(I realize this is SW)
The funny thing is how both sides (not meaning to exclude Wii and PC) use each site as they see fit, and I'm not referring to the Haze review, but almost anytime it fits their agenda. Face it, both sites are as "credible" as you are gonna get in terms of video game reviews. Saying one side is more accurate than the other is stupid, and is an underlying problem with why the whole "A" system is completely derived by people that are insecure about their purchases. I'm not even referring to the ps3 vs. 360, I'm referring to ps2 vs. xbox vs. GC, etc. down the line. When it fits said agenda, that one score means that the game is either hailing a system as king or holding the system's head in the water. A review is ONE person's opinion. There are people that don't like The Godfather that are considered "professional" critics. I should probably repeat it even with no apparent purpose: "A review is one person's opinion."
I just find it annoying that so many people claim, excuse the stupid word, "pwnage" because of a score to a game they have never played and never will. How exactly can someone say a game that GS scores higher for their system is better than a game from another system if they haven't played it? I know it's so common on SW that it's basically just a forum of hilarity, but still makes me wonder how many of these people are adults and still behave like they "won" a non-existent "game."
Next time a game gets a 9.5 and a competing game gets a 9.0 on GS(this is completely hypothetical), someone count the number of threads made about how "9.5" game is vastly superior to "9.0" game, even if 50 other sites rate 9.0 game higher. Or even if the 9.5 game is better on gamerankings (the only other site that for some reason is "credible"...when it fits an agenda). Arguments on this forum always end up being about how this score is higher than this score, and again, the vast majority of the time, each individual party has only played one of the games in contention. I will concede that if one game gets an average score (more than one site)of a 4 and the other gets an average of 9, the game with the 4 probably does not need to be played to decide which is better. However, this leads to what is probably my underlying point: READ the reviews, as they are usually more indicative of the reviewer's opinion of a game, more so than a number at the end (or beginning). Reading the reviews themselves will often let you know if you should be listening to the reviewer as well (remember, it's just one person's opinion, and everyone can be biased about a certain genre or some such). If the reviewer doesn't like a game because of a feature that you enjoy, or likes the game because of a feature you hate, it should help you decide that you are not gonna rely on that person's judgement to become your's. Of course, the opposite is also true, if, in their writing, their opinion seems to be parallel to how you feel, it may be a good source for your decision.
My unnecessarily long post is basically just venting at the people that feel the need to bash games they have never played because someONE told them they are justified in doing so. Any well written review can be a source of praise or downplay, but it should not license anyone to credibly bash a game based solely on the opinion. If you are not going to play the game, at least be prepared to argue with facts from more than one source. There is a reason a paper in middle school composition class requires three or more sources.
(just as a note, I'm not making this discussion because of Haze)
Log in to comment