Scores are important, but it's the context behind the scores that really matters

  • 107 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64057

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#51 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64057 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]Scores actually aren't that important. PinnacleGamingP
well in some cases, for example halo ODLC scoring a 9 may easily be dismissed as fanboyish hype which was completely oblivious to the fact that the overall package was not a 9/10 and more like a 5.5 out of 10. especially when the same reviewer gives infamous 2 a 7.5 and uncharted 3 a 8.5 and zelda skyward sword a 7.5. what a joke.

5 being average. Yeah I'd argue for that. But at the same time I'd argue that his 7s for Skyward Sword was on point, and personally infamous 2 didn't deserve more either. It's a matter of how well he presents his argument for a game. All things being fair he made ODST sound like it deserved it. I flat out disagree, but it's not like his context didn't match his score.

What you find overrated/underrated is just as much a sign of preference or bias. Plus a group of opinions(metacritic) is a group of glorified opinions. Plenty of you have gotten old enough to argue a game's merits with your own words.

But either way game reviewers gloss over a lot of stupid **** when they review a game. Be it Mass Effect's binary morality system, God of War's ridiculously stupid plot, or the inconsistent level design issues of a Halo.

Avatar image for Bigboi500
Bigboi500

35550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#52 Bigboi500
Member since 2007 • 35550 Posts

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

Sure, 1 person can be wrong. 80 people? I don't think so. That's why a score of 7.5 on Skyward Sword from Gamespot dwindles off into the abyss, and the score of SKyward Sword on Gamerankings.com is like a 93%. Bad reviews get eaten alive on Gamerankings.com, which is why I like it.

arkephonic

Have you considered cultural and regional bias? Or that maybe 90% of the reviewers are all frat-boys who think alike? If someone shares their values and similarities, it's easy to agree with them perhaps, but there are lots of different mind-sets and beliefs when it comes to games, and entertainment in general.

What do you think is better, listening to 1 professional opinion, or 80 professional opinions? What is better, a dictatorship or a democracy? If you had a mental illness, what would be better, to get the opinion from 1 doctor, or 80 doctors? I find that with meta-scores, things just naturally even out in the end and end up being representative of what a game is. Like for example, if you were to just listen to the Gamespot review of Skyward Sword, you would be misinformed and possibly miss out on a great game. If you look at the Gamerankings score and read all the reviews, you would have a much better understanding of the truth behind the game.

Can't you listen to "professional" opinions without the score? You can listen to a reviewer's opinion without being influenced by a hollow number. Scores are assigned to games for the sole purpose to generate site traffic and drudge up a false sense of power. They give casual gamers a quick measuring stick without having to do research. They are pointless when you leave these website domains, yet the written text of reviews can actually have some intelligent information to offer. Think about it, when you're talking about your favorite games with friends and family in person, do you mention the scores that websites give them? Of course not, you'd be looked at like a fool. That's why they only have any value right here, and nowhere else.

Avatar image for arkephonic
arkephonic

7221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#53 arkephonic
Member since 2006 • 7221 Posts

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]Have you considered cultural and regional bias? Or that maybe 90% of the reviewers are all frat-boys who think alike? If someone shares their values and similarities, it's easy to agree with them perhaps, but there are lots of different mind-sets and beliefs when it comes to games, and entertainment in general.

Bigboi500

What do you think is better, listening to 1 professional opinion, or 80 professional opinions? What is better, a dictatorship or a democracy? If you had a mental illness, what would be better, to get the opinion from 1 doctor, or 80 doctors? I find that with meta-scores, things just naturally even out in the end and end up being representative of what a game is. Like for example, if you were to just listen to the Gamespot review of Skyward Sword, you would be misinformed and possibly miss out on a great game. If you look at the Gamerankings score and read all the reviews, you would have a much better understanding of the truth behind the game.

Can't you listen to "professional" opinions without the score? You can listen to a reviewer's opinion without being influenced by a hollow number. Scores are assigned to games for the sole purpose to generate site traffic and drudge up a false sense of power. They give casual gamers a quick measuring stick without having to do research. They are pointless when you leave these website domains, yet the written text of reviews can actually have some intelligent information to offer. Think about it, when you're talking about your favorite games with friends and family in person, do you mention the scores that websites give them? Of course not, you'd be looked at like a fool. That's why they only have any value right here, and nowhere else.

Reviews have numerical scores tied to them because that is the way they have always been. There is no hidden reasoning, no hidden agenda behind it, there's no conspiracy theory to be made concerning it.

I agree that when it comes to you, as an individual, playing games in the privacy of your own home, buying games, collecting games, there's no better critic than yourself when it comes to the value of a game. But personal opinion holds no weight in an argument. All I'm saying is that Gamerankings holds the most weight out of anything argumentatively.

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64057

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#54 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64057 Posts

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

What do you think is better, listening to 1 professional opinion, or 80 professional opinions? What is better, a dictatorship or a democracy? If you had a mental illness, what would be better, to get the opinion from 1 doctor, or 80 doctors? I find that with meta-scores, things just naturally even out in the end and end up being representative of what a game is. Like for example, if you were to just listen to the Gamespot review of Skyward Sword, you would be misinformed and possibly miss out on a great game. If you look at the Gamerankings score and read all the reviews, you would have a much better understanding of the truth behind the game.

arkephonic

Can't you listen to "professional" opinions without the score? You can listen to a reviewer's opinion without being influenced by a hollow number. Scores are assigned to games for the sole purpose to generate site traffic and drudge up a false sense of power. They give casual gamers a quick measuring stick without having to do research. They are pointless when you leave these website domains, yet the written text of reviews can actually have some intelligent information to offer. Think about it, when you're talking about your favorite games with friends and family in person, do you mention the scores that websites give them? Of course not, you'd be looked at like a fool. That's why they only have any value right here, and nowhere else.

