Do you find that you agree with Gamespots reviews?

Since here at SW ratings are used for ownage, to declare one systems library of games superior to the other I am curious to know if people actually agree with Gamspots reviews. Do you find that scores they give are comparable to your taste? I personally think GS has fallen off a bit. Overrating games I don't care for and under rating those games I do.

A prime example of this was Arkham Origins which Gamespot gave a 6. Many of the reasons had to do with it not doing anything innovative, Yet that hasn't stopped COD from getting anything less then an 8 year after year after year. I thought overall it was a great game with the exception that it has some horrible game breaking bugs which Gamespot doesn't even mention in their review. It had a great story worthy of the Batman Universe along with an awesome atmosphere.

Another title I disagreed with was the most recent review of KZ SF. Its funny to me as the games in the past got much criticism for being linear and shoving a bunch of Helgast in front of you time and time again. So in this sequel they make the game much larger much less linear and take a totally new approach. I personally think its the best KZ yet but GS basically crucifies it for trying something new. They basically said the game was boring and didn't have enough enemies( really Kevin what game did you play)?

So my question is what reviews have you not agreed with or do you find GS is dead on with your opinions. I realize there is no such thing as a wrong opinion but I have come to accept my taste seem to be quite different then this websites which several years ago usually wasn't the case.

lol 7/10 cry more.

Scores are useless and I don't bother to read their reviews for the most part.

only when fanboys get upset about them

I just go by Metacritic, I dont give a damn about the GS scores. people only seem to care about GS reviews when it suits their fanboy agenda.

generally I don't.

It's a rare occasion when I do.

If a review score isn't what I come to expect from a game I'll read what they thought about it, sometimes just reading a review gives one perspective whether the reader will like it or not regardless of what the reviewer thought of it. About every reviewer out there gave Dead Island a bad rating but nearly every reviewer thought it was a lot of fun, just plagued with bugs, so I went out on a limb and no regrets it was a lot of fun. bugs eventually got fixed.

with the only person I almost always agree with his reviews and scores is Sessler. It's like he's my other half even though he sometimes blow things out of proportions and creates drama his reviews are the best and they aren't even on Metacritic!

At the end of the day I buy whatever the **** I want. I like Yakuza. A lot... There's tons of hidden greatness there.

Scores are just someones opinion, but there are occasional games that are worthy of their scores.

Examples..

GTA Vice City

GTA San Andreas

Resident Evil 2

I think consistency is what we're all after.

I'm still left a bit confused why Battlefield 4 was praised for multiplayer but slammed for campaign and got an 8, whilst Killzone Shadow Fall received a 7 despite having the same issues.

Same can be said for Ghosts, which unlike Shadow Fall didn't receive any critism for feeling the same as previous titles, and received an 8 compared to Killzones 7.

I'm not butthurt, I doubt I'll even get Killzone, so that's not an issue, more just confused why Killzone scored a 7 compared to BF4 and Ghosts which scored 8...

I don't know how to explain this but I agree with GS reviews in that what they say is really accurate but I don't agree to the extent that they do. I really enjoy playing video games and I acknowledge that games aren't specifically made for me as an individual so if something happens gameplay wise that upsets me I don't start cursing at the game and say "This is stupid." Instead I will tweak my play style and adapt. This is probably why I can enjoy linear games while many do not.

call of duty, despite being unwilling to change the formula, has a robust amount of multiplayer options and tons of replay value.

batman origins just doesn't offer it. and the more i think about it, most series' are no different than COD in the innovation department

Generally, no. Considering Call of Duty Ghosts is getting the same score as BF4, I can't take them seriously.

I usually agree yes - occasionally this or that will crop up that they didn't mention or that I didn't notice in my playthrough, but on the hole, yes, I do trust GameSpot's reviews.

Unless its McSheep or the other "this game merits a 6 because it had no females in it". All other reviewers are great here

this poster was excreted from the most lowly bowels of 4chan

@drekula2: wtf is 4chan

Some times I do sometime I don't but I rarely feel like the logic behind them is out right wrong.

Gamespot needs glasses. They switched Beyond & Puppeteer with TLOU & Shadow Fall.

Or... They just lost their minds

I haven't trusted GS reviews for a long time. They seemed to give low scores for games and have nothing but praise in the written reivew... those types of inaccuracies I just don't get. Don't be praising a game for all these points, mention one little flaw and give it a bad or mediocre score. If most things is praise it deserves a good score.

And don't call out a game for not "innovating" when COD gets a free pass every installment.

Then there is the old gerstman firing years back...I still haven't forgotten.

There have been tons of games that got bad reviews scores here, great scores on other sites, and I loved the games.. .so yeah GS sucks for reviews.. Only here for the lunacy of Sys wars.

I almost never do. When you have self centered reviewers like Mcshea and Carlyn only caring about showcasing their odd opinions and not properly informing people whether or not to purchase a product the way a review is supposed to do, it's hard to agree with what's happening with reviews on this site.

some reviews i agree some i dont. On general i find them good enough. But here is the think no one should rely on reviews alone to decide if he/she is gonna buy a game either that review is from gamespot or another gaming site. Reviews serve to give you an idea about the game. Reviews along videos on youtube and user feedback should be used

Problem is the biased reviews lower the Metacritic score thus fvcking up its place in history.

We are here because we want people (the opposition) to recognize.

Only when it makes cows cry.

Some I do, some I don't.

You will NEVER find a site where you agree with ALL their reviews

Very rarely do I agree with any of their reviews.

This mainly. Gametrailers does great reviews which is why I go there mainly for its reviews.

I only go on GS for the fun and ownage, not if I'm trying to decide whether or not to purchase a game.

I don't really agree with a lot of reviewers. I like what I like, I don't need their opinions to validate my own.

I do like looking at them though, I enjoy reading their opinions also. I just don't base mine on their's

KZ 9/10 Played for 12-13 hours straight until I completed it. :P

EDIT: I like Kevin V. Don't always agree, but usually he's pretty close in opinion to me.

@KarateeeChop: 1 million day 1 be mad.