[QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"]If it was up to gamers every game would score a nine or ten. Just accept the fact that many games are average and yes you can still enjoy them but a job is to tell people if a game is worth sixty bucks or not. None of those games are worth sixty bucks. Shielder7
So i guess critics are immune to error and can never be wrong and or biased? hmmm I thought critics were human, they must be super intelligent alien robots who are never wrong. Critics can indeed be wrong to varrying degrees.
Reviews are to be taken with a salt mine. It can't be ignored that bigger name games get bigger scores as a rule. It really comes down to how much fun you have with a game. For instance, I've dumped many more hours into Earth Defense Force 2017 than I did into GTA IV.
The dantes inferno review was extremely unprofessional as all he did was compare it to god of war which of course assumes everyone in the world has played god of war.
Good games that got bad reviews? What does that mean? Aren't you really just saying "Games I personally like but can't handel that someone else gave it a bad score and I can't be bothered to read or discuss the actual article review because that would be too much work"?
Bread_or_Decide
Really they are just ignoring some glaring flaws in these games. I played Haze and Lair and clearly they are flawed and broken. Yet some gamers really wanted to love these games so much. The difference is the gamer spent 60 bucks and has to justify his purchase. The critic is saving people from wasting their money.
People ignore glaring flaws and reviewers tend to make them sound worse than they are. For instance GS dante's inferno review makes the game sound really lousy when, honestly it isn't. The thing is the review is spot on, even though he did forget to mention certain things like enemies attacks could be used against them and what not (or maybe he didn't know), but the way he put it across and the constant hammering of the flaws while only mentioning what was good about the game a few times makes it really sound worse than it is. The game isn't worth 60, I agree but it only is worth at least a 7.5
A score under 8.0, in most circles that follow scores, is considered a game that can be skipped over, and is usually never given a fair chance, despite possibly being a great game. That is the major problem with reviewers quantifying their enjoyment of a game with a score.
A score under 8.0, in most circles that follow scores, is considered a game that can be skipped over, and is usually never given a fair chance, despite possibly being a great game. That is the major problem with reviewers quantifying their enjoyment of a game with a score.
Reviewers can also give game very little criticism over all, then give a unexpectedly low score. I've seen that a few times.
Dante's Inferno. A GoW clone though it may be, it was still a really good game with some great gameplay. Definately deserved somewher ebetween a 7.5 and an 8.5 IMO.
edit: Another one is Fire emblem Radiant Dawn, I have no idea how taht scored the way it did here.
If it was up to gamers every game would score a nine or ten. Just accept the fact that many games are average and yes you can still enjoy them but a critics job is to tell people if a game is worth sixty bucks or not. None of those games are worth sixty bucks. Bread_or_Decide
I agree with almost everything you've said in this thread Bread_or_Decide.
I don't mind people disagreeing with reviewers. I've disagreed with reviews many times. But it's really annoying when people get emotional about games not getting scores that they felt a game deserved as if there's some kind of magical correct score range that a review has to fall into without being "biased".
Great JRPG. Even if you dislike it, it's miles better than Eternal Sonata which got an 8.5 on GS. Those two scores are what invalidated GS's opinion on JRPGs for me.
-The reviewer complained about bugs, yet Fallout 3 and Oblivion were so buggy that they actually gave me a blue screen of death, crashed multiple times, didn't load maps properly and sometimes quest lines were not completable. Yet both got 9+.
I don't mind people disagreeing with reviewers. I've disagreed with reviews many times. But it's really annoying when people get emotional about games not getting scores that they felt a game deserved as if there's some kind of magical correct score range that a review has to fall into without being "biased".
GreySeal9
its not even that. Its people who think reviews are law and 100% fact with no room ro error that bugs me. The only fact part of a review is tec issues,proboly graphics and the whats in the game like length, characters and so forth. Everything els is pretty much reviewers opinion. Like the AVP review when he said controling an alien is awful basicly when its just a learning curve and is exacly like controling one from the old avp games which he seem to like. Stuff like that. People have to learn reviews arent 100% fact.
Great JRPG. Even if you dislike it, it's miles better than Eternal Sonata which got an 8.5 on GS. Those two scores are what invalidated GS's opinion on JRPGs for me.Oh heck yeah and me thinks if MS didn't umm, hmm, do the FF13 thing at E3, we may be seeing this year a SW JRPGn face off..
L.O.2 vs FF13. :o
Having both.. oh yeah and I'd have little to complain about if MS / Mistwalker were to finally announce the LO sequel. :P
Great JRPG. Even if you dislike it, it's miles better than Eternal Sonata which got an 8.5 on GS. Those two scores are what invalidated GS's opinion on JRPGs for me.Oh heck yeah and me thinks if MS didn't umm, hmm, do the FF13 thing at E3, we may be seeing this year a SW JRPGn face off..