Reviews have numerical scores tied to them because that is the way they have always been. There is no hidden reasoning, no hidden agenda behind it, there's no conspiracy theory to be made concerning it.

I agree that when it comes to you, as an individual, playing games in the privacy of your own home, buying games, collecting games, there's no better critic than yourself when it comes to the value of a game. But personal opinion holds no weight in an argument. All I'm saying is that Gamerankings holds the most weight out of anything argumentatively.

Bull**** It's just a group of glorified opinions with no real merit, and worse yet it's taking review scales that aren't universally the same, and trying to add them up as if all things are equal. An 8 here is not the same as an 8 at Edge or Eurogamer or IGN. The same way 4 stars on Giantbomb is not the same as an 8.0 on gametrailers. And you're telling me that broken system holds weight? get real.
Avatar image for Bigboi500
Bigboi500

35550

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#55 Bigboi500
Member since 2007 • 35550 Posts

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

What do you think is better, listening to 1 professional opinion, or 80 professional opinions? What is better, a dictatorship or a democracy? If you had a mental illness, what would be better, to get the opinion from 1 doctor, or 80 doctors? I find that with meta-scores, things just naturally even out in the end and end up being representative of what a game is. Like for example, if you were to just listen to the Gamespot review of Skyward Sword, you would be misinformed and possibly miss out on a great game. If you look at the Gamerankings score and read all the reviews, you would have a much better understanding of the truth behind the game.

arkephonic

Can't you listen to "professional" opinions without the score? You can listen to a reviewer's opinion without being influenced by a hollow number. Scores are assigned to games for the sole purpose to generate site traffic and drudge up a false sense of power. They give casual gamers a quick measuring stick without having to do research. They are pointless when you leave these website domains, yet the written text of reviews can actually have some intelligent information to offer. Think about it, when you're talking about your favorite games with friends and family in person, do you mention the scores that websites give them? Of course not, you'd be looked at like a fool. That's why they only have any value right here, and nowhere else.

Reviews have numerical scores tied to them because that is the way they have always been. There is no hidden reasoning, no hidden agenda behind it, there's no conspiracy theory to be made concerning it.

I agree that when it comes to you, as an individual, playing games in the privacy of your own home, buying games, collecting games, there's no better critic than yourself when it comes to the value of a game. But personal opinion holds no weight in an argument. All I'm saying is that Gamerankings holds the most weight out of anything argumentatively.

If that system has value to you, that's fine but the formula doesn't work for everyone.

Avatar image for arkephonic
arkephonic

7221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#56 arkephonic
Member since 2006 • 7221 Posts

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="Bigboi500"]Can't you listen to "professional" opinions without the score? You can listen to a reviewer's opinion without being influenced by a hollow number. Scores are assigned to games for the sole purpose to generate site traffic and drudge up a false sense of power. They give casual gamers a quick measuring stick without having to do research. They are pointless when you leave these website domains, yet the written text of reviews can actually have some intelligent information to offer. Think about it, when you're talking about your favorite games with friends and family in person, do you mention the scores that websites give them? Of course not, you'd be looked at like a fool. That's why they only have any value right here, and nowhere else.

jg4xchamp

Reviews have numerical scores tied to them because that is the way they have always been. There is no hidden reasoning, no hidden agenda behind it, there's no conspiracy theory to be made concerning it.

I agree that when it comes to you, as an individual, playing games in the privacy of your own home, buying games, collecting games, there's no better critic than yourself when it comes to the value of a game. But personal opinion holds no weight in an argument. All I'm saying is that Gamerankings holds the most weight out of anything argumentatively.

Bull**** It's just a group of glorified opinions with no real merit, and worse yet it's taking review scales that aren't universally the same, and trying to add them up as if all things are equal. An 8 here is not the same as an 8 at Edge or Eurogamer or IGN. The same way 4 stars on Giantbomb is not the same as an 8.0 on gametrailers. And you're telling me that broken system holds weight? get real.

What holds more weight? I didn't see an alternative given.

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64057

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#57 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64057 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="arkephonic"]

Reviews have numerical scores tied to them because that is the way they have always been. There is no hidden reasoning, no hidden agenda behind it, there's no conspiracy theory to be made concerning it.

I agree that when it comes to you, as an individual, playing games in the privacy of your own home, buying games, collecting games, there's no better critic than yourself when it comes to the value of a game. But personal opinion holds no weight in an argument. All I'm saying is that Gamerankings holds the most weight out of anything argumentatively.

arkephonic

Bull**** It's just a group of glorified opinions with no real merit, and worse yet it's taking review scales that aren't universally the same, and trying to add them up as if all things are equal. An 8 here is not the same as an 8 at Edge or Eurogamer or IGN. The same way 4 stars on Giantbomb is not the same as an 8.0 on gametrailers. And you're telling me that broken system holds weight? get real.

What holds more weight? I didn't see an alternative given.

