Most Biased Professional Review IYO

IGNs Battlefield Bad Company 2 Review

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7c1RrJ_sg4w

Where do I start? He compared it to MW2 way too many times throught the review. This is a tactical shooter. MW2 is a run and gun shooter. At least GT didn't do this. They chose the wrong guy to review this. They chose a guy who is a MW2 fanboy and disliked the first Bad Company, bringing in a lot of bias. Many of his comments are very opinionated, like when he said the characters were less annoying in this game, when that's just an opinion. And his opinion on the campaign "missing the epic feel" is extremely biased. Not every campaign is going to be a MW2 campaign, and this campaign had many epic moment. Just because it wasn't as "epic" as MW2s campaign, doesn't mean it completely misses it.

I think Yahtzee from Zero Punctuation takes the cake for bias... but that's kind of expected, it's fair though because to him everything is a piece of crap EDIT: woh woh woh, hold up, in the review I just noticed some MP maps that were just released (at least on the Xbox 360) not too long ago, but here he's playing this waaaay before that, is that like a PC thing or did they get some of these maps later too, I also notice with different day/night settings anyhow, I don't see what's bias about it, mind pointing it out to melamprey263

He isn't biased. He hates everything equally. Now if he hated on some random stuff for no reason, that would indicate bias, but save for a few oddball games he hates everything.

GAMETRAILERS, I wouldnt call em bias, just inconsistant.

They bang on all day about linearity and about doing something new, but as soon as a halo or COD game pops its head those rules go out the window.

IGNs Battlefield Bad Company 2 Review

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7c1RrJ_sg4w

Where do I start? He compared it to MW2 way too many times throught the review. This is a tactical shooter. MW2 is a run and gun shooter. At least GT didn't do this. They chose the wrong guy to review this. They chose a guy who is a MW2 fanboy and disliked the first Bad Company, bringing in a lot of bias. Many of his comments are very opinionated, like when he said the characters were less annoying in this game, when that's just an opinion. And his opinion on the campaign "missing the epic feel" is extremely biased. Not every campaign is going to be a MW2 campaign, and this campaign had many epic moment. Just because it wasn't as "epic" as MW2s campaign, doesn't mean it completely misses it.

Bad-School-Girl

How is it biased? "He compared it to MW2 way too many times throught (you mean through out*) the review."? He mentioned MW2 two times, and the only one of those times did he really compare - that was when he comparing that cinematic feel. In which he only said one sentence then moved on to what BF:BC2 does. The second time he mentioned MW2 was when he praised the online for BF:BC2 and saying it is a "legitimate contender" to MW2 online position. BF:BC2 isn't a tactical shooter, it's a modern first person shooter. It is as tactical as MW2 is on a game of domination or demolition. Battlefield 2 IS a tactical shooter! But because BC2 is on console it isn't so. It is a console shooter, and plays like one on the PC as well (don't get me wrong, this isn't a bad thing).

That reviewer gave it an 8.9 out of 10. Gamespot gave it a 9.0 out of 10. That would mean that who ever reviewed it on Gamespot is biased as well. "Many of his comments are very opinionated" - most reviews are opinionated. It's the whole point of the review - they don't tell you the logic, they give there opinion the matter in a least most biased way. It would be a good thing that the IGN reviewer gave it a similar score to the Gamespot score, even when he said he didn't like the first game! I didn't read the review - so I don't know if he compares again to MW2 or in more detail - but that video he didn't do anything against the game. Also - I don't even like MW2.

[QUOTE="Bad-School-Girl"]

IGNs Battlefield Bad Company 2 Review

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7c1RrJ_sg4w

Where do I start? He compared it to MW2 way too many times throught the review. This is a tactical shooter. MW2 is a run and gun shooter. At least GT didn't do this. They chose the wrong guy to review this. They chose a guy who is a MW2 fanboy and disliked the first Bad Company, bringing in a lot of bias. Many of his comments are very opinionated, like when he said the characters were less annoying in this game, when that's just an opinion. And his opinion on the campaign "missing the epic feel" is extremely biased. Not every campaign is going to be a MW2 campaign, and this campaign had many epic moment. Just because it wasn't as "epic" as MW2s campaign, doesn't mean it completely misses it.

mgs_freak91

How is it biased? "He compared it to MW2 way too many times throught (you mean through out*) the review."? He mentioned MW2 two times, and the only one of those times did he really compare - that was when he comparing that cinematic feel. In which he only said one sentence then moved on to what BF:BC2 does. The second time he mentioned MW2 was when he praised the online for BF:BC2 and saying it is a "legitimate contender" to MW2 online position. BF:BC2 isn't a tactical shooter, it's a modern first person shooter. It is as tactical as MW2 is on a game of domination or demolition. Battlefield 2 IS a tactical shooter! But because BC2 is on console it isn't so. It is a console shooter, and plays like one on the PC as well (don't get me wrong, this isn't a bad thing).

