Worst Game Reviewers?

[cjspyres]

So, we all know that there are times when a reviewer will slip up and give a game a score it doesn't deserve, good or bad. But then there are the ones that are consistent in this, and eventually become unreliable for information in regards to games. I want to see what you Escapists think. Bonus points for providing damning articles! GO!

Captcha: Face the Music. I'd say quite so.

 

[baddude1337]

Not quite the reviewer per se, but the controversy surrounding it: Gamespots review of the first Kayne and Lynch. The reviewer basically got fired as Gamespot had the games ads plastered on its website and he gave it a 6/10. Obviously, the publisher wasn't happy about this. It makes me doubt pretty much all of Gamespots professional reviews.

An actual one: Gamesweasel give pretty much every game a 7/10. They basically think all games are slightly better than ok.

 

[Fappy]

I am more familiar with not giving a shit about an organization's opinion rather than an individual reviewer. Gamespot and IGN come to mind.

 

[cjspyres]

Not quite the reviewer per se, but the controversy surrounding it: Gamespots review of the first Kayne and Lynch. The reviewer basically got fired as Gamespot had the games ads plastered on its website and he gave it a 6/10. Obviously, the publisher wasn't happy about this. It makes me doubt pretty much all of Gamespots professional reviews.

An actual one: Gamesweasel give pretty much every game a 7/10. They basically think all games are slightly better than ok.

That sounds like an extreme case of the "Mehs".

 

[Kordie]

I'd point to metacritic simply because people put way too much importance on it. In fact, any review of a game that is largely a number I don't like. So much of a game has to go into the context of a review that a number based score just can't describe.

 

[Scrustle]

Can't really think of any reviewers by name that I actually dislike, apart from maybe Greg Miller, but I'll get to that later.

But I find most of the reviews of IGN and Gamespot are pretty terrible. They often don't really give you a good idea of what a game's actually like, they just read like a promotional release. The Gamestop reviews are the worst for this. Greg Miller is just one of many crappy reviewers from IGN, so he's not exactly special. He has got an incredibly irritating and grating voice though, and an annoying personality. That's why I remember him specifically.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Tom Chick is the Armond White of game reviewers. He knows his stuff but he enjoys being deliberately contrarian.

 

[putowtin]

Eurogamer: Every AAA a 9/10, pretty much everything else 7/10.

 

[Mr. GameBrain]

Eurogamer, IGN and Gamespot.

The quality of their reviews are just aweful...

I'd rather look at Joystiq's reviews over all those. At least they tend to be a little more honest.

Here's a fun little game to play whenever you go onto IGN, Eurogamer or Gamespot.
Pick a game, guess the score and the main complaints the game might have, then read the review.

After a while you learn the patterns and get pretty good at the game.

 

[RipRoaringWaterfowl]

Metacritic. Good in theory, has turned into Hell in practice. I think we all know how.

Also, this guy [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/profiles/view]. Yeah, this guy. Dunderhead.

 

[GloatingSwine]

greg kasavin. ... because he left us :'(

But then he made Bastion. And that's approximately 900% better than being a games reviewer.

Games reviews are pointless and shite. Mostly they won't tell you anything they didn't already tell you in the five previews they've already done, and mostly they'll be full of inaccuracies and outright lies because reviewers don't have the time or inclination to play through the games properly and pay attention to them if they're even slightly outside of strict genre convention.

You can tell more about a game from a gameplay video these days than a review.

 

[SajuukKhar]

anyone from IGN..... seriously... screw IGN.

they have some of the most odd scores ever.

 

[Sassafrass]

Metacritic. Good in theory, has turned into Hell in practice. I think we all know how.

Also, this guy [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/profiles/view]. Yeah, this guy. Dunderhead.

I dunno, I do alright. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/326.381973][footnote]And before anyone jumps on me, I know what the link does. I'm just blatantly advertising. [/footnote]

OT: Can't name names but I remember someone comparing Half Life to Viva Pinata and marking Viva Pinata down because it wasn't like HL2. That was a bizarre read.

 

[Mirroga]

Reviewers or critics to me are of course and undeniably will be biased or subjective. It's an irremovable trait as long as we have a childhood. That's why I watch/read critics and reviewers as just a way to filter out the really bad games from my want-to-play checklist.

 

[Carlos Storm]

Gameoverthinker

Doesn't finish the game, attests to said ending's greatness despite overwhelming public opinion to the contrary.

 

[neonsword13-ops]

IGN.

Modern Warfare 3: 9.5

Persona 4: 9.0 (Edited to suit my own fancy)

LOLWUT?

LOLWUT is right. I didn't know perfection could get a lower score than CoD.

Gonna have to go with most major game journalism sites for this one. (Except the escapist)

The reviews just seem dis-honest.

 

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

This person [www.escapistmagazine.com/profiles/view/thebobmaster] really seems to have no idea what makes a good game, and is generally way too positive about games that real gamers seem to hate.