Nothing holds weight in a quality judgement argument, because a quality judgement argument is all going to be stuff that is purely subjective. Is there a such thing as stupid opinions? sure Trying to use "well a group of critics loved it, so it must be exactly that good" is a flawed argument for any piece of entertainment's quality. By that merit The Wire sucks as a TV show because it never even got nominated for an Emmy. And **** off that show is GODLY! Anyway I'd rather deal with people making their own argument, presenting their own argument(albeit one without typical SW douchery) than some BS "the critics" loved it defense. At least that type of discussion is interesting and worth my effort. When it comes to something like sales, a game's impact, or the quantity of exclusives a platform has sure there is black and white facts going on there. Quality judgement? there is no arguing facts, and "close enough"(which is the usual defense for why people use metacritic) does not count.
Avatar image for Another48hours
Another48hours

1970

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#58 Another48hours
Member since 2012 • 1970 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="arkephonic"]

Reviews have numerical scores tied to them because that is the way they have always been. There is no hidden reasoning, no hidden agenda behind it, there's no conspiracy theory to be made concerning it.

I agree that when it comes to you, as an individual, playing games in the privacy of your own home, buying games, collecting games, there's no better critic than yourself when it comes to the value of a game. But personal opinion holds no weight in an argument. All I'm saying is that Gamerankings holds the most weight out of anything argumentatively.

arkephonic

Bull**** It's just a group of glorified opinions with no real merit, and worse yet it's taking review scales that aren't universally the same, and trying to add them up as if all things are equal. An 8 here is not the same as an 8 at Edge or Eurogamer or IGN. The same way 4 stars on Giantbomb is not the same as an 8.0 on gametrailers. And you're telling me that broken system holds weight? get real.

What holds more weight? I didn't see an alternative given.

An Averager site that takes the opinions from each game from the same sources evenly which will never happen because they think as dumb as you do.
Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64057

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#59 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64057 Posts
or not using a sight or another persons opinions at all?
Avatar image for arkephonic
arkephonic

7221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#60 arkephonic
Member since 2006 • 7221 Posts

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] Bull**** It's just a group of glorified opinions with no real merit, and worse yet it's taking review scales that aren't universally the same, and trying to add them up as if all things are equal. An 8 here is not the same as an 8 at Edge or Eurogamer or IGN. The same way 4 stars on Giantbomb is not the same as an 8.0 on gametrailers. And you're telling me that broken system holds weight? get real. jg4xchamp

What holds more weight? I didn't see an alternative given.

Nothing holds weight in a quality judgement argument, because a quality judgement argument is all going to be stuff that is purely subjective. Is there a such thing as stupid opinions? sure Trying to use "well a group of critics loved it, so it must be exactly that good" is a flawed argument for any piece of entertainment's quality. By that merit The Wire sucks as a TV show because it never even got nominated for an Emmy. And **** off that show is GODLY! Anyway I'd rather deal with people making their own argument, presenting their own argument(albeit one without typical SW douchery) than some BS "the critics" loved it defense. At least that type of discussion is interesting and worth my effort. When it comes to something like sales, a game's impact, or the quantity of exclusives a platform has sure there is black and white facts going on there. Quality judgement? there is no arguing facts, and "close enough"(which is the usual defense for why people use metacritic) does not count.

Well I'll tell you the last thing people will listen to around here, and that's someone's personal opinion on a game. Heck, you can't blame them either, because a lot of the time I see people criticizing games that they've never even played before. I have seen people rant on Metal Gear Solid 4 and Uncharted for paragraphs, pages, days, months, and come to find out they have never even played the game, nor do they even own the system it plays on.

Around these parts, you don't listen to the opinion of a forum poster, it holds no weight. A lot of views are skewed. People are deathly afraid of buyer's remorse, and they try to justify their console of choice by heralding everything on it, and discrediting everything on a competing system. Not only that, many people around here throw around their 2 cents on games after only having played the demo, or half of it.

At least with a professional review, they have people looking over their shoulder. At least you know they've played the game. I'm pretty sure that professional reviewers don't let buyer's remorse and purchase justifications blind their views as much as forum posters do.

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64057

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#61 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64057 Posts

Well I'll tell you the last thing people will listen to around here, and that's someone's personal opinion on a game.

arkephonic

Don't ****ing care it still holds as much merit as a gamerankings score(read: not all that much, unless it's actually argued that well).

There is a clear difference between those who can argue their points, and clearly played the game. And those that just want to go "blah blah is mediocre/overrated/crap on a disc". Just because SW's average poster tends to argue in a very stupid manner, doesn't mean you have to join in or generalize about that level of idiocy.

Kevin Von Ord's actual review holds some merit, because at least it's laid out in a manner that conveys HIS thougts on the game. There is a difference between "I disagree with Keven, and here's why A, B, C" and "Kevin sucks, MGS 4 sucks, and people who like MGS4 are poopyheads".

Avatar image for UCF_Knight
UCF_Knight

6863

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#62 UCF_Knight
Member since 2010 • 6863 Posts
IN OTHER NEWS I THINK IT RAINED SOMEWHERE TODAY Once I find out where I'll let you guys know
Avatar image for arkephonic
arkephonic

7221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#63 arkephonic
Member since 2006 • 7221 Posts

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

Well I'll tell you the last thing people will listen to around here, and that's someone's personal opinion on a game.

jg4xchamp

Don't ****ing care it still holds as much merit as a gamerankings score.

There is a clear difference between those who can argue their points, and clearly played the game. And those that just want to go "blah blah is mediocre/overrated/crap on a disc". Just because SW's average poster tends to argue in a very stupid manner, doesn't mean you have to join in or generalize about that level of idiocy.

The average gamer isn't wired correctly to give a well thought out, non biased review.

