I think Kevin VanOrd is testing us once again with his KoA review...

Back in 2010 Kevin reviewed what would eventually become the greatest game of the generation, Nier, and in a brilliant and inspired move he scored it a 5.0. I don't believe this was coinicidence. In my humble opinion, he knowingly gave one of the greatest games ever a mediocre score as a way to test us the gamers, to see if down the line we could look past what the mainstream game loving critics think and recognise a niche title for the masterpiece it is. That test ended up being a resounding success.

I'm getting the same vibe from his KoA: Reckoning review. Perhaps this is a test to see if we will still recognise it as a legendary title down the line. Opinions?

I think he just has a different taste in video games to you or I.

AMalur is way worst than Nier

Soooo...

Damage control?

SW conspiracy theories are the best!

Back in 2010 Kevin reviewed what would eventually become the greatest game of the generation, Nier, and in a brilliant and inspired move he scored it a 5.0. I don't believe this was coinicidence. In my humble opinion, he knowingly gave one of the greatest games ever a mediocre score as a way to test us the gamers, to see if down the line we could look past what the mainstream game loving critics think and recognise a niche title for the masterpiece it is. That test ended up being a resounding success.

I'm getting the same vibe from his KoA: Reckoning review. Perhaps this is a test to see if we will still recognise it as a legendary title down the line. Opinions?

Master_ShakeXXX

AMalur is way worst than Nier

loosingENDS

.

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

AMalur is way worst than Nier

gamebreakerz__

[QUOTE="Master_ShakeXXX"]

Back in 2010 Kevin reviewed what would eventually become the greatest game of the generation, Nier, and in a brilliant and inspired move he scored it a 5.0. I don't believe this was coinicidence. In my humble opinion, he knowingly gave one of the greatest games ever a mediocre score as a way to test us the gamers, to see if down the line we could look past what the mainstream game loving critics think and recognise a niche title for the masterpiece it is. That test ended up being a resounding success.

I'm getting the same vibe from his KoA: Reckoning review. Perhaps this is a test to see if we will still recognise it as a legendary title down the line. Opinions?

gamebreakerz__

Kevin gave it lowest score of all the critics though. I think he looked at some of the other scores it was receiving and said to himself "ya know what, this brilliant game isn't getting the love it deserves so I'm going to write the most negative review of all and leave it up to the gamers." Kevin, you clever dog you.

[QUOTE="gamebreakerz__"][QUOTE="Master_ShakeXXX"]

Back in 2010 Kevin reviewed what would eventually become the greatest game of the generation, Nier, and in a brilliant and inspired move he scored it a 5.0. I don't believe this was coinicidence. In my humble opinion, he knowingly gave one of the greatest games ever a mediocre score as a way to test us the gamers, to see if down the line we could look past what the mainstream game loving critics think and recognise a niche title for the masterpiece it is. That test ended up being a resounding success.

I'm getting the same vibe from his KoA: Reckoning review. Perhaps this is a test to see if we will still recognise it as a legendary title down the line. Opinions?

Master_ShakeXXX

Kevin gave it lowest score of all the critics though. I think he looked at some of the other scores it was receiving and said to himself "ya know what, this brilliant game isn't getting the love it deserves so I'm going to write the most negative review of all and leave it up to the gamers." Kevin, you clever dog you.

Soooo do you actually believe this or are you just very bored right now?

AMalur is way worst than Nier

loosingENDS

AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!

What is this? No mention of The Witcher 2 on 360? No mention of Fable on 360? What is going on? WHAT IS GOING ON?????

[QUOTE="loosingENDS"]

AMalur is way worst than Nier

arto1223

AAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!

What is this? No mention of The Witcher 2 on 360? No mention of Fable on 360? What is going on? WHAT IS GOING ON?????

a post...a post from loosingENDS that does not have any 360 exclusives in it.

/head explodes.

[QUOTE="Master_ShakeXXX"]

[QUOTE="gamebreakerz__"] Nier was a critical flop though, it wasn't just him. :?sandbox3d

Kevin gave it lowest score of all the critics though. I think he looked at some of the other scores it was receiving and said to himself "ya know what, this brilliant game isn't getting the love it deserves so I'm going to write the most negative review of all and leave it up to the gamers." Kevin, you clever dog you.

Soooo do you actually believe this or are you just very bored right now?

