The Nirvana Zen Master of Reviewers....

In case your wondering what this thread is about, its something I've gotta get off my chest and I need system wars opinion. Do you think reviewers sometimes grade games tougher because they want the public to see them as the "reviewer that can see deeper into games." What I mean is, all reviewes are supposed to be looked at with objective eyes, so KungFu Panda and MGS4 are supposed to be graded and treated equally, right? Do you believe this is what the case is 100% of the time?

Mass Effect is an example of a game that is a massive acheivment in the way of RPG's and story telling. It has flaws, but it is clearly a stunning and memorable gaming experience that was not an 8.5 especially when you consider that WarioWare is a 9.0. Does this bother you? does it make you feel like reviewers tend to feed their own ego's over giving the true and honest review that a game may be as good as it is?

In case your wondering what this thread is about, its something I've gotta get off my chest and I need system wars opinion. Do you think reviewers sometimes grade games tougher because they want the public to see them as the "reviewer that can see deeper into games." What I mean is, all reviewes are supposed to be looked at with objective eyes, so KungFu Panda and MGS4 are supposed to be graded and treated equally, right? Do you believe this is what the case is 100% of the time?

Mass Effect is an example of a game that is a massive acheivment in the way of RPG's and story telling. It has flaws, but it is clearly a stunning and memorable gaming experience that was not an 8.5 especially when you consider that WarioWare is a 9.0. Does this bother you? does it make you feel like reviewers tend to feed their own ego's over giving the true and honest review that a game may be as good as it is?

BillCutting

i know what your saying, like anything there is ego there is pride and for some reason people strive to prove that they are not casual that they are hard core. Its like any critic, i love going to the theatre and (some would say protencious) galleries and u should hear the stuff that people come out with. all an illusion to make it seemlike they are all knowin (this could be said like alot of people on sw)

I dont know whether they actually do review them with the same objective eyes, there is many variables that affect whether they buy into the the hype these games get or they ignore it

No offence, but Mass Effect hardcore fans make me lol, I played the superior version of that game on the PC, and the game had a tons of flaws and bad design choices, it really wasn't anything special, it's a great game, but even 8.5 for the pc version would have been perfectly fair. Never played the 360 version. Eddie-Vedder

I wouldn't say im hardcore, I just recognize a great game when I play one. The point wasn't to make this Mass Effect against the world, it was to get an opinion about reviewers and their, "hidden" motives?

Mass Effect is an example of a game that is a massive acheivment in the way of RPG's and story telling.

BillCutting

I've bought it for PC. It's a great, fun game, but I wouldn't call it a "massive achievement". Honestly, it's nothing special. Guess I'm spoiled with Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Morrowind, Neverwinter Nights etc...

I think the main problems with reviews is that they sometimes don't grade properly for the genre, for example: you can't give a beat 'em game a bad score for button mashing because when it comes down to it, all beat 'em ups are button mashers. there are also review written by people who dislike that particular series, it is best to be neutral, but it is stil better to like a series than to dislike it, because then when you get reviewers that dislike a series you get comments like, "this sequel doesn't bring too much to the table", well if a series was great to begin with, why would you want to drastically change it. A lot of times the reviwers mislead people to think that a game is not fun, all because they don't like the series. They won't even realize it, but they will say a lot of new things that the sequel brings to the series are bad, and that deters new comers and possible fans of the series, but when the diehard fans pic up the game anyways, they ask themselves "was he on crack?"

I just choose not to trust reviews anymore unless it is a game that i am not interested in but gets a good score so then i consider it.

I think they should say what they think. Not to get ahead.Willy105

Indeed. A reviewer should say whatever they think should be said. If they thought Mass Effect was boring, say it. If they didn't like the cutscenes in MGS4, say. If they think Twilight Princess is more of the same, say it. It should be their opinion.

I like Mass Effect, but it deserved the 8.5 it recieved on GS on 360.

Technical issues, shallow RPG elements, and a messy inventory system isn't really my idea of a AAA game.

Using GS' old rating system I'd give it an 8.8

[QUOTE="Willy105"]I think they should say what they think. Not to get ahead.supercubedude64

Indeed. A reviewer should say whatever they think should be said. If they thought Mass Effect was boring, say it. If they didn't like the cutscenes in MGS4, say. If they think Twilight Princess is more of the same, say it. It should be their opinion.

[QUOTE="supercubedude64"]

[QUOTE="Willy105"]I think they should say what they think. Not to get ahead.ULTIMATEZWARRIO

Indeed. A reviewer should say whatever they think should be said. If they thought Mass Effect was boring, say it. If they didn't like the cutscenes in MGS4, say. If they think Twilight Princess is more of the same, say it. It should be their opinion.