That reviewer gave it an 8.9 out of 10. Gamespot gave it a 9.0 out of 10. That would mean that who ever reviewed it on Gamespot is biased as well. "Many of his comments are very opinionated" - most reviews are opinionated. It's the whole point of the review - they don't tell you the logic, they give there opinion the matter in a least most biased way. It would be a good thing that the IGN reviewer gave it a similar score to the Gamespot score, even when he said he didn't like the first game! I didn't read the review - so I don't know if he compares again to MW2 or in more detail - but that video he didn't do anything against the game. Also - I don't even like MW2.

Eurogamers review for Alan Wake wasnt exactly biased but it was one of the worst reviews i've ever read some of her gripes werent really thought out at all like "Alan is accompanied on this jolly holiday by his wife, Alice. She sets the cause of female videogame characters back 10 years by being afraid of the dark and mewling like a kitten with a broken leg whenever the lights are off." seriously ??.

Not saying its the worst review ever but its one of the only reviews ever to irritate me. So i thought i'd mention it.

Eurogamers review for Alan Wake wasnt exactly biased but it was one of the worst reviews i've ever read some of her gripes werent really thought out at all like "Alan is accompanied on this jolly holiday by his wife, Alice. She sets the cause of female videogame characters back 10 years by being afraid of the dark and mewling like a kitten with a broken leg whenever the lights are off." seriously ??.

Not saying its the worst review ever but its one of the only reviews ever to irritate me. So i thought i'd mention it.

Snugenz

Yeah I agreed with the score, but it was a terrible review, poorly written and argued.

The Ratchet and Clank : Tools of Destruction Gamespot review by ex Gamespot Sports game reviewer Aaron Thomas (No longer a Gamespot employee).

Why he was chosen to review it, I will never know. The review isn't even consistant with other Ratchet and Clank Reviews here at GS, it's like he didn't even play the series before that game, nor had any idea of what fellow Gamespot reviewers thought of the series. As you can see it's not one of my favorite reviews...lucky, when I saw his name on the review, I knew I was going to have to pay close attention.

He later went on to other fabulous websites to bash Uncharted 2 going as far as to compare it to his friend's bout with Cancer, and arguing with his Gaming peers / friends about the game, and how he can't believe it's accolades. There is more, but you get the idea.

There is other funny things that came up as I researched him, but that one review really was disappointing, penalizing the game for variety was my favorite.

The other review that comes to mind is a Deadspace Review at OXM...eh. That's why I tend to find writers/reviewers I like, and put more faith into those reviews, and it's always more than one person, to get a consensus before I plunk down, unless I know I love the developer. :P

GAMETRAILERS, I wouldnt call em bias, just inconsistant.

They bang on all day about linearity and about doing something new, but as soon as a halo or COD game pops its head those rules go out the window.

Zaibach

Yup I still rememebr the sillyness of the uncharted 2 complaints of nothing oringal so it doesint get higher then 9.2. Then MW2 comes and boom higher then uncharted 2score even thought mw2 is as unorginal as they come. Not saying its a bad game,but GT always change the rules when it fits them. Basicly making them look like for the lack of a better word dumb.

[QUOTE="Zaibach"]

GAMETRAILERS, I wouldnt call em bias, just inconsistant.

They bang on all day about linearity and about doing something new, but as soon as a halo or COD game pops its head those rules go out the window.

finalfantasy94

Yup I still rememebr the sillyness of the uncharted 2 complaints of nothing oringal so it doesint get higher then 9.2. Then MW2 comes and boom higher then uncharted 2score even thought mw2 is as unorginal as they come. Not saying its a bad game,but GT always change the rules when it fits them. Basicly making them look like for the lack of a better word dumb.

Yeah, they really didn't know what they were doing over there at GT. That whole thing was a mess.

i'd say any review done by greg miller on ign

i'd say any review done by greg miller on ign

DoomZaW

Greg Miller is the leader of True Fanboys of Sony League.

The GS Oblivion review.

The Good

• Huge, lavishly detailed world offers tremendous amount of action and adventure
• Main mechanics like combat, stealth, and magic are fun and well designed
• Impressive artificial intelligence and hundreds of believable characters
• Outstanding symphonic score, as well as excellent voice acting and sound effects
• Tremendous replay value, plus gorgeous graphics to make it easy on the eyes.

The Bad

• Frequent though fairly brief loading times
• You might run into some technical issues with performance.

Lol what? The ps3 review even praises the story...

the whole review is waaay off the mark. They seem to think it's pretty much Planescape: Torment.

Hilary Goldstein

http://stars.ign.com/objects/964/964246.html

The GS Oblivion review.

