When a new game releases, and gamespot gives it a review, there is inevitably, always people who say how the game was poorly reviewed. They think the game received a too high score, or too low score, and begin to explain on the forums how there is some sort of bribery going on with game developer companies, to pay reviewers extra cash to give their game a good review.
Agree with a review or not, like anything, duh, we all have our own opinions. Opinions make up the worlds diverse society, different believes, causes, what we do and don't do. Of course its ok to disagree. What people don't seem to realize however, and I guess I find irritating, is this:
Gamespot delivers very efficient game reviews, based on the criteria they use to review their games with.
They do, and they stay true to this formula. Whoa there **** I hear, whoa! are you retarded!? Have you read some of their reviews? I believe Gamespot reviews game on underlying comparisons to other games directly in that genre. If there is a game thats released, but does notdeliver it more effectively then another, it won't be a better game then the one before it. The score won't surpass its predecessor. The aggrivates enthusiastic gamers beyond belief who have been eagerly awaitingthe next sequel in a series, and have had their game pre-ordered for 2 months.
Next, Gamespot reviewers don't have anybias for topic,theme, genre or console. The reviews they make are completly and very fortunatly, deprived of any fan-boyism. They are strictly of the game, and its content. Something that also rattles the anger button of many gamers.
Lastly, what does a game review mean? A review, to gauge somethings quality, compared with everything else of that product, on the time of its release. Thats what it is. Gamespot does it well. It looks for everythign we want in games. Immersion, graphics, quality of the gameplay, the replay value. Well we want to pick it up after 3 months and keep playing? They are gamers, hardcore ones, they know what they are talking about. They know what makes games good. We want games to be fun, they know what games are, and when quality is recognised.
Obviously gamer reviews differ from website to website.Any ones with credible history, you'll discover are often very close in terms of the final result of the review. They both look for the same top notch quality. People who get mad, simply because their all time anticpated game got a 7.0, is ignorant. They are completly entitled to have all kinds of fun with it! It in no way, however, should be compared to Gamespots Game Review criteria. Gamespot reviewed the game based on its criteria it has always used. Your simply upset, because a reviewer that has credibilty isn't lavishing your famed game.
The game industry is competitve, and only the ones with everything and all out efforts, well receive high acclaim from good websites like Gamespot, that is aiming to fill the criteria Gamespot has put out. Enjoy your games, but please, stop blaming gamespot from doing nothing wrong, and only doing what it has been doing from day 1. The reviewers work hard to review games. I'm sure they are used to negative feedback, but some support I'm sure would be appreciated as well.
Alright, let me have it guys. Give it to me.
Log in to comment