Certainly, and at a big site like Gamespot, they can usually delegate that game to the most viable reviewer.

Well i played it on PC and the is one of the few games that deserves exactly the score they gave it

I think the main problems with reviews is that they sometimes don't grade properly for the genre, for example: you can't give a beat 'em game a bad score for button mashing because when it comes down to it, all beat 'em ups are button mashers. there are also review written by people who dislike that particular series, it is best to be neutral, but it is stil better to like a series than to dislike it, because then when you get reviewers that dislike a series you get comments like, "this sequel doesn't bring too much to the table", well if a series was great to begin with, why would you want to drastically change it. A lot of times the reviwers mislead people to think that a game is not fun, all because they don't like the series. They won't even realize it, but they will say a lot of new things that the sequel brings to the series are bad, and that deters new comers and possible fans of the series, but when the diehard fans pic up the game anyways, they ask themselves "was he on crack?"

I just choose not to trust reviews anymore unless it is a game that i am not interested in but gets a good score so then i consider it.

ULTIMATEZWARRIO

very insightful...

Though this thread probably won't go anywhere because I used Mass Effect as an example... folks here seem to not actually get the point of most threads but like to spill their rehtoric on a polorizing game when its mentioned...

learning the rules of system wars I suppose.

I think one of the biggest problems is the sheer number of games these days. It's hard for a website to remain consistent when there are ten to twenty people reviewing games for them. For example Morrowind got the same treatment as Mass Effect did. They were both underscored mostly for bugs and technical issues. I myself enjoyed both games and got many hours out both of them. I never let the minor issues bother me and had in my opinion, a AAA experience. However the GameSpot reviewers apparently did not. It makes me feel like those particular reviewers would enjoy a game with an average story and game mechanics that has little or no bugs, more than a great game with a few minor issues here and there. Which is odd because Oblivion, the sequel to Morrowind, had many of the same issues. Yet it scored a 9.6, 0.8 higher than Morrowind. They must have been reviewed by different people.HaloFan77

and I guess thats one of my points. nit picking on some technical issues (and lets face it, a game like mass effect is far from overly buggy. Its got some frame dips and thats it.) while ignoring fantastic story-telling in the medium is very odd. I can't help but to feel that in some cases they know it will be highly read review and thus must come off like a master reviewer rather than just stating the obvious, the game is amazing fun.

These Guys would be the ideal game reviewers

In case your wondering what this thread is about, its something I've gotta get off my chest and I need system wars opinion. Do you think reviewers sometimes grade games tougher because they want the public to see them as the "reviewer that can see deeper into games." What I mean is, all reviewes are supposed to be looked at with objective eyes, so KungFu Panda and MGS4 are supposed to be graded and treated equally, right? Do you believe this is what the case is 100% of the time?

Mass Effect is an example of a game that is a massive acheivment in the way of RPG's and story telling. It has flaws, but it is clearly a stunning and memorable gaming experience that was not an 8.5 especially when you consider that WarioWare is a 9.0. Does this bother you? does it make you feel like reviewers tend to feed their own ego's over giving the true and honest review that a game may be as good as it is?

BillCutting

i find eurogamer tries too hard with their reviews. in one of their interviews about gears 2 half the time they were gloating about giving the first one an 8. oooh eurogamer you see past the hype im so impressed.. :roll:

[QUOTE="BillCutting"]

In case your wondering what this thread is about, its something I've gotta get off my chest and I need system wars opinion. Do you think reviewers sometimes grade games tougher because they want the public to see them as the "reviewer that can see deeper into games." What I mean is, all reviewes are supposed to be looked at with objective eyes, so KungFu Panda and MGS4 are supposed to be graded and treated equally, right? Do you believe this is what the case is 100% of the time?

Mass Effect is an example of a game that is a massive acheivment in the way of RPG's and story telling. It has flaws, but it is clearly a stunning and memorable gaming experience that was not an 8.5 especially when you consider that WarioWare is a 9.0. Does this bother you? does it make you feel like reviewers tend to feed their own ego's over giving the true and honest review that a game may be as good as it is?

mephisto_11

i find eurogamer tries too hard with their reviews. in one of their interviews about gears 2 half the time they were gloating about giving the first one an 8. oooh eurogamer you see past the hype im so impressed.. :roll:

exactly my point!!! I guess I just don't want to feel like Im the only one who sees this happening quite a bit.

Its kinda like when a newspaper supports a presidential candidate... its like Wha!?! your a "NEWSPAPER!" your job is to report the NEWS, keep your ego fullfilling garbage at home.

Well i played it on PC and the is one of the few games that deserves exactly the score they gave it

adamosmaki

well, obviously not if the majority of gaming review outlets have praised it above 90/100... right?