Which reviewer do you trust the most?

[Joccaren]

Pretty much just Yahtzee and Jim from this site. They tend to have fairly reasonable opinions that I'll take with a grain of salt, are entertaining, and will say it straight if something makes a game utterly unplayable, or whether its just something really annoying - most of the time.

Bajo and Hex from Good Game (Australian Gaming Tv-show)

Been a while since I watched them. Think I stopped around the time of their Fable 3 review, and even then there were a number of things they'd said I didn't agree with. Stopped watching more because of lack of television than lack of interest though. Even if I don't agree with their scores or opinions they usually give enough information for me to make an opinion off of it, and I like that they make it abundantly clear that its their opinion on things, probably because the two of them can disagree at times, as opposed to a number of reviewers who act as if their opinion is fact - and that's one thing I can't stand.

 

[Blackdoom]

I typically gauge just how much /v/ hates a video game to how good it is typically there is a certain level of hate which means that the game is good however once it exceeds that point it is typically shit.

So, the hate a game gets on /v/ is like your bell curve of the game's quality? That's an interesting measurement scale.

Maybe not exactly a bell curve as both sides aren't exactly equal in terms of the hate/quality ratio.

 

[Yopaz]

People liking Yahtzee as a subjective game reviewer. Seriously? He craps on everything, even a game he loved liked just cause 2. And really, you are going to spend your money, based on a guy who says Borderlands 2 and Dead Island are crap for arbitrary reasons. Seriously?

Personally I don't trust him as a subjective game reviewer. I trust that he will be able to present his opinion of a game in a humorous way. If he hates a game that tells me the game wasn't his kind of game. If he likes a game then that tells me that I should check it out because I got similar taste (I usually like what he likes).

Also you think a game reviewer is bad because he says negative things about games he likes? You'd rather have people who try to sell you a game by ignoring flaws?

OT: While Yahtzee isn't a reviewer I listen to what he has to say about games, I take his recommendations, but I am usually able to enjoy games he hates. I trust his recommendations and his most hated games, but for the games in between I prefer to check some serious reviews or gameplay videos.

Jim Sterling also has similar tastes than me when it comes to some games. Looking back to games I played before I read his reviews I often myself giving the game the same scores he did.

However I have to say that I don't trust any reviewer. They are people with opinions that sometimes match my own. I skim through reviews to see if there's something I really like about the game.

 

[an874]

I don't trust any reviewer totally, but I generally like Jim Sterling's Destructoid review, Angry Joe from Blistered Thumbs, and I'm starting to warm up to Dark Side Phil's Hateful Truth series.

 

[Nouw]

I don't really trust a single reviewer, I opt to look at multiple reviews from different sites and make my opinion collectively.

9001. Jim Sterling

You read his review for MW3 didn't you ?

 

[Andrewtheeviscerator]

I typically gauge just how much /v/ hates a video game to how good it is typically there is a certain level of hate which means that the game is good however once it exceeds that point it is typically shit.

>implying /v/ doesn't hate every single video game

 

[uchytjes]

Well, TotalBiscuit is the one that I trust most often. I never buy purely on his recommendation, like any person with half a brain.

 

[JagermanXcell]

Adam Sessler when he left Xplay.
Ben Yahtzee.
Arin Hanson.
Angry Joe is pretty good.

And my number 1 reviewer I trust (in fact the one EVERYONE should trust): *drumroll*

Regular everyday gamers. The more legitimate opinions, the more idea of what game you'll be getting your self into and wether or not its worth paying a small fortune for/waiting to buy it used or just borrowing it from a friend.

No other reviewer can compare.

 

[Happiness Assassin]

I trust only my gut. Everybody has their own preferences that won't necessarily line up with mine. I read reviews to get a general description of how the game plays. Reviews are, by their very nature, subjective and biased.

 

[Reaper195]

Myself. WHile sometimes I might agree with what another reviewer says, more than often I'll end up reading their review and go "No, fucking wrong! That was incredibly awesome!" or "WHAT THE SHIT!? AssCreed 3 was horse cock!". So I tend to look into games that I would seem to like by checking out the trailers, seeing what other games the developers have made, watching some gameplay videos (Although it's next to impossible to find a video where the game is being played without some dickhead trying to sound all cool and smart and witty).

 

[StriderShinryu]

I think trust is sort of an odd word to use given that reviews are simply professionally stated opinion. Now, of course, that doesn't mean they are not to be believed or anything silly like that, it's just that "trust" seems to be overstating what I look to reviews for.