The Good

• Huge, lavishly detailed world offers tremendous amount of action and adventure
• Main mechanics like combat, stealth, and magic are fun and well designed
• Impressive artificial intelligence and hundreds of believable characters
• Outstanding symphonic score, as well as excellent voice acting and sound effects
• Tremendous replay value, plus gorgeous graphics to make it easy on the eyes.

The Bad

• Frequent though fairly brief loading times
• You might run into some technical issues with performance.

Lol what? The ps3 review even praises the story...

the whole review is waaay off the mark. They seem to think it's pretty much Planescape: Torment.

Filthybastrd

IGNs Battlefield Bad Company 2 Review

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7c1RrJ_sg4w

Where do I start? He compared it to MW2 way too many times throught the review. This is a tactical shooter. MW2 is a run and gun shooter. At least GT didn't do this. They chose the wrong guy to review this. They chose a guy who is a MW2 fanboy and disliked the first Bad Company, bringing in a lot of bias. Many of his comments are very opinionated, like when he said the characters were less annoying in this game, when that's just an opinion. And his opinion on the campaign "missing the epic feel" is extremely biased. Not every campaign is going to be a MW2 campaign, and this campaign had many epic moment. Just because it wasn't as "epic" as MW2s campaign, doesn't mean it completely misses it.

Bad-School-Girl

The Ratchet and Clank : Tools of Destruction Gamespot review by ex Gamespot Sports game reviewer Aaron Thomas (No longer a Gamespot employee).

Why he was chosen to review it, I will never know. The review isn't even consistant with other Ratchet and Clank Reviews here at GS, it's like he didn't even play the series before that game, nor had any idea of what fellow Gamespot reviewers thought of the series. As you can see it's not one of my favorite reviews...lucky, when I saw his name on the review, I knew I was going to have to pay close attention.

He later went on to other fabulous websites to bash Uncharted 2 going as far as to compare it to his friend's bout with Cancer, and arguing with his Gaming peers / friends about the game, and how he can't believe it's accolades. There is more, but you get the idea.

There is other funny things that came up as I researched him, but that one review really was disappointing, penalizing the game for variety was my favorite.

The other review that comes to mind is a Deadspace Review at OXM...eh. That's why I tend to find writers/reviewers I like, and put more faith into those reviews, and it's always more than one person, to get a consensus before I plunk down, unless I know I love the developer. :P

SolidTy

Wasnt he also primarily a sports reviewer? It just didnt make any sense to hand him that game. I still havent played TOD (or any other ratchet game) but wow, im always shocked whenever i hear that, complaining about too much variety that is.

Although i dont have many, one line from the Metal Gear Solid review has always annoyed me (even though i havent played it). It says something like "When you know what to do and skip all cutscenes, the game can be completed in 3 hours" and it was listed as a drawback. Its not really bias but completely silly. Firstly you dont know what to do on your first playthrough and secondly, why would you skip cutscenes when MGS has a huge focus on presentation? Really annoys me.

Edge Magazine against the PS3 and its exclusives.

Edge Magazine against the PS3 and its exclusives.

7ojistix

The oblivion review. Dialogue being better than morrowind? Please.

I think the game as a whole is better then morrowind personally, but even I wouldn't compare their dialogue.

IGN and Gametrailers are usually biased in some way, game trailers for example bashed the sc2 story only since they didn't know the first one. I mean fine! Everyone makes misstakes.

Gametrailer review of Blacklight Tango down. Stop comparing every shooter to MW2 :evil:

The IGN Sonic Unleashed (360) review, absolutely disgusting, Hilary doesn't say anything about the actual game, he says "Werehog bad Don't buy" without even going in to the problems of the game. This is the worst review i have ever seen regardless if he is correcy or not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjyWXiZrSlQ

[QUOTE="7ojistix"]

Edge Magazine against the PS3 and its exclusives.

Ninja-Hippo

All reviews are biased in someway. It is impossible to review a game without some of your personal preferences affecting what you are writing about. I don't know why people let reviews get to them so much.

Gametrailer review of Blacklight Tango down. Stop comparing every shooter to MW2 :evil:

timmy00

[QUOTE="lamprey263"]I think Yahtzee from Zero Punctuation takes the cake for bias... but that's kind of expected, it's fair though because to him everything is a piece of crap EDIT: woh woh woh, hold up, in the review I just noticed some MP maps that were just released (at least on the Xbox 360) not too long ago, but here he's playing this waaaay before that, is that like a PC thing or did they get some of these maps later too, I also notice with different day/night settings anyhow, I don't see what's bias about it, mind pointing it out to meGuybrush_3

He isn't biased. He hates everything equally. Now if he hated on some random stuff for no reason, that would indicate bias, but save for a few oddball games he hates everything.