L.O.2 vs FF13. :o
Having both.. oh yeah and I'd have little to complain about if MS / Mistwalker were to finally announce the LO sequel. :P
LOL Wild arms 2= 5.4/10 invalidated GS JRPG scores long ago for me xD.
If it was up to gamers every game would score a nine or ten. Just accept the fact that many games are average and yes you can still enjoy them but a critics job is to tell people if a game is worth sixty bucks or not. None of those games are worth sixty bucks. Bread_or_Decide
Even worth vary person to person? I mean I dont think live is worth 50 bucks,but others do. Does that make me or them wrong. No its just an opinion.
[QUOTE="Skittles_McGee"][QUOTE="Shielder7"][QUOTE="Skittles_McGee"] That all aside, he is technically correct. There are things in reviews that are simply facts. As a reviewer, its their job to point these things out. Nothing more. They don't say "Oh, you will hate it", they say what flaws it is and if said flaws won't bother you, then the review has still done its job. Reviews are to inform you what to expect from a game. . So just because he points out a few facts makes the reviewer 100% accurate in his score? I've seen reviewers point out a dozen flaws and still give a game a high score ( Dragon Age) and yet I've seen the exact opposite and sorry if I was a bit hasty in my response after being jumped on by 3 people from asking a simple subjective question, unlike reviews I'm not perfect. Yes, that makes his score 100% accurate. The score is his opinion. The review tells you what the game is like. The score tells you the reviewer's opinion of the game. Now the review itself is always flawed in some form or another, whether its something major like overlooking a flaw or something minor like not wording a sentence properly. Nothing in the world is perfect. K first you said the reviews were fact now they're opinions make up your mined they can't be both.
[QUOTE="Skittles_McGee"][QUOTE="Shielder7"] So just because he points out a few facts makes the reviewer 100% accurate in his score? I've seen reviewers point out a dozen flaws and still give a game a high score ( Dragon Age) and yet I've seen the exact opposite and sorry if I was a bit hasty in my response after being jumped on by 3 people from asking a simple subjective question, unlike reviews I'm not perfect. Shielder7
Yes, that makes his score 100% accurate. The score is his opinion. The review tells you what the game is like. The score tells you the reviewer's opinion of the game. Now the review itself is always flawed in some form or another, whether its something major like overlooking a flaw or something minor like not wording a sentence properly. Nothing in the world is perfect. K first you said the reviews were fact now they're opinions make up your mined they can't be both.
[QUOTE="Shielder7"][QUOTE="Skittles_McGee"] Yes, that makes his score 100% accurate. The score is his opinion. The review tells you what the game is like. The score tells you the reviewer's opinion of the game. Now the review itself is always flawed in some form or another, whether its something major like overlooking a flaw or something minor like not wording a sentence properly. Nothing in the world is perfect.jimkabrhel
K first you said the reviews were fact now they're opinions make up your mined they can't be both.
That isn't what he said. I suggest you reread.
This. That wasn't what I said at all. I said reviews contain things that are facts. Things like if a game has slowdowns, etc. Then the rest of the review, and the score, is what the reviewer though of the game. Its not really a difficult concept.
[QUOTE="Shielder7"] K first you said the reviews were fact now they're opinions make up your mined they can't be both.Skittles_McGee
That isn't what he said. I suggest you reread.
This. That wasn't what I said at all. I said reviews contain things that are facts. Things like if a game has slowdowns, etc. Then the rest of the review, and the score, is what the reviewer though of the game. Its not really a difficult concept. For you it seems to be if the review itself is always flawed than it can't be 100% accurate.
[QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"]If it was up to gamers every game would score a nine or ten. Just accept the fact that many games are average and yes you can still enjoy them but a critics job is to tell people if a game is worth sixty bucks or not. None of those games are worth sixty bucks. finalfantasy94
Even worth vary person to person? I mean I dont think live is worth 50 bucks,but others do. Does that make me or them wrong. No its just an opinion.
I think people have a habit of justifying their purchases. Once you've spent the money you don't want to believe you wasted it.
Most sources panned the game for being a poor first person shooter... without realizing it was created to be a first-person parkour simulator with shooting elements. It was a very ground-breaking game for the first-person perspective, and most people wrote it off as bad or mediocre.
Syphon Filter 2.
Much better than the first game, with many improvements and yet received (especially here on Gamespot) a very low score and panning review.
~~~
It just goes to show that you cannot trust reviews from other people.
foxhound_fox
I completely agree with you. Mirror's edge and syphon filter 2 are two of my favorite game ever made
Log in to comment