Disappointing or Poor Reviews?

Do you think Gamespot has awful reviews or do you think that most of the recent games have been major disappointments?

- Fable III - 7.5

- Fallout: New Vegas - 7.5

- Star Wars: The Force Unleashed II - 6.0

- God of War: Ghost of Sparta - 8.0

- Medal of Honor - 7.5

- James Bond: Bloodstone - 7.5

Sims 3 - 7.0

Most of those are not that bad, but were expected to score much higher and I am pretty sure each of their GS scores are lower than the average.

I think the reviews are spot on. Gaming sites and their users often seem to have this policy that if a game doesn't score 9 or higher it isn't a good game. A "7.5" isn't a bad score... all these highly rated games are often mediocre and don't deserve the praise. It's nice to see Gamespot finally getting a little more critical.

I agree with Fable 3 and Fallout: NV reviews wholeheartedly

I'm somewhat on the fence about the issue. I have yet to play, and probably won't play most of the games the OP listed. However I feel Castlevania LoS and Fallout: NV were scored rather low. The GS review of Castlevania in no way reflected the 7.5 score it was given. If you don't look at the score and just read the review, it easily sounds like the game should of gotten an 8.5 instead at the very least.

Fallout is a bit harder to make an case for. The game was bugged out and glitchy. As a reviewer I can't imagine how difficult it must be to review a game in such a state. Do you ignore said bugs knowing they will eventually be fixed? Can you even give an accurate review if you try and do that? Or do you review the game as is knowing that in the next few weeks most of these problems will be gone, thus creating an overly negative review that will be on this site for years to come? Hard call to make, but I still feel 7.5 was a bit low. The PC score of 8.5 felt more appropriate.

Also the few people I know who have played Force Unleashed 2 seem to think a score of 6.0 is far too low. They do agree the story was poorly written, but that the core mechanics of the game are much improved. Seems kind of harsh to bust down a game so many points based on story alone. But I digress because that's just a second hand opinion that isn't my own.

I'm somewhat on the fence about the issue. I have yet to play, and probably won't play most of the games the OP listed. However I feel Castlevania LoS and Fallout: NV were scored rather low. The GS review of Castlevania in no way reflected the 7.5 score it was given. If you don't look at the score and just read the review, it easily sounds like the game should of gotten an 8.5 instead at the very least.

Fallout is a bit harder to make an case for. The game was bugged out and glitchy. As a reviewer I can't imagine how difficult it must be to review a game in such a state. Do you ignore said bugs knowing they will eventually be fixed? Can you even give an accurate review if you try and do that? Or do you review the game as is knowing that in the next few weeks most of these problems will be gone, thus creating an overly negative review that will be on this site for years to come? Hard call to make, but I still feel 7.5 was a bit low. The PC score of 8.5 felt more appropriate.

Also the few people I know who have played Force Unleashed 2 seem to think a score of 6.0 is far too low. They do agree the story was poorly written, but that the core mechanics of the game are much improved. Seems kind of harsh to bust down a game so many points based on story alone. But I digress because that's just a second hand opinion that isn't my own.

keech

The horrible story isn't the only problem with TFU2. It's also ridiculously repetitive and very, very short. The core combat mechanics have been improved, but the world surrounding it kind of sucks. Which is really rare for a Star Wars game.

Their not bad scores, but they were expected to be higher. Oh and I forgot about Castlevania, that game would make the best case.

I wonder if Black Ops or Assassins Creed Brotherhood will break the streak.

Out of every other game site, Gamespot is the place where I trust most of the reviews, always will.

Fallout: New Vegas for example, received quite a low score imo, but the points made in the review were spot on. When I rate a game, I take in everything, but the most important thing for me is the fun factor, which is the reason I give New Vegas a 9 :)

But in the end, it all comes down to opinion.

i think there reviewing the games crapply on purpose because MS payed for halo reach to be the GOTY spot hell the new dlc says the GOTY

fl4tlined

I'm happy to see them being realistically critical of games. I think they've been far, far too generous in the past. The way that every well known franchise was basically guaranteed and 8.5 or better in the past really led me to ignore their reviews.