I've probably seen 2 or 3 posters on here after 6 years that can actually give a non biased opinion on a game.

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64057

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#64 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64057 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

Well I'll tell you the last thing people will listen to around here, and that's someone's personal opinion on a game.

arkephonic

Don't ****ing care it still holds as much merit as a gamerankings score.

There is a clear difference between those who can argue their points, and clearly played the game. And those that just want to go "blah blah is mediocre/overrated/crap on a disc". Just because SW's average poster tends to argue in a very stupid manner, doesn't mean you have to join in or generalize about that level of idiocy.

The average gamer isn't wired correctly to give a well thought out, non biased review.

I've probably seen 2 or 3 posters on here after 6 years that can actually give a non biased opinion on a game.

You are assuming a reviewer is capable of not having his own bias towards a franchise, certain styIe of play, or type of game. More importantly you're assuming a person shares their dislike for a game based solely on bias, and not simply because they think the game sucks.

Avatar image for arkephonic
arkephonic

7221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#65 arkephonic
Member since 2006 • 7221 Posts

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] Don't ****ing care it still holds as much merit as a gamerankings score.

There is a clear difference between those who can argue their points, and clearly played the game. And those that just want to go "blah blah is mediocre/overrated/crap on a disc". Just because SW's average poster tends to argue in a very stupid manner, doesn't mean you have to join in or generalize about that level of idiocy.

jg4xchamp

The average gamer isn't wired correctly to give a well thought out, non biased review.

I've probably seen 2 or 3 posters on here after 6 years that can actually give a non biased opinion on a game.

You are assuming a reviewer is capable of not having his own bias towards a franchise, certain styIe of play, or type of game. More importantly you're assuming a person shares their dislike for a game based solely on bias, and not simply because they think the game sucks.

I'm not assuming anything. I'm basing what I just said on reading the actual context.

Avatar image for princeofshapeir
princeofshapeir

16652

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#66 princeofshapeir
Member since 2006 • 16652 Posts
It's funny how games like RDR and GTA IV have better writing than a semi-movie with cutscenes every other minute. Why do people defend MGS4's story when they know it's crap? Kojima didn't even try with this one; he didn't want to make this game.
Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64057

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#67 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64057 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

The average gamer isn't wired correctly to give a well thought out, non biased review.

I've probably seen 2 or 3 posters on here after 6 years that can actually give a non biased opinion on a game.

arkephonic

You are assuming a reviewer is capable of not having his own bias towards a franchise, certain styIe of play, or type of game. More importantly you're assuming a person shares their dislike for a game based solely on bias, and not simply because they think the game sucks.

I'm not assuming anything. I'm basing what I just said on reading the actual context.

So that's one idiot dismissed, now move on to the next one. Duh.
Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64057

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#68 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64057 Posts
It's funny how games like RDR and GTA IV have better writing than a semi-movie with cutscenes every other minute. Why do people defend MGS4's story when they know it's crap? Kojima didn't even try with this one; he didn't want to make this game. princeofshapeir
GTA 4/RDR might be better written than MGS 4(lots of things are), but it's not like those games are devoid of their own writing mistakes.
Avatar image for princeofshapeir
princeofshapeir

16652

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#69 princeofshapeir
Member since 2006 • 16652 Posts
[QUOTE="princeofshapeir"]It's funny how games like RDR and GTA IV have better writing than a semi-movie with cutscenes every other minute. Why do people defend MGS4's story when they know it's crap? Kojima didn't even try with this one; he didn't want to make this game. jg4xchamp
GTA 4/RDR might be better written than MGS 4(lots of things are), but it's not like those games are devoid of their own writing mistakes.

I'm not saying their writing is absolutely perfect but it's a lot better than many other games today and easily better than MGS4's. I mean, they have to reveal the plot of the game to you in PowerPoint slides in MGS4. That's how much of a convoluted mess it is.
Avatar image for PinnacleGamingP
PinnacleGamingP

5120

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#70 PinnacleGamingP
Member since 2012 • 5120 Posts

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] Don't ****ing care it still holds as much merit as a gamerankings score.

There is a clear difference between those who can argue their points, and clearly played the game. And those that just want to go "blah blah is mediocre/overrated/crap on a disc". Just because SW's average poster tends to argue in a very stupid manner, doesn't mean you have to join in or generalize about that level of idiocy.

jg4xchamp

The average gamer isn't wired correctly to give a well thought out, non biased review.

I've probably seen 2 or 3 posters on here after 6 years that can actually give a non biased opinion on a game.

You are assuming a reviewer is capable of not having his own bias towards a franchise, certain styIe of play, or type of game.

yes, Kevin Van Ord, Chris Watters, Shaun Mcinnis all non biased respected reviewers

Avatar image for arkephonic
arkephonic

7221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#71 arkephonic
Member since 2006 • 7221 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

The average gamer isn't wired correctly to give a well thought out, non biased review.

I've probably seen 2 or 3 posters on here after 6 years that can actually give a non biased opinion on a game.

PinnacleGamingP

You are assuming a reviewer is capable of not having his own bias towards a franchise, certain styIe of play, or type of game.

yes, Kevin Van Ord, Chris Watters, Shaun Mcinnis all non biased respected reviewers

I know I would listen to what those reviewers had to say over anyone I have ever seen on these forums, bar none.

People on these forums just have this misconception that all reviewers out there are incapable of doing their jobs, and all it takes is 1 bad review of one of their favorite games and all the sudden the entire gaming publication industry is corrupt.