This pretty much always ends up being what ever review the reader disagrees with most.

If it's a series the reader loves but sees a critical review - oh that's just because the reviewer is biased.
If it's a series the reader hates but sees a positive review he thinks the game doesn't deserve - oh that's just because the reviewer is biased.

And I want to get out the way here too, something I see all the time on these forums when people claim reviewer bias. Yes, we all have our preferences to the kind of games we like, even reviewers. Some just don't get into sports so could care less about Madden 11, or don't care for RTS or RPG, or fighter or what have you.

But when posters claim a review bias based on nothing more than a platform specific criteria, that's when I know the complainers are full of their own ego. They project their own platform bias as being common to everybody in order to justify their crappy attitude. But no, while reviewers can hve their genre preferences, they are NOT biased towards any platform, and will score a game from any system based on its merits. They don't deduct or give bonus points because it's a 360 game, or on the Wii or PS3 or whatever.

▲ All of them. Well not all of them, just the ones that score extremely well on all sites. Paid off reviews. There is no way a game can truly be universely liked. ▲

▲ All of them. Well not all of them, just the ones that score extremely well on all sites. Paid off reviews. There is no way a game can truly be universely liked. ▲

Loco_Live

Says who?

▲ All of them. Well not all of them, just the ones that score extremely well on all sites. Paid off reviews. There is no way a game can truly be universely liked. ▲

Loco_Live

That's like saying there's no way any given game's fan base can number in the millions :|

They project their own platform bias as being common to everybody in order to justify their crappy attitude.

AdobeArtist

A poster has a particular platform bias so anything said against that platform or it's games is overly scrutinized. Never mind that it's been proven many times in the past that this is not true they tend to ignore the facts and continue to blather on about bias. This was eveident in a thread a couple of days ago about a Kotaku GT 5 post accusing the site of intentionally making a bad article about PS3 load times when it was probably just a mistake. Not to mention that Kotaku has done equally bad articles about the 360 and the Wii.

It's just fanboy goggles.

[QUOTE="Loco_Live"]

▲ All of them. Well not all of them, just the ones that score extremely well on all sites. Paid off reviews. There is no way a game can truly be universely liked. ▲

Head_of_games

Says who?

▲ Not everybody shares the same opinion. A game may sell a million, but there is always somebody who did not like the game. I think it's ridiculous that I come and post something on SW and I'm immediately laughed at for my opinion. It's like you've never heard such a thing as people disliking a popular game before. ▲

[QUOTE="Loco_Live"]

▲ All of them. Well not all of them, just the ones that score extremely well on all sites. Paid off reviews. There is no way a game can truly be universely liked. ▲

AdobeArtist

That's like saying there's no way any given game's fan base can number in the millions :|

▲ No, its not. ▲

GAMETRAILERS, I wouldnt call em bias, just inconsistant.

They bang on all day about linearity and about doing something new, but as soon as a halo or COD game pops its head those rules go out the window.

Zaibach

But when posters claim a review bias based on nothing more than a platform specific criteria, that's when I know the complainers are full of their own ego. They project their own platform bias as being common to everybody in order to justify their crappy attitude. But no, while reviewers can hve their genre preferences, they are NOT biased towards any platform, and will score a game from any system based on its merits. They don't deduct or give bonus points because it's a 360 game, or on the Wii or PS3 or whatever.

AdobeArtist

You can't possibly know that, nor can you speak for every reviewer in the world. :|

The only correct answer is IGN's review of God Hand.

[QUOTE="AdobeArtist"]

But when posters claim a review bias based on nothing more than a platform specific criteria, that's when I know the complainers are full of their own ego. They project their own platform bias as being common to everybody in order to justify their crappy attitude. But no, while reviewers can hve their genre preferences, they are NOT biased towards any platform, and will score a game from any system based on its merits. They don't deduct or give bonus points because it's a 360 game, or on the Wii or PS3 or whatever.

SolidTy

You can't possibly know that, nor can you speak for every reviewer in the world. :|

[QUOTE="SolidTy"]

[QUOTE="AdobeArtist"]

But when posters claim a review bias based on nothing more than a platform specific criteria, that's when I know the complainers are full of their own ego. They project their own platform bias as being common to everybody in order to justify their crappy attitude. But no, while reviewers can hve their genre preferences, they are NOT biased towards any platform, and will score a game from any system based on its merits. They don't deduct or give bonus points because it's a 360 game, or on the Wii or PS3 or whatever.

AfterBurnerZ

You can't possibly know that, nor can you speak for every reviewer in the world. :|

erm. Every one has an opinion... :?

There are reviews I disagree cause of my own personal preferences, but yeah I don't see bias in a review.

If anything CGR-HD praises a game waaay to much even if it's bad,