how many of you ACTUALLY trust GS reviews

ok i know in SW we have to go along with GS reviews, but how many of you actually think that the reviews are/aren't trustworthy? i don't, especially after R: FoM and LoZ: TP both getting only AAs. there are plenty of others that i really don't agree with but those two really just annoy me. i want to know if ANYONE really agrees with the reviews here, since a lot of people say they trust IGN. and if the answer "no" gets 3/4 of the polls votes then why do we even go by GS reviews in SW?

anyway to sum it up my vote is no, but what about you?

I don't know. I'm split. Almost everything in the last 12 months has been complete crap.

Call of Duty 2&3, Oblivion, Gears of War, Resistance, Rainbow Six, Motorstorm...

I have dramatically different opinions about these games than Gamespot.

I don't know. I'm split. Almost everything in the last 12 months has been complete crap.

Call of Duty 2&3, Oblivion, Gears of War, Resistance, Rainbow Six, Motorstorm...

I have dramatically different opinions about these games than Gamespot.

Redfingers

Nobody should 100% trust any single review. Realistically they should look at several and gauge their own interest in the game as well. Also they shouldn't just be looking at the review scores; you actually gotta read these things.

In SW we just go by Gamespot reviews because things would be far more chaotic without a standard. Its not a practice that I recommend carrying over to real life.

[QUOTE="Redfingers"]

I don't know. I'm split. Almost everything in the last 12 months has been complete crap.

Call of Duty 2&3, Oblivion, Gears of War, Resistance, Rainbow Six, Motorstorm...

I have dramatically different opinions about these games than Gamespot.

musicalmac

Yeah, and Gamespot is the single publication that determines whether I'm right or wrong. All those other publications that agree with me don't matter.

In fact, Gamespot is the only legitimate publication in the world. Good point. :roll:

do gamespot use one person to come out with the review or a whol staff??? and if they use a whole staff how come they are not credit on the article

Well, since I played Oblivion and read their review, I'm far less trusting of their reviews (and the fact that Madden still gets higher than 8 despite not improving). But I don't dismiss them outright.

As far as SW goes, remember, this forum is hardly serious, so whether a game flops or not is hardly of consequence. I think GS reviews get used because logically, it's GSes site. Also, it keeps things simple- how different are the results if you changed it from GS to IGN or 1up? I don't know, but probably not much.

I trusted them until I bought BF2 based off the 9.3 it scored here at GS.foxhound_fox

Sounds like your mistake, not GS's. I like FPS but I didn't just rush out and buy Perfect Dark Zero because it scored a 9 on Gamespot.

Well, since I played Oblivion and read their review, I'm far less trusting of their reviews (and the fact that Madden still gets higher than 8 despite not improving). But I don't dismiss them outright.

As far as SW goes, remember, this forum is hardly serious, so whether a game flops or not is hardly of consequence. I think GS reviews get used because logically, it's GSes site. Also, it keeps things simple- how different are the results if you changed it from GS to IGN or 1up? I don't know, but probably not much.

Vampyronight

Yeah. For me, personally, the discrepency between Halo CE, Halo 2 Xbox, and Halo 2 PC is extremely ridiculous. There are so many inconsistencies....they need one set of criteria for all the editors.

And God of War 2 and Half Life 2 were slightly underrated, IMO.

I trusted them until I bought BF2 based off the 9.3 it scored here at GS.foxhound_fox

Yeah, and Gamespot is the only legitimate publication that disagrees with my opinion.

In fact, Gamespot is the only legitimate publication in the world. Good point. :roll:

Redfingers

NO! the new system is lame...

Cnet Networks tend to be biased against the ps3 (GS, 1UP, EGM)

R:FoM Should have gotten AAA..

Sounds like your mistake, not GS's. I like FPS but I didn't just rush out and buy Perfect Dark Zero because it scored a 9 on Gamespot.Corvin

BF2?Shinobishyguy

50/50 FOR ME.

some time GS is on the money with their reviews.....but there are alot of times where they have screwed up.

[QUOTE="Corvin"]Sounds like your mistake, not GS's. I like FPS but I didn't just rush out and buy Perfect Dark Zero because it scored a 9 on Gamespot.foxhound_fox

BF2?Shinobishyguy

They hook you in and then BOOM...disappointment

standards for the 360 has been raised by GS. thats all the Madden score shows. standards for PS3 is lower than 360. just like all multi plats are better on 360, standards are high for it now.

does it makes sense now?

GS reviews mean NOTHING anymore. Madden 08 360 and PS3 review are a perfect example.apolloluke

Perfect example of what? What was so wrong with the Madden 08 reviews?

I don't know. I'm split. Almost everything in the last 12 months has been complete crap.

Call of Duty 2&3, Oblivion, Gears of War, Resistance, Rainbow Six, Motorstorm...

I have dramatically different opinions about these games than Gamespot.

Redfingers

well one thing ill give them credit for is that they give their honest opinion. i may not agree with it but i can certainly respect it. if they think a highly anticipated game is crap then they will say so which is good.

sometimes i do disagree with them. imho they were way to harsh on red steel for example. the game is far from perfect. its buggy and the graphics are a bit poor. controller usage also isnt perfect by a long shot. but to its credit it was trying alot of new things and it did quite well. 5.5 was way to harsh (though ive seen some places give it a 9 which is also just plain wrong imho). the game diserved a 7-7.5 overall imho. it was fun to play and the core mechanics werent broken at all.

sometimes i do agree with them. zelda TP is not a AAA game in my book. i think they were spot on with that score (though the lack of voice over complaint was a bit silly imho). the game stuck too closely to the same old same old and didnt really try anything new. the game also lacked the charm of WW. its still a great game (i mean..8.8. were not talking a disaster here are we?) but its age is starting to show. ninty need to get those creative juices flowing for the next one.

but yeah i trust them to give their honest opinion. i may not like it but id prefer if they told me a game was crap in their eyes rather than just tell me what i want to hear. i use many sources for reviews though. GS are not the deciding factor in my purchasing decision.

NO! the new system is lame...

Cnet Networks tend to be biased against the ps3 (GS, 1UP, EGM)

R:FoM Should have gotten AAA..

The_Wise_0ne

Resistance deserves 7.5 at best. pretty lame game if you ask me ;)

Gamespot reviews are the most reliable of all gaming sites.

Much better than IGN or crap like that.

The harsh and critical reviews make sure that people actually know the game for once before they buy.

The other sites rate games with average scores like 7.0 or better, which is ridiculous and moronic.

Crap games are crap - good games are good, so the gaming editors should be making a better distinction.

Over-rating games just means that the editors have failed in their jobs, which is sad because they get paid for it.

That's why Gamespot is much better, though not perfect, at score judging, around 80 percent of the time.