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64057

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#72 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64057 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"]

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

The average gamer isn't wired correctly to give a well thought out, non biased review.

I've probably seen 2 or 3 posters on here after 6 years that can actually give a non biased opinion on a game.

PinnacleGamingP

You are assuming a reviewer is capable of not having his own bias towards a franchise, certain styIe of play, or type of game.

yes, Kevin Van Ord, Chris Watters, Shaun Mcinnis all non biased respected reviewers

I'm not arguing that they are, or aren't respected. But I don't see how their opinion holds any real merit, save being a decent blueprint for what they disliked/liked about a game, and how you feel about that opinion. Or how they are incapable of having a bias of their own when reviewing a game. Bias goes beyond just "I like this platform" or "that franchise is so awesome, no matter how lame Halo Wars is".
Avatar image for princeofshapeir
princeofshapeir

16652

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#73 princeofshapeir
Member since 2006 • 16652 Posts

[QUOTE="PinnacleGamingP"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] You are assuming a reviewer is capable of not having his own bias towards a franchise, certain styIe of play, or type of game.

arkephonic

yes, Kevin Van Ord, Chris Watters, Shaun Mcinnis all non biased respected reviewers

I know I would listen to what those reviewers had to say over anyone I have ever seen on these forums, bar none.

People on these forums just have this misconception that all reviewers out there are incapable of doing their jobs, and all it takes is 1 bad review of one of their favorite games and all the sudden the entire gaming publication industry is corrupt.

Why does it matter to you what anyone says about a game you like? If these people actually dictate what games you buy you're retarded.
Avatar image for arkephonic
arkephonic

7221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#74 arkephonic
Member since 2006 • 7221 Posts

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="PinnacleGamingP"] yes, Kevin Van Ord, Chris Watters, Shaun Mcinnis all non biased respected reviewers

princeofshapeir

I know I would listen to what those reviewers had to say over anyone I have ever seen on these forums, bar none.

People on these forums just have this misconception that all reviewers out there are incapable of doing their jobs, and all it takes is 1 bad review of one of their favorite games and all the sudden the entire gaming publication industry is corrupt.

Why does it matter to you what anyone says about a game you like? If these people actually dictate what games you buy you're retarded.

I'd say it would be pretty retarded to make that accusation.

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64057

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#75 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64057 Posts

[QUOTE="PinnacleGamingP"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] You are assuming a reviewer is capable of not having his own bias towards a franchise, certain styIe of play, or type of game.

arkephonic

yes, Kevin Van Ord, Chris Watters, Shaun Mcinnis all non biased respected reviewers

I know I would listen to what those reviewers had to say over anyone I have ever seen on these forums, bar none.

People on these forums just have this misconception that all reviewers out there are incapable of doing their jobs, and all it takes is 1 bad review of one of their favorite games and all the sudden the entire gaming publication industry is corrupt.

I respect a lot of Kevin's reviews. I do disagree for instance with his MGS 4 review, or his FF13 review, or Mafia 2 for that matter. But I respect his ability to convey his thoughts properly. Doesn't suddenly mean his opinion became a fact, holds any more merit than any other informed opinion, or written gospel that properly dictates how good or bad a game is. By that logic why do we even need SW? No argument necessary. PC won ages ago. End forum.

Avatar image for arkephonic
arkephonic

7221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#76 arkephonic
Member since 2006 • 7221 Posts

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="PinnacleGamingP"] yes, Kevin Van Ord, Chris Watters, Shaun Mcinnis all non biased respected reviewers

jg4xchamp

I know I would listen to what those reviewers had to say over anyone I have ever seen on these forums, bar none.

People on these forums just have this misconception that all reviewers out there are incapable of doing their jobs, and all it takes is 1 bad review of one of their favorite games and all the sudden the entire gaming publication industry is corrupt.

I respect a lot of Kevin's reviews. I do not disagree for instance with his MGS 4 review, or his FF13 review, or Mafia 2 for that matter. But I respect his ability to convey his thoughts properly. Doesn't suddenly mean his opinion became a fact, holds any more merit than any other informed opinion, or written gospel that properly dictates how good or bad a game is. By that logic why do we even need SW? No argument necessary. PC won ages ago. End forum.

You make it seem like this place is flooded with informed opinions.

Avatar image for princeofshapeir
princeofshapeir

16652

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#77 princeofshapeir
Member since 2006 • 16652 Posts

[QUOTE="princeofshapeir"][QUOTE="arkephonic"]

I know I would listen to what those reviewers had to say over anyone I have ever seen on these forums, bar none.

People on these forums just have this misconception that all reviewers out there are incapable of doing their jobs, and all it takes is 1 bad review of one of their favorite games and all the sudden the entire gaming publication industry is corrupt.

arkephonic

Why does it matter to you what anyone says about a game you like? If these people actually dictate what games you buy you're retarded.

I'd say it would be pretty retarded to make that accusation.

So if they don't dictate what games you buy, why bother listening to them? Does it make you all tingly and happy to know they're heaping praise on a game you like?
Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64057

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#78 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64057 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="arkephonic"]

I know I would listen to what those reviewers had to say over anyone I have ever seen on these forums, bar none.

People on these forums just have this misconception that all reviewers out there are incapable of doing their jobs, and all it takes is 1 bad review of one of their favorite games and all the sudden the entire gaming publication industry is corrupt.

arkephonic

I respect a lot of Kevin's reviews. I do not disagree for instance with his MGS 4 review, or his FF13 review, or Mafia 2 for that matter. But I respect his ability to convey his thoughts properly. Doesn't suddenly mean his opinion became a fact, holds any more merit than any other informed opinion, or written gospel that properly dictates how good or bad a game is. By that logic why do we even need SW? No argument necessary. PC won ages ago. End forum.

