The written Review is credible but the score/rating should always be ignored. And you should check out the videos and avoid the demos. And thats just the Basics.
I'll say this in the most unbiased way possible. I can assure you, they're much more credible than IGN's reviews. Kevin VanOrd usually gives the most honest scores.
I actually did a master's thesis on the topic. Â It turns out that GS reviews are 75.43% reliable. Â
TheBatFreak777
have you got a number for all of the big sites? IGN, Game Informer, etc? I trust them and IGN a lot (laugh if you want, i don't care). And a local reviewer here. But it's usually to get a feel of the game and i don't base my purchases solely on them
Hit or miss. One thing I found silly was the SS3:BFE review. 6/10 to a game that offers something different than the constant linear modern military shooters.
Most of the time I think the written reviews are well presented, and offer a good indication of the pros and cons of a game, along with an overall flavour. I tend to ignore the actual score rating, though.
They're semi-informed opinions, no more or less credible than your average forum poster. Which makes them useless as I can get more out of a conversation with someone who has earned my trust and played a game than from the ENG 101 essay closed style of review.
I'd say that wether or not they're credible depends more on your own tastes. If you find a source which has a similar view on what makes a videogame great, then you'll agree with their reviews most of the time, thus, they will be credible to you as an individual. Personally I put my faith more in Edge and Eurogamer.
They are as credible as whether you can find the information you (as a gamer)Â are looking forward to finding out in order to help you make a decision. For example, how good the story is and how long the single player campaign is are two important factors for me. Some GS reviewers give that information, which i find to be most useful. Some dont. So, it is up to you as a gamer to decide what you can get out of someone else's review.
It depends on the reviewer it seems. There are some really good reviews on here but there are also some very poorly done ones as well. Sometimes both coming from the same reviwer who seemingly just felt different that time... Reading the content in the review is very important. Otherwise how will you know that a low score was given because the reviewer didn't know about important mechanics integral to the enjoyment of the game or said the whole game was terrible because one part was too frustrating (both of these have happened on this sight and instantly lost the credibility of the two reviewers involved)...
I think Gamespot loses some credibility with the Trine 2 reviews. One reviewer gave it an 8.5 when it came out on PS3 and 360. When the same game came out with added content for the Wii U, someone who didn't enjoy the game reviewed it and gave it a 6.5. That's a huge descrepency in scores and I feel it improperly reflects the quality of the game. There is no consistency there.
Basically, Gamespot didn't need the whole game reviewed a second time. They just needed to state if it was a good port.
"Jeff Gerstmann, Editorial Director of the site, was fired on November 28, 2007. Immediately after his termination, rumors circulated proclaiming his dismissal was a result of external pressure from Eidos Interactive, the publisher of Kane & Lynch: Dead Men, which had purchased a considerable amount of advertising space on GameSpot's website. Gerstmann had previously given Kane & Lynch a fair or undesirable rating along with critique.Both GameSpot and parent company CNET stated that his dismissal was unrelated to the review, but due to corporate and legal constraints cannot reveal the reason. A month after Gerstmann's termination, freelance reviewer Frank Provo left GameSpot after eight years stating that 'I believe CNET management let Jeff go for all the wrong reasons. I believe CNET intends to soften the site's tone and push for higher scores to make advertisers happy.' In 2012, the non-disclosure agreements ended and it was confirmed that Gerstmann had been fired as a result of this review and other low scores assigned to games that had been advertised on the site."
i don't pay attention to scores much, but reviews on GS will, generally, have a few useful points covering objective topics regarding the game (ie, bugs)
It depends on the reviewer it seems. There are some really good reviews on here but there are also some very poorly done ones as well. Sometimes both coming from the same reviwer who seemingly just felt different that time... Reading the content in the review is very important. Otherwise how will you know that a low score was given because the reviewer didn't know about important mechanics integral to the enjoyment of the game or said the whole game was terrible because one part was too frustrating (both of these have happened on this sight and instantly lost the credibility of the two reviewers involved)...
I think Gamespot loses some credibility with the Trine 2 reviews. One reviewer gave it an 8.5 when it came out on PS3 and 360. When the same game came out with added content for the Wii U, someone who didn't enjoy the game reviewed it and gave it a 6.5. That's a huge descrepency in scores and I feel it improperly reflects the quality of the game. There is no consistency there.
Basically, Gamespot didn't need the whole game reviewed a second time. They just needed to state if it was a good port.
Pikminmaniac
Yeah, I didn't get the necessity to completely re-review that game.Â
Trine 2 for the Wii-U is one of the examples of Gamespot reviews that make me feel like false information was given. Carolyn says that it feels like "you stumble upon a makeshift solution that gets the job done rather than you cleverly worked out a challenging conundrum" and while she says that it shows her solving one of the puzzles. I have no idea what the hell she was trying to do in that video and I never encountered that problem. There was always a clear way to solve everything.
Trine 2 for the Wii-U is one of the examples of Gamespot reviews that make me feel like false information was given. Carolyn says that it feels like "you stumble upon a makeshift solution that gets the job done rather than you cleverly worked out a challenging conundrum" and while she says that it shows her solving one of the puzzles. I have no idea what the hell she was trying to do in that video and I never encountered that problem. There was always a clear way to solve everything.
IndianaPwns39
Not on topic, but I agree with her. I bought Trine2 for WiiU, seeing as everyone seemed to hail it. Yes, it looks beautifull, but the gameplay is slow and dumb, and I've also circumvented a number of puzzles by just fooling around a bit and being able to traverse the area without actually solving the puzzle at hand. Worst WiiU purchase for me so far.
Maybe they've reviewed some games highly that people have an extreme dislike towards or reviewed games lowly that people have an extreme like towards but I'd say from a non-bias perspective I don't see what discredits them from the rest of the websites out there.
Maybe they've reviewed some games highly that people have an extreme dislike towards or reviewed games lowly that people have an extreme like towards but I'd say from a non-bias perspective I don't see what discredits them from the rest of the websites out there.
Goyoshi12
Carefull there, before you know it, we'll have a discussion on our hands if games journalism is little more then marketing in sheeps clothing.
Maybe they've reviewed some games highly that people have an extreme dislike towards or reviewed games lowly that people have an extreme like towards but I'd say from a non-bias perspective I don't see what discredits them from the rest of the websites out there.
SupremeAC
Carefull there, before you know it, we'll have a discussion on our hands if games journalism is little more then marketing in sheeps clothing.
I guess, I just don't see what can discredit GameSpot from the rest. Yeah there was that Kane and Lynch fallout a while back but that was just one, granted, rather big incident but I don't know or haven't heard word of any other kind of fallout like that happen again. Besides, after Jeff was alievated from his duties quite a few other reviewers left the company as well and since we are talking about the reviewers and not just GameSpot as a whole I'd say that adds a little bit of bandage to the wounds.
Sometimes they hit the nail on the head; sometimes they miss the target. Either way, I'm not fussed about something until I've had the chance to experience it. I take everything they say with a pinch of salt most of the times
Log in to comment