- Mar 24, 2011
... which they actually always are (even so-called "objective" judgements are based on the reviewer's notion of what "objective" means) ...VectorSlip said:I just have a quick question. I've seen a lot of arguments for subjectivity vs objectivity in reviews ITT and I wanted to ask something. If a reviewers piece is just 100% subjective and opinion
Well, for starters, they can detail what they liked and what they didn't like, and from their description, they can decide whether you would like those things or not.then where does its value lie? Im not asking this to disparage any reviews in particular, I'm just genuinely curious.
If its just another person's opinion about a game then whats the point?
But also: Really, unless something is a very very niche title and you're not part of that niche audience, most people are going to have fairly broadly similar opinions about a lot of things. Even the Polygon review in question was 7.5, not (say) 3, and said it was an "otherwise great game". If you look beyond just the score and read the article, I think you can come to a similar conclusion.
There are, of course, exceptions. I don't like MOBAs and MMOs as a rule. If I read good reviews of a new (traditional-style) MOBA or MMO, I'm still going to be skeptical. If I see bad reviews, no chance I'll be touching that. On the other hand, if I found a critic who disliked MOBAs/MMOs as much as I do, and they said they actually liked it, I might pay more attention.
It's all about context, and how much you agree with the principles and tastes upon which a reviewer judges a game.