THIS is WHY profesional reviews are TRUE

THIS IS WHY PROFESIONAL REVIEW MATTERS.

SITES LIKE GAMESPOT are made from people who played games all their life.Players who know verry well what they are talking about. SO EVEN IF YOUR FAVOURITE GAME SCORED LOW- you should know that its like that because people who rated it played 3215782357 more games than you did. EXAMPLE- when i was younger i liked (SOME GAME DOESNT METHER) it was best game for me. It scored verry LOW.i was angry. But then when i got older,i remembered it and said "omg i liked this game its best i will play it again"

And guess what... it sucked,SUCKED HARD!!!

It was just like reviewers said.

p.s.

this doesnt mean that you should not play that game.If you like it its fine BUT DONT GO ALL AROUND SAYING HOW ITS BEST GAME EVER LOL and especialy not on PC forums go in system wars with other kids and do it there

Let's take a gander at Gamerankings.

#15 BioShock
#16 BioShock
#25 Tony Hawk's 2
#26 NFL 2K1
#28 Halo 2
#33 CoD 4
#35 Baldur's Gate 2
#38 Oblivion
#39 Tony Hawk's
#93 SSX 3
#94 SSX
#95 System Shock 2
#143 Planescape
#144 Deus Ex
#222 Thief Dark Project
#426 Fallout 2

Yep, reviewers sure do know what they're talking about. :roll:

Well now, how do you know these judges have played games - all thier life- ? Or even know what they're talking about? Some of these folks may even like games a little bit but have an educational background in journalism. This does not make them experts at what they do.

I'm a professional at what I do but don't always know what I'm talking about...

For example -- Would a "Hard Core" gamer really give 'Super Smash Bros.' a 9.5 and COD-4 a 9.0 ? No way. It's all about sponsers and hype.

This is why the professional reviews aren't true:

- They play through these games in a short amount of time. They don't get to judge the game on a "get to know basis". It's too often games are reviewed based on rushed first looks.

- They may be biased. After all, reviews are just one's opinions. Some might think that the level scaling mechanic in Oblivion is a good thing, and others will think it's bad.

- Consoles don't adhere to the same standards.

There's so many more points, but I don't really feel I need to list all of them. Reviews are just opinions from people who play a lot of games. But I've played a lot of games too, so I don't feel like I need to pretend like reviews are truth.

In defense of this trusted site, I have in the past, went and bought a game under my own speculation and discovered very quickly that the game was rubbish - and, wish I would checked the reviews first. :( **cough**motorstorm**uck-cough**PS3*Gasp-cough.

Let's take a gander at Gamerankings.

#15 BioShock
#16 BioShock
#25 Tony Hawk's 2
#26 NFL 2K1
#28 Halo 2
#33 CoD 4
#35 Baldur's Gate 2
#38 Oblivion
#39 Tony Hawk's
#93 SSX 3
#94 SSX
#95 System Shock 2
#143 Planescape
#144 Deus Ex
#222 Thief Dark Project
#426 Fallout 2

Yep, reviewers sure do know what they're talking about. :roll:

RobbieH1234

Hahaha ok i forgot to add "NON COMERCIAL BRIBED reviews"..

but well,how many true reviews are out there :(

Hahaha ok i forgot to add "NON COMERCIAL BRIBED reviews"..

but well,how many true reviews are out there :(

Lidve

Yes,but reviewers are not supposed to give subyective view.

They should do next.

FOR EXAMPLE

GRAPHICS-

-artistic (this is hard to give objective score )

-TECHNICAL (this is what should be looked because it can be "MEASURED"

you watch for how advanced your graphics are,how optimised they are,etc..

SOUND- quality of reproduction,BUT not music itself

etc.

SO EVERY REVIEW SHOULD SCORE ONLY TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF GAME.STUFF THAT CAN BE MEASURED.not their peronal oppinion or smthing else(money)

Like Fatshodan told you in the other thread, how much you or a reviewer enjoy the game is not an exact science. You can't slap a score on it and think that "Yes, this game is exactly 8.5 good." Doesn't work that way.

Your subjective opinions on the game will always sneak into a review some way or the other, that's human nature for you. Last time I checked reviewers are humans with opinions. When those opinion sneak into the written text, the objectivity is watered down. Anything not completely objective cannot be used to prove a point, like: *insert game* sucks. Imho.

Yes,but reviewers are not supposed to give subyective view.

They should do next.

FOR EXAMPLE

GRAPHICS-

-artistic (this is hard to give objective score )

-TECHNICAL (this is what should be looked because it can be "MEASURED"

you watch for how advanced your graphics are,how optimised they are,etc..

SOUND- quality of reproduction,BUT not music itself

etc.

SO EVERY REVIEW SHOULD SCORE ONLY TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF GAME.STUFF THAT CAN BE MEASURED.not their peronal oppinion or smthing else(money)

Lidve

A subjective review is the only kind of review a reviewer can give.

Clearly you do not understand the difference between subjectivity and objectivity, and arguing probably won't change your mind, so I will hit you with a logic bomb and hope your head explodes.

One professional reviewer gives a game 6/10.

Another professional reviewer gives a game 10/10.

You believe they are both true?

Yes,but reviewers are not supposed to give subyective view.

They should do next.

FOR EXAMPLE

GRAPHICS-

-artistic (this is hard to give objective score )

-TECHNICAL (this is what should be looked because it can be "MEASURED"

you watch for how advanced your graphics are,how optimised they are,etc..

SOUND- quality of reproduction,BUT not music itself

etc.

