MeisterKleister said:
mavrik said:
So, in short: "WHIIINE, IT'S NOT A COPY-PASTE OF THIEF 2, WHIIIINE". But then again, you don't go watching Yahtzee to see an unbiased review.
Jim Sterling wrote an unbiased review once:
http://www.destructoid.com/100-objective-review-final-fantasy-xiii-179178.phtml
Honestly if that's Jim's takeaway from the "Bioshock Infinite" debacle then he's completely missed the damn point.
I don't expect him to be UNBIASED. I do, however, expect him to give a fair and frank review of the game, such that it helps me make an informed purchasing decision. That's half of a reviewer's job (the other half is delivering constructive feedback to the game's creators so that they can improve the job that they do in future).
He might say he loved the game despite its flaws. That is fine. I will happily admit that I love, say, "Skyrim" despite its flaws - which are numerous and occasionally near-game-breaking.
He might say that some people will not be bothered by the flaws. He might go into some detail about WHICH people are likely to appreciate the game, based on its characteristics. All of this is also fine. I would recommend "Skyrim" to fans of open-world games and exploration, but not people who like in-depth character-driven storylines in their games.
He might say "If you like X, Y and Z then this game is perfect for you; but if you don't like A, B or C then give it a miss." Provided that this is reasonably accurate, that's what I'd expect from a game review aimed at helping a consumer make an informed choice.
Buying into "hype", however, is NOT fine. Ignoring objective flaws of the game (and if somebody says "but all flaws are subjective!" then I'll end up starring in one of those youtube videos of people who break their monitors over their heads) is NOT fine.
A professional games reviewer gets PAID to do a job, and do it properly. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect more from the professional than the random guy on t'Interwebs.