To me it seems like sometimes games receive a completely different score on a review from what I or other people would give it. So should gaming review be a public vote or just one persons opinion. Discuss it.
Gaming reviews are editorial and totally subjective. They represent one writers opinion about the game being reviewed, nothing more.
If you don't agree with a particular writer's opinion that's absolutely your prerogative. If you'd like to see an example of a democratically given review score, look at the aggregate user review scores for the games here at Gamespot, or over on Amazon. Keep in mind that those scores can to be subject to bias or tampering.
Ppersonally, I prefer to read a few professionally written reviews for a game that I might be making a decision about. I certainly go beyond looking at the review scores.
Making a game's official score be the average of what X number of users gave the game would be a bad idea. Fanboys of company X would mass together to give exclusive games of company Y a bad score even if they hadn't played them. I do agree though, that the current review system is extremely flawed.
Like the gaming fans as a community should log on to some sort of website, maybe for magazines for games and vote on a 1 to 10 scale basis and include a comment or two to say what they liked about the game and what they didn't.
I don't usually go by critic scores. Some can be pretty bias. Or it's a game style they don't perticularly like, so they won't give it quite the score it deserves. So I usually go by the fans popular vote poll. Everyones got different tastes, so usually a sensus is best.
I don't usually go by critic scores. Some can be pretty bias. Or it's a game style they don't perticularly like, so they won't give it quite the score it deserves. So I usually go by the fans popular vote poll. Everyones got different tastes, so usually a sensus is best.
kittensRjerks
I think this is the way to think about it too. Some games get really high overall critic scores, but it doesn't always mean it's going to be the best game for everyone. I'm still surprised at GTA4's overall critic score, which is like 9.6 or 9.7. It's a good game, but damn that's really high...
I don't usually go by critic scores. Some can be pretty bias. Or it's a game style they don't perticularly like, so they won't give it quite the score it deserves. So I usually go by the fans popular vote poll. Everyones got different tastes, so usually a sensus is best.
SoNin360
I think this is the way to think about it too. Some games get really high overall critic scores, but it doesn't always mean it's going to be the best game for everyone. I'm still surprised at GTA4's overall critic score, which is like 9.6 or 9.7. It's a good game, but damn that's really high... Yea and in GI they gave God of War 3 a perfect 10. One of the only other games I've seen a lot being that high a score is Zelda: Ocarina of time for the N64 and no offense, but I surely don't think God of War 3 was as good as that game.
should gaming review be a public vote or just one persons opinion.Armagadem
Huh? A review, singular, by definition, is only one person's opinion. A public vote is merely a collection of opinions, so that doesn't really improve things. If you really think a public vote over something is better because you think that the popular vote reflects merit and goodness, you have to remember that Hitler was voted into power, the current brutal Iranian regime was put in power by the people in popular 1979 uprising when they overthrew their existing secular government, and the Gazan Palestinians elected the terrorist organisation Hamas as their government.
Like the gaming fans as a community should log on to some sort of website, maybe for magazines for games and vote on a 1 to 10 scale basis and include a comment or two to say what they liked about the game and what they didn't.Armagadem
Then all you get is a bunch of vague and contradictory things. Someone writes under "Pros" that the gameplay is fun. Someone writes under "Cons" that the gameplay is boring. At least with a single reviewer, you have some amount of internal consistency to their opinion. And with "professional" reviewers, you tend to get better descriptions and more consistency between them, at least as far as the Pros and Cons go, though different reviewers weigh them differently and thus come to different scores.
[QUOTE="Armagadem"]should gaming review be a public vote or just one persons opinion.clicketyclick
Huh? A review, singular, by definition, is only one person's opinion. A public vote is merely a collection of opinions, so that doesn't really improve things. If you really think a public vote over something is better because you think that the popular vote reflects merit and goodness, you have to remember that Hitler was voted into power, the current brutal Iranian regime was put in power by the people in popular 1979 uprising when they overthrew their existing secular government, and the Gazan Palestinians elected the terrorist organisation Hamas as their government.
Like the gaming fans as a community should log on to some sort of website, maybe for magazines for games and vote on a 1 to 10 scale basis and include a comment or two to say what they liked about the game and what they didn't.Armagadem
Then all you get is a bunch of vague and contradictory things. Someone writes under "Pros" that the gameplay is fun. Someone writes under "Cons" that the gameplay is boring. At least with a single reviewer, you have some amount of internal consistency to their opinion. And with "professional" reviewers, you tend to get better descriptions and more consistency between them, at least as far as the Pros and Cons go, though different reviewers weigh them differently and thus come to different scores. Ok Mrs. Smarty Pants but if you didn't realize that THE U.S. IS A DEMOCRACY!!!!!!!!!!! Everyone should have the right to their opinion, not just specialists that get paid.