SO EVERY REVIEW SHOULD SCORE ONLY TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF GAME.STUFF THAT CAN BE MEASURED.not their peronal oppinion or smthing else(money)

Lidve

Gameplay isn't something that can be measured. I don't care how good looking or polished a game is. Also, take note that games on Gamespot don't review anymore based on different aspects. GTA4 in my opinion has terrible graphics yet it scored a 10.

How old is this kid who posted this??

Then it comes down to personal prefernce.

Do you want to play it or not?

[QUOTE="Lidve"]

Yes,but reviewers are not supposed to give subyective view.

They should do next.

FOR EXAMPLE

GRAPHICS-

-artistic (this is hard to give objective score )

-TECHNICAL (this is what should be looked because it can be "MEASURED"

you watch for how advanced your graphics are,how optimised they are,etc..

SOUND- quality of reproduction,BUT not music itself

etc.

SO EVERY REVIEW SHOULD SCORE ONLY TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF GAME.STUFF THAT CAN BE MEASURED.not their peronal oppinion or smthing else(money)

GodLovesDead

Gameplay isn't something that can be measured. I don't care how good looking or polished a game is. Also, take note that games on Gamespot don't review anymore based on different aspects. GTA4 in my opinion has terrible graphics yet it scored a 10.

Whell it certainly dont have best graphics.I think that games like Crysis (games that drive technology) should get like 11 points for graphics,because its unfair that Crysis that came months ago have same score for graphics as some game that came just jesterday.

BUT REMEMBER!!! GTA4 is for consoles!!!!!!! You must look it from that angle of view.

Is there graphicaly bether (much bether) game for consoles??? Yes but not much bether.They both can score 10.

Dont forget that PC GRAPHHICS scored 8 usualy beat console game graphics scored 9

Also PS3 graphics scored 7 beat lets say gba graphics scored 10

What about Wii games? Thier graphics suck to the highest standard and they get 9's?? So that bit of logic doesnt quite hold up???

Yes,but reviewers are not supposed to give subyective view.

They should do next.

FOR EXAMPLE

GRAPHICS-

-artistic (this is hard to give objective score )

-TECHNICAL (this is what should be looked because it can be "MEASURED"

you watch for how advanced your graphics are,how optimised they are,etc..

SOUND- quality of reproduction,BUT not music itself

etc.

SO EVERY REVIEW SHOULD SCORE ONLY TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF GAME.STUFF THAT CAN BE MEASURED.not their peronal oppinion or smthing else(money)

Lidve

Exactly, but most reviewers seem to be subjective, in special the infamous Jeff.

And TYPING IN ALL CAPS DOES NOT MAKE YOU COOL.

/cruise control

I wouldn't say true but I would say give you a general idea of the game. I mean if any game gets 7+ then you know it will be good. But when the game gets a 3 or a 4, then you know something is wrong.

But taking their score is a law is just wrong.

The reason that reviews are true is b/c it's their opinion. Not much reason to think they would lie about that. There is no reason to believe that their opinion is any better than mine, my friends, or whoever b/c they are all really the same. If one person thinks they enjoyed a game and another didn't, they are both right. It's all a matter of opinion.

Now that said, I have seen some reviews here and else where that are wrong. I've seen people state something as fact (rather than opinion) that is simply wrong. One good example of this would be Lair. Some people complained that the controls were "broken", "didn't work", or were "un-responsive" while others claimed the opposite. Obviously, both can't be true. It just doesn't work that way. All opinions (be them "profesional" or otherwise) need to be taken at face value.

Also, as one person pointed out, they play a lot of games. They don't have the time to get personal with them or take their time, period. Also, having played that many games, some people may grow jaded (after all these years/generations of platforms I know I have, at least a little).

How old is this kid who posted this??

Xtraflo

A review (professional or not) is just another persons opinion. And just like any opinion you may or may not feel the same way.capthavic

Reviews are opinion, they could not, and should not be held as fact. Especially with how poor professional reviews are today, so many games being tossed AAA/AAAA (Which likely is in part to hype and marketing behind many big budget games) whether they are deserving of such standing or not.

Many times I find some of the best reviews to be from straight and honest gamers, since they're more likely to have better credibility than a professional in the industry these days, and they don't have a company cramming their agenda down their throats to influence their opinion.

The value of scores these days have been devalued to irrelevance since so many review sites toss out perfect scores to most big budget games like a fat kid going to an all you can eat cake buffet.

Of all things I find it scary that so people easily believe in another persons thoughts and holding it up as truth or fact in a flamboyant display of ignorance, without even trying the notion of forming their own thoughts and opinions through collecting and analyzing the data from multiple sources themselves.

[QUOTE="capthavic"]A review (professional or not) is just another persons opinion. And just like any opinion you may or may not feel the same way.Xtraflo

And so was I :lol:

At this interval I would like to forward you to the link in my sig. There is currently only a small list of reviewers, but their reviews are superb which I trust significantly more than commercial reviews.

Keep in mind, I am not ranking reviewers but am simply listing who I believe are excellent reviewers in no particular order

What about Wii games? Thier graphics suck to the highest standard and they get 9's?? So that bit of logic doesnt quite hold up???

Xtraflo

What the Wii's games lack in graphics, they make up for in entertainment that is mostly family based, age gruops that tend to like/play the games, storylines, how long the games can hold your attention without getting bored of it, and lots of other details that reviewers take into concern when reviewing games. (in most cases... NOT all)[QUOTE="Xtraflo"]

What about Wii games? Thier graphics suck to the highest standard and they get 9's?? So that bit of logic doesnt quite hold up???

Ronagen