You make it seem like this place is flooded with informed opinions.

You make it seem like because the forum is filled with idiots, the rest of us have to abide to a system built for idiots. Some of us are fully capable of arguing our points. Admittedly with a typo, that should have been "I do disagree"
Avatar image for arkephonic
arkephonic

7221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#79 arkephonic
Member since 2006 • 7221 Posts

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="princeofshapeir"] Why does it matter to you what anyone says about a game you like? If these people actually dictate what games you buy you're retarded.princeofshapeir

I'd say it would be pretty retarded to make that accusation.

So if they don't dictate what games you buy, why bother listening to them? Does it make you all tingly and happy to know they're heaping praise on a game you like?

It's obvious you just jumped in the conversation without even knowing what we're talking about.

I was saying that argumentatively, meta-scores hold more weight than the average person's opinion on these forums about how good a game is.

Avatar image for princeofshapeir
princeofshapeir

16652

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#80 princeofshapeir
Member since 2006 • 16652 Posts

[QUOTE="princeofshapeir"][QUOTE="arkephonic"]

I'd say it would be pretty retarded to make that accusation.

arkephonic

So if they don't dictate what games you buy, why bother listening to them? Does it make you all tingly and happy to know they're heaping praise on a game you like?

It's obvious you just jumped in the conversation without even knowing what we're talking about.

I was saying that argumentatively, meta-scores hold more weight than the average person's opinion on these forums about how good a game is.

Okay, I'll agree with that, and I'm sorry for wasting your time.
Avatar image for PinnacleGamingP
PinnacleGamingP

5120

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#81 PinnacleGamingP
Member since 2012 • 5120 Posts

[QUOTE="PinnacleGamingP"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] You are assuming a reviewer is capable of not having his own bias towards a franchise, certain styIe of play, or type of game.

jg4xchamp

yes, Kevin Van Ord, Chris Watters, Shaun Mcinnis all non biased respected reviewers

I'm not arguing that they are, or aren't respected. But I don't see how their opinion holds any real merit, save being a decent blueprint for what they disliked/liked about a game, and how you feel about that opinion. Or how they are incapable of having a bias of their own when reviewing a game. Bias goes beyond just "I like this platform" or "that franchise is so awesome, no matter how lame Halo Wars is".

its not only opinion... let me break it down for you: It is about them having experience reviewing games. They replay multiple times and try multiple things. They have guidelines to abide by so it keeps them as consistent as possible. They have contacts to the people who create these games which they use can use to obtain further information about the game that the average gamer might not know about, but after checking reviews, they learn about. Alot of things that I can explain to you but its kind of late.......

Avatar image for arkephonic
arkephonic

7221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#82 arkephonic
Member since 2006 • 7221 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="PinnacleGamingP"] yes, Kevin Van Ord, Chris Watters, Shaun Mcinnis all non biased respected reviewers

PinnacleGamingP

I'm not arguing that they are, or aren't respected. But I don't see how their opinion holds any real merit, save being a decent blueprint for what they disliked/liked about a game, and how you feel about that opinion. Or how they are incapable of having a bias of their own when reviewing a game. Bias goes beyond just "I like this platform" or "that franchise is so awesome, no matter how lame Halo Wars is".

its not only opinion... let me break it down for you: It is about them having experience reviewing games. They replay multiple times and try multiple things. They have guidelines to abide by so it keeps them as consistent as possible. They have contacts to the people who create these games which they use can use to obtain further information about the game that the average gamer might not know about, but after checking reviews, they learn about. Alot of things that I can explain to you but its kind of late.......

That's a good point. I just find it asinine that people would discredit anything a professional reviewer has to say in favor of the opinion that a random poster on System Wars has.

I'm just fully convinced that many people here have a personal grudge with gaming publications and professional reviewers, and are simply trying to rebel against it.

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64057

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#83 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64057 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="PinnacleGamingP"] yes, Kevin Van Ord, Chris Watters, Shaun Mcinnis all non biased respected reviewers

PinnacleGamingP

I'm not arguing that they are, or aren't respected. But I don't see how their opinion holds any real merit, save being a decent blueprint for what they disliked/liked about a game, and how you feel about that opinion. Or how they are incapable of having a bias of their own when reviewing a game. Bias goes beyond just "I like this platform" or "that franchise is so awesome, no matter how lame Halo Wars is".

its not only opinion... let me break it down for you: It is about them having experience reviewing games. They replay multiple times and try multiple things. They have guidelines to abide by so it keeps them as consistent as possible. They have contacts to the people who create these games which they use can use to obtain further information about the game that the average gamer might not know about, but after checking reviews, they learn about. Alot of things that I can explain to you but its kind of late.......

That's all fine and dandy, but at the end of the day they are making a judgement call on the quality of a videogame. Which no matter how you spin it is an opinion. Making the review nothing more than an opinion(admittedly a far more informed one than say of SW poster #56). It's not something that is incapable of being argued against. At the end of the day it's still not a fact, or anything with any real merit.
Avatar image for arkephonic
arkephonic

7221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#84 arkephonic
Member since 2006 • 7221 Posts

[QUOTE="PinnacleGamingP"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] I'm not arguing that they are, or aren't respected. But I don't see how their opinion holds any real merit, save being a decent blueprint for what they disliked/liked about a game, and how you feel about that opinion. Or how they are incapable of having a bias of their own when reviewing a game. Bias goes beyond just "I like this platform" or "that franchise is so awesome, no matter how lame Halo Wars is". jg4xchamp

its not only opinion... let me break it down for you: It is about them having experience reviewing games. They replay multiple times and try multiple things. They have guidelines to abide by so it keeps them as consistent as possible. They have contacts to the people who create these games which they use can use to obtain further information about the game that the average gamer might not know about, but after checking reviews, they learn about. Alot of things that I can explain to you but its kind of late.......