Ok Mrs. Smarty Pants but if you didn't realize that THE U.S. IS A DEMOCRACY!!!!!!!!!!! Everyone should have the right to their opinion, not just specialists that get paid.Armagadem
Everyone has a right to their wrong opinion. I just don't wanna hear it.
[QUOTE="Armagadem"]Ok Mrs. Smarty Pants but if you didn't realize that THE U.S. IS A DEMOCRACY!!!!!!!!!!! Everyone should have the right to their opinion, not just specialists that get paid.clicketyclick
Everyone has a right to their wrong opinion. I just don't wanna hear it. Then don't live here. Get out. Go somewhere where the government runs everything so they can make all the choices for you. Only one kind of food everyday for one meal. Have fun.
HA I can't believe I had you going so long! Sorry I must apologize for my behavior because I was joking (hence the reference to canada and other countries that run everything) I know I was being a jerk and I am sorry for how I acted. Apology accepted?
The problem with the "pro" reviewers are firm in what they hold as good or bad.
The real problem with is that they are more base on their emotion. I seen many just give poor review because they use worthless terms such as "dated". I seen many give some JRPG a low score because it use a system that is menu base andthe person call it because beacause they think the system is dated.
I think there should be a group that give the reviewer to judge.
Everyone is going to have a different opinions on game reviews-- you ultimately form your opinions. For example seeing Halo 3 get a 9.5 score from GameSpot, I didn't think it deserved that rating. People's opinions vary, so take it with a grain of salt.
I usually like the critic score better. Some fanboys attempt to inflate the user score of a game by giving it 0's and 1's so it drops to a way lower score than it deserves. For example, SMG2 user review scores have been affected by this inflation. The user score is actually .6 away from the critic score. I have a funny feeling that loads of fanboys that hate this game and haven't tried it at all have been giving it loads of 0's and 1's without actually giving a written review. If you manage to calculate all the written user review scores it's probably at least at a 9.5.There's also the case of the horribly written user reviews. Again I will mention some of the SMG 2 user review scores.I'm not trying to make fun of anybody's review for this game,but some of the reviews are way to short or way to long and compare the game to other genre's.
People post their own reviews online anyway, and I tend to read both professional and player reviews before I consider buying anything. Player reviews can be just as, if not more so, bias than a professional writer so I don't see that it really matters who it is coming from or what they are saying about it. Just go for the concensus of opinion, and you should be alright.
I always trust professional reviews more than the majority as it's their job to try to be as objective as possible.
Rekunta
I trust professional individuals more than most individuals from the public, but I do not trust them more than the public as a whole. Their job is to do reviews, at no point does objectivity enter into the equation for many of them. Remember, the people being reviewed are the same people who pay their salary.
I always trust professional reviews more than the majority as it's their job to try to be as objective as possible.
reason58
I trust professional individuals more than most individuals from the public, but I do not trust them more than the public as a whole. Their job is to do reviews, at no point does objectivity enter into the equation for many of them. Remember, the people being reviewed are the same people who pay their salary.
A professional reviewer's job is to try to give as an objective critique of games as humanly possible. Yes, many let their personal bias leak through, but nevertheless that's a large part of what they're paid to do. Any half decent critic will try to refrain from personal bias.
Allow me to clarify. Reviewers make all their money from game advertisers. Game companies are more likely to throw advertising dollars at a magazine/site that will give them favorable reviews.
Every major magazine/site does it. Heck, look at the Kane and Lynch controversy right here at Gamespot.
Allow me to clarify. Reviewers make all their money from game advertisers. Game companies are more likely to throw advertising dollars at a magazine/site that will give them favorable reviews.
Every major magazine/site does it. Heck, look at the Kane and Lynch controversy right here at Gamespot.
reason58
Because of that controversy, it is now VERY HARD to trust reviews. They are no longer acceptable.
In the end though, a review is a review. I only skim through the review or read it carefully in order to find out what the game has in store for me. What the person writes in that review is solely their opinion.
Therefore, the only review that ever matters is your review and how you feel about it.
Allow me to clarify. Reviewers make all their money from game advertisers. Game companies are more likely to throw advertising dollars at a magazine/site that will give them favorable reviews.
Every major magazine/site does it. Heck, look at the Kane and Lynch controversy right here at Gamespot.
reason58
Ah, I see. Yea I agree, GTA IV's scores were enough evidence of this along with Kane and Lynch. It's an unfortunate part of the business, but there are some decent critics out there if you look hard enough who are not afraid to look at the game for what it is instead of what they hope it to be.
Log in to comment