, good for them they have something to play.

 

[quack35]

Thank you. I absolutely can not stand when people say the reviewers were "bribed". It pisses me off so much.

 

[Dr Spaceman]

Thank you. I absolutely can not stand when people say the reviewers were "bribed". It pisses me off so much.

But... what if they were bribed? I mean, how the hell else can you justify IGN's 6.9 rating of Codename Panzers: Cold War? It's so obvious to anyone who's played the game that it's a 6.5, maybe 6.7 tops. Seriously, [checking up on game publisher...] oh, uh, Atari must've paid them at least a million dollars. Jerks.

 

[TheGreenManalishi]

I read reviews for detailed info on all game elements, like gameplay, graphics, story and for the screenshots. The score isn't that important to me. I mean, though I haven't played it yet, I think Haze on the PS3 looks pretty fun. It got a 4 or something on IGN. Might not be GOTY or anything like that but it looks like it might satisfy some deep-rooted need for shooting things for a while.

And whatever any review says, Halo is mediocre.

 

[Flap Jack452]

And whatever any review says, Halo is mediocre.

It's mediocre to you, but not to the reviewer. This is the whole point the OP is trying to get across.

 

[Zac_Dai]

Reviewers aren't bribed but they are heavily influenced by where there money comes from.

Say if EA is the biggest paying advertiser on your review site and losing this would be very costly. Its reasonable then to assume that you're going to do your best to please them and the best way to do this is to review their games in the best possible light.

 

[Kirosilence]

Reviewers aren't bribed but they are heavily influenced by where there money comes from.

Say if EA is the biggest paying advertiser on your review site and losing this would be very costly. Its reasonable then to assume that you're going to do your best to please them and the best way to do this is to review their games in the best possible light.

Sorta like if Eidos Interactive has been advertising on the site, and your give one of their games a mediocre review, you get fired.

This is why I don't take reviews seriously.

 

[ElArabDeMagnifico]

Read reviews to see if the game is a buggy mess or not, then play it yourself. Ignore everything else.

 

[Remleiz]

and as for the 'bribed reviewer' issue, let's not forget the kane and lynch/gamespot fiasco

 

[bjj hero]

you have to read the actual review, not just read the score.

I do think too many mediocre games get good reviews though. Maybe my standards are too high but I play so many games that get rave reviews and then to play them is a massive let down.

I blame the nature of the review tread mill, game after game. How many times have you played a game that seems mint for the first few hours but then you think theyre nothing special and hardly play them again? GTA4 comes to mind. Reviewers cant honestly get that much play time on each game.

 

[godevit]

who cares about the reviews....if you feel the game is good get it
(meh always go for the games that hide in the shadow)

 

[Gamine]

who cares about the reviews....if you feel the game is good get it
(meh always go for the games that hide in the shadow)

Exactly.

Reviews cannot make me like or hate a game.
So whether its bribed or not, the gameplay will tell at the end of the day

 

[The-Big-D]

Everyone has there own opinion on the game and reviewers themselves are entitled to there own opinions. They havnt been bribed or are fan boys the game just appeals to them more than it might do to other people.

Dont always rely on reviews.
Play the game and make your own mind up.

 

[FinalGamer]

Well now if it's GameSpot...

 

[SimuLord]

Well now if it's GameSpot...

Indeed. When a site has a proven track record of accepting bribes for scores (or giving lower scores to games that didn't bring the payola, see Van Ord, Kevin) and yet they still figure into the formula for Game Rankings and Metacritic, that's bad for the industry.

 

[Captain Spectacular]

if you notice this sorta thing only applies typically to games that are console exclusives. People get so damn defensive over their consoles because to them it's an investment and if they see another console getting good exclusives then may also see it as a threat to their console's lifespan. People all need to relax about their systems and enjoy the games they have because when taken all in perspective each console is good in their own way.

Then again there is also the culture of people who hate anything regardless of what it is simply because of the fact it's popular. I know people who, despite never actually playing it, hate Halo simply because everyone else loves it. These people can all sit around and rant while I continue to enjoy the things that I believe are good.

 

[hopeneverdies]

The thing is professional reviews get a short amount of time to play a game. If a game has lots of things to do it will rate higher than one that focuses more on actual gameplay. I always get mad when I see Advance Wars Dual Strike rated higher than Days of Ruin because of this or any series whose sequels remove stuff that turns out for the better. Dual Strike while featuring a ton of play modes was extremely broken with Tag abilities. DoR removed Survival and Combat mode in favor of Wifi and better play balance in the COs and units which I think was better for it.