That's all fine and dandy, but at the end of the day they are making a judgement call on the quality of a videogame. Which no matter how you spin it is an opinion. Making the review nothing more than an opinion(admittedly a far more informed one than say of SW poster #56). It's not something that is incapable of being argued against. At the end of the day it's still not a fact, or anything with any real merit.

No one ever said it was fact, you're arguing a non-existent point.

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64057

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#85 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64057 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="PinnacleGamingP"] its not only opinion... let me break it down for you: It is about them having experience reviewing games. They replay multiple times and try multiple things. They have guidelines to abide by so it keeps them as consistent as possible. They have contacts to the people who create these games which they use can use to obtain further information about the game that the average gamer might not know about, but after checking reviews, they learn about. Alot of things that I can explain to you but its kind of late.......

arkephonic

That's all fine and dandy, but at the end of the day they are making a judgement call on the quality of a videogame. Which no matter how you spin it is an opinion. Making the review nothing more than an opinion(admittedly a far more informed one than say of SW poster #56). It's not something that is incapable of being argued against. At the end of the day it's still not a fact, or anything with any real merit.

No one ever said it was fact, you're arguing a non-existent point.

I'm still arguing that realistically another persons opinion does not hold any real merit in an argument that involves say just me and you. And either way nothing he said, or you said made Gamerankings/metacritics design of trying to take all these different review scales and unify them under one universal system less broken. Which were my initial arguments to begin with.
Avatar image for arkephonic
arkephonic

7221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#86 arkephonic
Member since 2006 • 7221 Posts

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] That's all fine and dandy, but at the end of the day they are making a judgement call on the quality of a videogame. Which no matter how you spin it is an opinion. Making the review nothing more than an opinion(admittedly a far more informed one than say of SW poster #56). It's not something that is incapable of being argued against. At the end of the day it's still not a fact, or anything with any real merit. jg4xchamp

No one ever said it was fact, you're arguing a non-existent point.

I'm still arguing that realistically another persons opinion does not hold any real merit in an argument that involves say just me and you. And either way nothing he said, or you said made Gamerankings/metacritics design of trying to take all these different review scales and unify them under one universal system less broken. Which were my initial arguments to begin with.

Just like with a lot of things, no option is perfect, ya know?

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64057

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#87 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64057 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="arkephonic"]

No one ever said it was fact, you're arguing a non-existent point.

arkephonic

I'm still arguing that realistically another persons opinion does not hold any real merit in an argument that involves say just me and you. And either way nothing he said, or you said made Gamerankings/metacritics design of trying to take all these different review scales and unify them under one universal system less broken. Which were my initial arguments to begin with.

Just like with a lot of things, no option is perfect, ya know?

That's not a good excuse.
Avatar image for arkephonic
arkephonic

7221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#88 arkephonic
Member since 2006 • 7221 Posts

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] I'm still arguing that realistically another persons opinion does not hold any real merit in an argument that involves say just me and you. And either way nothing he said, or you said made Gamerankings/metacritics design of trying to take all these different review scales and unify them under one universal system less broken. Which were my initial arguments to begin with. jg4xchamp

Just like with a lot of things, no option is perfect, ya know?

That's not a good excuse.

An excuse? That's not an excuse, that's called reality.

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64057

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#89 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64057 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="arkephonic"]

Just like with a lot of things, no option is perfect, ya know?

arkephonic

That's not a good excuse.

An excuse? That's not an excuse, that's called reality.

That still wouldn't give the thing any real merit. It's a broken system, and it's a group of numbers where the CONTEXT behind those scores is stripped away.
Avatar image for arkephonic
arkephonic

7221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#90 arkephonic
Member since 2006 • 7221 Posts

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] That's not a good excuse. jg4xchamp

An excuse? That's not an excuse, that's called reality.

That still wouldn't give the thing any real merit. It's a broken system, and it's a group of numbers where the CONTEXT behind those scores is stripped away.

Well, there's no better system out there. You know that developers take meta-scores for their games very seriously, right? Meta-scores and sales are the two most important things to them. There are even incentives in contracts based on reaching certain marks on Metacritic. If there was a better system, they would use it, but there isn't.

Avatar image for jg4xchamp
jg4xchamp

64057

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#91 jg4xchamp
Member since 2006 • 64057 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="arkephonic"]

An excuse? That's not an excuse, that's called reality.

arkephonic

That still wouldn't give the thing any real merit. It's a broken system, and it's a group of numbers where the CONTEXT behind those scores is stripped away.

Well, there's no better system out there.You know that developers take meta-scores for their games very seriously, right? Meta-scores and sales are the two most important things to them. There are even incentives in contracts based on reaching certain marks on Metacritic. If there was a better system, they would use it, but there isn't.

I'm taking a blackbond note real quick.

Still not a real excuse, or a point that suddenly gives game rankings/metacrtic any real merit.

Because of its impact on sales, and because a good MC score is something they can put up as a bullet point in a commercial, or a press release.