A little bit of both.

AMalur is way worst than Nier

loosingENDS

NIER's reception among critics is one of the biggest travesties in gaming history. As for this 7.5, I think Gamespot are trying to cut back the 8.0+ reviews lately. I mean, I think they're trying to become tougher and giving an 8.0+ score a much more respectable meaning. In doing so, they'd be screwing with Metacritic and everything, but whatever. The 7.5 review of Skyward Sword sort of supports this (except that SS has a MC score of 94..) as well as Toms article 'In Defence of the 6.0'. Basically, I think what we're seeing is a transition in the way games are reviewed here at Gamespot, with the standards being greatly increased.

I haven't played the full game, but based on the demo the rest of the game must just die off to be scored that differently to Dark Souls and Skyrim. I mean, Skyrim had an amazing, beautiful and vast game world but terrible combat, less-than-stellar animations and plenty of hit-or-miss side quests. I don't feel like KoA would be a better game, but I didn't expect it to fall 1.5 points short. As for Dark Souls, amazing game, but it falls short in areas and I can't see how it should be regarded a better game than Skyrim (and almost everywhere but Gamespot agrees).

Just my two cents. Looking forward to playing KoA, and Kevin spoke very highly of it in the video review. The score doesn't seem to match the review, unless my above theory is true, in which case 7.5 can now be regarded as a great, solid game. And finally, I'll finish how I started. NIER IS ONE OF THE GREATEST GAMES OF ALL TIME!

OF. ALL. TIME.

Calm down, this isn't a conspiracy. Kevin is just a mainstream gamer who loves dem shooters n blood n gore, TEH BLOOOOD.... TEH GUNS..... E.g MGS4 and Gears 3dracolich55

Which is why he creamed himself over Dark Souls. :|

i will go with 8.5 GS wanting to become 7.5 GS, they don't exactly have review standars and they just throw random numbers at games, so 7.5 is the new 8.5

Or...he has a very DIFFERENT view on games! :o

Crazy, right?

Calm down, this isn't a conspiracy. Kevin is just a mainstream gamer who loves dem shooters n blood n gore, TEH BLOOOOD.... TEH GUNS..... E.g MGS4 and Gears 3dracolich55

He hates those games...well, except for MGS4 but otherwise he really doesn't like those games.

Let me get this straight...

So Infamous 2 gets 7.5...It's on spot, reviewer said screen changes color when damaged, good reason to give that score

Zelda SS gets 7.5...Haha you sheep mad, reviewer said he can't play with controls, yep a 7.5 (AAA metacritic average)

This crappy, generic, color by the numbers caliber game called KoA gets 7.5...gamesspot trying to be hipsters, 7.5 = new 8.5, it's a conspiracy!!!

Gamespot may indeed have some flawed scores, but I don't understand the defense of THIS particular game. This is probably one of the few scores that is dead on spot, actually it probably could have been lower...wish Tom Mc Shea had got his hands on this.

I dunno bout all this but will say he blew it when it came to reviewing Lost Odyssey though I bet now that he's seen what's come after L.O. in terms of JRPG's the last 4 - 5 years, he wishes he had scored L.O. AAA - eh, the old hind sight is always 20/20. :P

I was expecting a 7.5 from the start. Generic is one of the more damning things an RPG can be. When you have a heap of talent at your disposal, and the endless possibilities of a fantasy universe to explore, there's just no excuse for making a really mundane setting and story - it'll inevitably bring down the whole experience.

Besides the combat, there wasn't a single thing in the trailers that looked like it hadn't been done before a hundred times...so I really never understood the hype or defence of the game. It looks solid and entertaining, but it was never going to be the next huge thing.

IGN 9 GS 7.5 I know which review has more credability........ Its not IGN. BibiMaghoo

IGN 9

GS 7.5

I know which review has more credibility, its not GS, well neither ign, guess i will wait for other reviewrs like angryjoe, zetgeistreview or zeropunctuation who can actually do decent reviews.

[QUOTE="BibiMaghoo"]IGN 9 GS 7.5 I know which review has more credability........ Its not IGN. Krelian-co

IGN 9

GS 7.5

I know which review has more credibility, its not GS, well neither ign, guess i will wait for other reviewrs like angryjoe, zetgeistreview or zeropunctuation who can actually do decent reviews.

