Worst Game Reviewers?

[Windcaler]

To be fair I think there is this fallacy out there that 10 out of 10 or 100% equals a perfect game. A perfect game just doesnt exist and of course the closer you get to perfection the easier it is to fall from it

Personally I dont trust any reviewer that gives a score. At all. I dont think there is any way to summarize a complex opinion into a numerical forumula so to me all scores are useless. I pay more attention to what a reviewer says about a game and if they dont or wont write something substantial about a game I wont go near them.

However Ill name one that I think is pretty bad. Angry Joe who does his stuff on Youtube. It goes back to his Alpha protocol review where it was so incompetant he couldnt even be bothered to learn the mechanics of the game before blasting them. Ive seen this with a few more of his reviews so I think hes at best a lazy reviewer

 

[Overusedname]

Threads like this are why I just talk about symbolism and Game Theory. In terms of how good I think a game is, I'm Biased as fox news, just not as evil (or so you think).

Honestly, if a review is funny or well made, I don't really care. I've never agreed with Spoony's opinion on any serious game he's ever covered, but I still love his show.

 

[Pearwood]

However Ill name one that I think is pretty bad. Angry Joe who does his stuff on Youtube. It goes back to his Alpha protocol review where it was so incompetant he couldnt even be bothered to learn the mechanics of the game before blasting them. Ive seen this with a few more of his reviews so I think hes at best a lazy reviewer

To be fair I don't learn every nuance of a game I think is shit before declaring that it's shit either, christ knows how he got on TGWTG though.

I'd say Spoony post-mental breakdown. The fuck is wrong with that guy?

 

[IGNOREME]

To be fair I think there is this fallacy out there that 10 out of 10 or 100% equals a perfect game. A perfect game just doesnt exist and of course the closer you get to perfection the easier it is to fall from it

Personally I dont trust any reviewer that gives a score. At all. I dont think there is any way to summarize a complex opinion into a numerical forumula so to me all scores are useless. I pay more attention to what a reviewer says about a game and if they dont or wont write something substantial about a game I wont go near them.

However Ill name one that I think is pretty bad. Angry Joe who does his stuff on Youtube. It goes back to his Alpha protocol review where it was so incompetant he couldnt even be bothered to learn the mechanics of the game before blasting them. Ive seen this with a few more of his reviews so I think hes at best a lazy reviewer

Took the words right out of my mouth good sir (or madam). I don't like Angry Joe either. I find him to be way too over the top, and his humor bits are more cringe worthy than funny to me.

 

[Savo]

Jim Sterling. He's got some great articles (he did an article on indie games a while back which was amazing), but goddamn.

So many times when I read his stuff, I get the impression that he is trying to piss off as many people as possible by throwing out insults and trollbait. His whole persona doesn't appeal to me at all.

It goes beyond his reviews, if I had a dime for every time I've gone to D'toid to find jim sterling striking a shocking controversial ZOMG CALL THE PRESS stance on some issue, I would be able to afford a new gaming computer.

 

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

However Ill name one that I think is pretty bad. Angry Joe who does his stuff on Youtube. It goes back to his Alpha protocol review where it was so incompetant he couldnt even be bothered to learn the mechanics of the game before blasting them. Ive seen this with a few more of his reviews so I think hes at best a lazy reviewer

To be fair I don't learn every nuance of a game I think is shit before declaring that it's shit either, christ knows how he got on TGWTG though.

I'd say Spoony post-mental breakdown. The fuck is wrong with that guy?

He's bipolar.

Wait, was that a rhetorical question? Crap.

 

[Scumpernickle]

I think everyone should watch this before this thread goes any further.


Reviews are always going to be subjected to personal opinion. Someone giving Call of Duty a 9 or Journey a 4 does not say anything about their credibility as a critic. It speaks to the kind of games they enjoy.

This does not make them a bad critic. If you use critics to determine what games you are going to buy or not, then it's always a wise decision to see a number of reviews from different people (I like to go with Yahtzee, Jim Sterling, and Angry Joe as my combination) so you can get varying viewpoints and make your decision while being informed.

Critics do not exist to validate what you like and hate. That's not a critic. That's an attention whore.

This. Everyone has different tastes and opinions which is why I really stray away from critics unless I share their tastes or they're really entertaining.

You can't have a "one size fits all" review. For example, Minecraft was critically acclaimed by tons of people, yet some hate it. But that's impossible right? The critics said it was good so that mean I have to love it!

I'm also aware of shit games getting biased reviews. Believe me, I know a LOT of people get some money under the desk to put in a good word for Modern Shooter 3, Assassination Ring 7, or Spooky Space Adventure 5: Spookier Than Last Time(no really). IGN, I'm looking at you.

Capcha Semi-Related: remain calm

 

[Scumpernickle]

Also ignore the double post which totally didn't happen just now.

 

[Pearwood]

He's bipolar.

Wait, was that a rhetorical question? Crap.

Well ok that is literally what's wrong with him but he's not exactly handling it well. Even years ago he both looked like and produced stuff that would only appeal to a man who hasn't slept all week.

 

[NoeL]

Irate Gamer is the worst, mooching off James Rolfe's success and blocking everyone that calls him out for it. What a loser.

 

[Abyss]

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.

How come when I click on the "this guy" link, it takes me to my account? I didn't think I was THAT important enough to be included with the worst game reviewers.

It's true though. Most game critics are very, very weird in their perceptions of the latest, and the oldest, games. They tend to nitpick on things that aren't worth nitpicking, or don't go into the flaws which really hinder a game. Even the best critics have these flaws, but at least their opinions are intelligent and thorough.

Sadly, most game companies are not fearless or bold enough to create a game that's impressive enough that can stand on its own merits. Bribing critic sites for high reviews is a sign of insecurity.

 

[Signa]

I wouldn't have had an opinion if I had not seen this video:

 

[alexwbyrd]

If want to figure out if you'd like a game or not (besides playing it) your best bet is to find a reviewer whose tastes in videogames matches your own (at least relatively speaking) and read his/her review of the game in the question.

Now finding a reviewer with your similar tastes who just so happened to review your game...that's the hard part.

 

[The_Blue_Rider]

Most major gaming sites mainly because they always give out either too high scores or too low. Theyre usually too critical of games that dont deserve it, but not harsh enough on games that do.

Although on the other end of things, I think AngryJoe is probably my favourite reviewer, he's generally fair and is isnt afraid to use his entire 1 - 10 scale

 

[Innocent Bystander]

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 don't think your link might be busted, because it keeps leading to my profile, and I don't think I've ever been a reviewer, and if I have, I don't think I've ever been payed for it. Goddamn bullshit..

 

[ksn0va]

IGN.

Modern Warfare 3: 9.5

The Witcher 2: 8.5

LOLWUT?

You do mean Modern Warfare 2 and The Witcher 1 right? If you do then you probably have never hears of TAGES. If you don't then you've never played The Witcher 2 during the first few months of its release.

Witcher 2 (9.0) - http://www.ign.com/games/the-witcher-2-assassins-of-kings/pc-14345201

MW3 (9.0) - http://www.ign.com/games/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3/xbox-360-69475

 

[Waaghpowa]

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.

Their whole site (IGN) is bad, not just their reviews. You can generate all their articles with this little piece of awesome

 

[Xdeser2]

I'd say reviews are just the opinion of the reviewer, in a sense there's no "Right" or "Wrong" way to rate/review a game.

Sure, I may heartily RAGE at when IGN/whatever popular game site is in the crosshairs the moment your reading this, gives a 9.5 to MW3 and an 8.5 to The Witcher 2, but its all up to opinion in the end. There's really no accounting for taste :/