When arguing quality no system>a broken one. At least the arguments would be genuine. A MC score discussion ends at SMG2 obliterated every game this gen. The end. kthx for playing, we'll see you next gen.

Avatar image for arkephonic
arkephonic

7221

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#92 arkephonic
Member since 2006 • 7221 Posts

[QUOTE="arkephonic"]

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"] That still wouldn't give the thing any real merit. It's a broken system, and it's a group of numbers where the CONTEXT behind those scores is stripped away. jg4xchamp

Well, there's no better system out there.You know that developers take meta-scores for their games very seriously, right? Meta-scores and sales are the two most important things to them. There are even incentives in contracts based on reaching certain marks on Metacritic. If there was a better system, they would use it, but there isn't.

I'm taking a blackbond note real quick.

Still not a real excuse, or a point that suddenly gives game rankings/metacrtic any real merit.

Because of its impact on sales, and because a good MC score is something they can put up as a bullet point in a commercial, or a press release.

When arguing quality no system>a broken one. At least the arguments would be genuine. A MC score discussion ends at SMG2 obliterated every game this gen. The end. kthx for playing, we'll see you next gen.

Well to be fair, Super Mario Galaxy did obliterate every game this gen.

Obliterate is a bit strong, but it was a cut above the rest.

Avatar image for LegatoSkyheart
LegatoSkyheart

29733

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 16

User Lists: 1

#93 LegatoSkyheart
Member since 2009 • 29733 Posts

For a minute I thought this was supposed to be about MUSIC Scores.

Avatar image for SW__Troll
SW__Troll

1687

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#94 SW__Troll
Member since 2011 • 1687 Posts

[QUOTE="jg4xchamp"][QUOTE="arkephonic"]

An excuse? That's not an excuse, that's called reality.

arkephonic

That still wouldn't give the thing any real merit. It's a broken system, and it's a group of numbers where the CONTEXT behind those scores is stripped away.

Well, there's no better system out there. You know that developers take meta-scores for their games very seriously, right? Meta-scores and sales are the two most important things to them. There are even incentives in contracts based on reaching certain marks on Metacritic. If there was a better system, they would use it, but there isn't.

They don't use Metacritic because it's the best system.

They use it because people are blind enough to believe that number on Metacritic is the exact amount of quality the game possesses.

A smart shopper would actually find a trustworthy reviewer, and follow them closely rather than looking at an average of scores given out by blog posts, and system-exclusive reviewers.

If you don't find sites like IGN, or Gametrailers, or Edge to be trustworthy then why would you think an average of their review scores would be trustworthy?

Avatar image for Mozelleple112
Mozelleple112

11293

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#95 Mozelleple112
Member since 2011 • 11293 Posts

So true. Its the fact that Metal Gear Solid 4 is a 10 out of 10 game, like SMG2. Its what has been said about it... the context behind the score.

SMGS2 is so fun its a 10

MGS4 is the most stunning video game ever made, it deserves an 11. Now that's a 10/10 game.

Avatar image for Labavo
Labavo

443

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#96 Labavo
Member since 2012 • 443 Posts
Scores are important, as they give you an idea of how good each individual game is without doing research. It's in your face, you can look at them in organized lists, and then decide on which one you want to get. That's what I did when I was little and ignorant of video games. I didn't know what the must-haves were, so I picked a genre on GameSpot, looked at the best games for each respective category, and then read the good and the bad section. YouTube also helped. I don't read reviews that much anymore. I know what I'm going to get, so it'd just seem superfluous. Usually the major points are called to my attention, anyway.
Avatar image for deactivated-59b71619573a1
deactivated-59b71619573a1

38222

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#97 deactivated-59b71619573a1
Member since 2007 • 38222 Posts

It's funny how games like RDR and GTA IV have better writing than a semi-movie with cutscenes every other minute. Why do people defend MGS4's story when they know it's crap? Kojima didn't even try with this one; he didn't want to make this game. princeofshapeir

Because it's Kojima and no one dares say his stuff is bad.

Avatar image for foxhound_fox
foxhound_fox

98532

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#98 foxhound_fox
Member since 2005 • 98532 Posts
People are just not willing to admit that Gamerankings.com is always right.arkephonic
 That's it. You got us.
Avatar image for drinkerofjuice
drinkerofjuice

4567

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 20

User Lists: 0

#99 drinkerofjuice
Member since 2007 • 4567 Posts
Scores should be removed so that gamers are forced to read the reviews instead of letting their own ignorance fuel their rage. Scores detract people from reading the text that comes along with it. As someone who writes critical pieces, it's annoying to see your "reader" focus less on the informed opinion and more on an arbitrary number. It would remove a lot of headache and frustration. But gamers quite frankly, are idiots in general. So maybe not.
Avatar image for deactivated-59b71619573a1
deactivated-59b71619573a1

38222

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#100 deactivated-59b71619573a1
Member since 2007 • 38222 Posts

Scores should be removed so that gamers are forced to read the reviews instead of letting their own ignorance fuel their rage. Scores detract people from reading the text that comes along with it. As someone who writes critical pieces, it's annoying to see your "reader" focus less on the informed opinion and more on an arbitrary number. It would remove a lot of headache and frustration. But gamers quite frankly, are idiots in general. So maybe not.drinkerofjuice

I agree that they should be removed. You can't put a number on Quality.People more and more these days just go to the review and see the score and base opinions on that. They hate some reviewers for low scores but if you actually read it the number is always justified. People are becoming less and less likely to read these days which is a shame