I know which review has more credibility, you're OWN damn review. :roll:

[QUOTE="BibiMaghoo"]IGN 9 GS 7.5 I know which review has more credability........ Its not IGN. Krelian-co

IGN 9

GS 7.5

I know which review has more credibility, its not GS, well neither ign, guess i will wait for other reviewrs like angryjoe, zetgeistreview or zeropunctuation who can actually do decent reviews.

Very true, I was reffering to just the two of them though. Having looked at GS review, the demerits are a little under explained. Bland characters, bland story ect. It would have been nice to have a little more detail. That being said, I have no respect for any of the writing IGN does. The UC3 review and FFXIII-2 review are enough for me to never read one again.

[QUOTE="dracolich55"]Calm down, this isn't a conspiracy. Kevin is just a mainstream gamer who loves dem shooters n blood n gore, TEH BLOOOOD.... TEH GUNS..... E.g MGS4 and Gears 3waltefmoney

Which is why he creamed himself over Dark Souls. :|

Plus he didn't even review Gears 3.

IGN 9 GS 7.5 I know which review has more credability........ Its not IGN. BibiMaghoo

Oh IGN, Ihad some respect for you...I guess it's true what they say, everyone has their price.

"In other words, if you're looking for bang for your buck, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning has it in droves. Then again, if you're looking for an immersive adventure backed by combat that doesn't only put other RPGs to shame, but in fact many action games, too, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning has that as well."

"I'll come right out and say it: Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning will be discussed when Game of the Year 2012 rolls around."

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/121/1216517p1.html

How ridiculous do these comments sound now?

[QUOTE="BibiMaghoo"]IGN 9 GS 7.5 I know which review has more credability........ Its not IGN. casharmy

Oh IGN, I used to respect you...I guess it's true what they say, everyone has their price.

"In other words, if you're looking for bang for your buck, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning has it in droves. Then again, if you're looking for an immersive adventure backed by combat that doesn't only put other RPGs to shame, but in fact many action games, too, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning has that as well."

"I'll come right out and say it: Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning will be discussed when Game of the Year 2012 rolls around."

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/121/1216517p1.html

How ridiculous do these comments sound now?

If they are going to rate things so highly all the time, (Amy excepted) they really need to change the review scores to a different scale, maybe a 5 scale. Otherwise they are just spamming high scores and they dont mean anything.

That does it, I've seen way too many people around here say that Nier is one of the, or flat the best game this gen. I'm going to buy it right now. If it sucks I'm collectively blaming everyone in sw.WithoutGraceXII

Yeah, I've made that decision too.

I had went to the store and had it in my hands, but I second guessed it and put it back...I'm not even going to think about it this time, gona get it. if it sucks it sucks, I've took chances on other games that ended up sucking (FFXIII, LO, MVC3), I migh as well give it a chance.

[QUOTE="casharmy"]

[QUOTE="BibiMaghoo"]IGN 9 GS 7.5 I know which review has more credability........ Its not IGN. sts106mat

Oh IGN, I used to respect you...I guess it's true what they say, everyone has their price.

"In other words, if you're looking for bang for your buck, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning has it in droves. Then again, if you're looking for an immersive adventure backed by combat that doesn't only put other RPGs to shame, but in fact many action games, too, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning has that as well."

"I'll come right out and say it: Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning will be discussed when Game of the Year 2012 rolls around."

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/121/1216517p1.html

How ridiculous do these comments sound now?

A game review really shouldnt be just down to how much the reviewer enjoyed playing it though. I could review a game I dont like, lets say Infamous as an example. I can still review that game based on its merits and achievements, ie, what it has done well and what it has not, even though I find the game a bit boring.

This is the very reason we have a 10 for UC3 on IGN, becuase they are not reviewing games based on merits, but rather how much the reviewer enjoyed the game. That method places fanboyism above journalism. Its not good for anyone.

[QUOTE="casharmy"]

[QUOTE="BibiMaghoo"]IGN 9 GS 7.5 I know which review has more credability........ Its not IGN. sts106mat

Oh IGN, I used to respect you...I guess it's true what they say, everyone has their price.

"In other words, if you're looking for bang for your buck, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning has it in droves. Then again, if you're looking for an immersive adventure backed by combat that doesn't only put other RPGs to shame, but in fact many action games, too, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning has that as well."