In any case, if I'm looking at reviews, I don't ever go with any single source regardless with my history with a certain one. I will always compare and contrast reviews from different sources and I wouldn't say I automatically rule any source out. My goal is to simply look at general opinion on a game from people I believe to be more swayed by professionalism and less swayed by fanboyism (hence why I almost never consider user reviews). If the general belief lines up with what I find appealling about a game, I may end up buying it. If the general belief doesn't, I may not. If I'm on the fence at all, I go past reviews and head to sources for actual Let's Play or Let's Look At type videos so I can actually see the game in front of me in action. At this point, and barring any of the weird system spec related glitches and errors found mainly in the PC gaming realm, I just don't see any honest reason for anyone complaining about having bought a game they end up hating, "trusted reviewers" be damned.

While I would always suggest looking into the details of reviews, I find that things like metacritic and gamerankings get way too much flak for this sort of average appraisal. Sure you may not agree with the details but if you see a game scoring poorly on metacritic it's probably a bad game and if it's scoring well it's probably a good game. It may or may not be to your tastes, of course, but the general professional opinion is usually a pretty decent guideline.

 

[marcooos]

Jim sterling and the rest of Dtoid I genuinely trust. The escapist I trust but find myself in contstant disagreement with, even though I agree with susan's ni no kuni review (I'd have put it lower though)

 

[Not Matt]

Apart from the escapist's own Yahtzee, bob, and Jim
Joe Vargas(angry Joe)
Doug Walker(nostalgia critic and bum reviews)
Lindsay Ellis(nostalgia chick)
rebel taxi (don't know his real name)
everyone at pressfire
(he's kind of a reviewer now) Lyle McDouchebag(I don't believe for a second that that is his real name though)

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

I don't really trust any reviewers. I only trust my own judgement. I'll get a vague idea of the game from listening to multiple reviewers but very rarely do any of them mesh up with my own opinion of a game.

 

[NightmareExpress]

People that aren't afraid to punch the game in the face, declare a few flaws and put out a score that shows as much.
I absolutely despise reviews full of praise written out like a bloody advertisement and an opinionated high school essay mixed together. Therefore, I tend to avoid major sites because they are likely in the pocket of the publisher and biased beyond belief.

More oft than not I find myself watching gameplay footage and occasionally delving into a GiantBomb quick-look (mostly for the footage, some of the commentary is annoying for one reason or another).

But above all, I trust myself the most.
I know what I like and even when I enjoy something, I'm not afraid to admit it has flaws (be they minor or major).

 

[CommanderL]

angry joe He explains the good and the bad even though our views don't always line up I trust his judgement
total biscut not a reviewer persay but what he does is good as you get to see his thoughts on the game while playing it

nerd cubed me and him have very similar tastes

 

[The Hero Killer]

Everybody has their own opinions so I cant say that I trust one person more than another but I use different reviewers for different reasons.

Game Informer's opinions is normally closest to mine and the score they give a game is normally what I would.
Gametrailers is best for their 7-8 minute reviews for me to actually see the game in action.
Zero Punctuation is great for an honest opinion of the games flaws.

As far as movies go I normally dont agree with MovieBob's opinions but I take then into consideration before I go see a film. I do however really respect his knowledge of film and comic books displayed in his big picture episodes.

I'm not really a fan of the escapist game reviews for a multitude of reasons, and I find Jim Sterling's sense of humor too off putting for me to give his videos a dedicated viewing.

 

[chikusho]

I usually don't go by any one reviewer, but general consensus of quality among a handful of reviewers.

 

[Zacharious-khan]

I think Yahtzee is the best reviewer and my favorite reviewer because while i can tell whats good about the game because the box and/or description will outline any and all things that are good about it, Yahtzee outlines all the parts about the game that aren't good and its those things that ruin a game. plus hes funny

 

[ExtraDebit]

For now I trust, watch and read Jim Sterling, Yahtzee and Movie Bob only. I've tried other reviewers and only met with disappointments. It's justs that some reviewers have no standards and just don't get it.

Say for example if a game got a horrible control or ending, I don't mind the reviewer giving the game a high score while pointing out its flaws. But some reviewers competely ignores the flaw and without a single mention of it in their reviews.

I don't know if they as reviewer failed to notice the flaws or just completely bias. If a game got flaws they should first point out its flaws then justify their score (if it's a high one) why they got a high score despite its short commings.

Some reviewers think that just because they like and enjoy the game they can give whatever score they want since it's their review. That is just wrong! The purpose of a review should be to inform gamers about the game, THE GAME!! not the reviewers preference in games or what they like, we don't care about that!

Some reviewers I suspect just lacks experience playing games, they just didn't play enough games or play enough DIFFERENT types of games from different platforms and different era. But I think we're lucky enough to have Jim,Ben and Bob at the moment, most people in the world are mediocre at what they do and I'm just glad that we got 3 that excel in their jobs.