"I'll come right out and say it: Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning will be discussed when Game of the Year 2012 rolls around."

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/121/1216517p1.html

How ridiculous do these comments sound now?

certainly, game reviews back in the day seemed a bit better tho. Game reviews had mirrored my standards alot better years ago. I don't think my standards have changed much, I just feel more reviewers have standards that aren't reliable anymore...they are all over the place and things one game gets marked off for, they are ignored for another game.

at least Yahstsee or whatever his name is stays consistent with his reviews.

[QUOTE="sts106mat"][QUOTE="casharmy"]

Oh IGN, I used to respect you...I guess it's true what they say, everyone has their price.

"In other words, if you're looking for bang for your buck, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning has it in droves. Then again, if you're looking for an immersive adventure backed by combat that doesn't only put other RPGs to shame, but in fact many action games, too, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning has that as well."

"I'll come right out and say it: Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning will be discussed when Game of the Year 2012 rolls around."

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/121/1216517p1.html

How ridiculous do these comments sound now?

BibiMaghoo

A game review really shouldnt be just down to how much the reviewer enjoyed playing it though. I could review a game I dont like, lets say Infamous as an example. I can still review that game based on its merits and achievements, ie, what it has done well and what it has not, even though I find the game a bit boring.

This is the very reason we have a 10 for UC3 on IGN, becuase they are not reviewing games based on merits, but rather how much the reviewer enjoyed the game. That method places fanboyism above journalism. Its not good for anyone.

Back in 2010 Kevin reviewed what would eventually become the greatest game of the generation, Nier, and in a brilliant and inspired move he scored it a 5.0. I don't believe this was coinicidence. In my humble opinion, he knowingly gave one of the greatest games ever a mediocre score as a way to test us the gamers, to see if down the line we could look past what the mainstream game loving critics think and recognise a niche title for the masterpiece it is. That test ended up being a resounding success.

I'm getting the same vibe from his KoA: Reckoning review. Perhaps this is a test to see if we will still recognise it as a legendary title down the line. Opinions?

Master_ShakeXXX

[QUOTE="BibiMaghoo"]

[QUOTE="sts106mat"] he really enjoyed the game dude, so what? Do you enjoy EVERY SINGLE GAME EVER? I'll bet you have enjoyed a couple of stinkers and also hated (probably quite a lot) of games that loads of other people love. Bread_or_Decide

A game review really shouldnt be just down to how much the reviewer enjoyed playing it though. I could review a game I dont like, lets say Infamous as an example. I can still review that game based on its merits and achievements, ie, what it has done well and what it has not, even though I find the game a bit boring.

This is the very reason we have a 10 for UC3 on IGN, becuase they are not reviewing games based on merits, but rather how much the reviewer enjoyed the game. That method places fanboyism above journalism. Its not good for anyone.

Tell that to Greg, the guy who got fired from Gamespot for not putting the score the dev paid for...erp

Generic? Really lol... Did that really take 3.5 points of the score. What about COD?Cowboy_Sheepbop

:lol: this thread reeks of damage control weren"t you the one claiming this game would destroy skyrim?

[QUOTE="BibiMaghoo"]

[QUOTE="sts106mat"] he really enjoyed the game dude, so what? Do you enjoy EVERY SINGLE GAME EVER? I'll bet you have enjoyed a couple of stinkers and also hated (probably quite a lot) of games that loads of other people love. Bread_or_Decide

A game review really shouldnt be just down to how much the reviewer enjoyed playing it though. I could review a game I dont like, lets say Infamous as an example. I can still review that game based on its merits and achievements, ie, what it has done well and what it has not, even though I find the game a bit boring.

This is the very reason we have a 10 for UC3 on IGN, becuase they are not reviewing games based on merits, but rather how much the reviewer enjoyed the game. That method places fanboyism above journalism. Its not good for anyone.

And I am saying they should not JUST be scored on how much THEY enjoyed the game. It is not relevant to everyone, a review should be unbiased, that means putting aside your own personal likes and dislikes for proffesionalism. Otherwise, every reviewer that doesnt like a certain genre etc will score them all poorly, even though the qualties of the title in question make it more deserving. Thats how I see it anyway, if someone is paid to produce a proffesional review, then it should be based on a titles merits, not JUST personal enjoyment.