What gamespot review do you disagree with the most this year?

Out of all the games that have come out in 2015, which reviews do you disagree with the most and why?

Metal Gear solid: V-I don't believe the game is perfect and be quite repetitive.

Tales of Zestiria is an easy 8

Woolly World.

Agreed. I'm in love with this game.

Probably all of them, the integrity of the site has taken a huge hit this year, with reviews that don't match the scores on a bunch of games. MGSV being one of them, 10/10 but broken on day 1? What? Seems like they assign numbers that would attract more users rather than give an honest opinion.

I disagree with most Gamespot reviews.

Metal Gear Solid V. The first half, easily a 10, but the second half drags down an otherwise exceptional experience.

Arkham Knight. Should be an 8/10 AT THE VERY LEAST.

Halo MCC, it was punished for problems in the MP while the effort of putting together 4 ( and finally 5 ) games with improved graphics in one ( H2 ) and creating a lot of more maps for the MP was not taken into consideration, should have scored better.

MGSV getting a 10.... yeah right.

out of the games i played Mad max. The game is an 8 for me though i do understand why some critics gave it a low score due to simple combat

Witcher 3.

None, they can have their opinions.

MGS V, Mad Max and Fallout 4 (in this case not so much the score as the justification of it)

basically anything Peter Brown reviewed

and you can disagree with them. the topic isn't "which review was wrong"

Yoshis Woolly World hands down. Its a top 10 game of 2015. It's difficult and the level design is pretty cool. It's a little thin on content and variety but it's a very fun game. I would have scored it an 8. (By Gamespots scale)

Even worse, Splatoon is a top 3 game of 2015. Great controls, mechanics, art style and multiplayer. The usual Nintendo online restrictions are the only negative. I would have scored Splatoon a 9. (Gamespots scale)

I'm fine with the Halo, COD, Battlefront scores but think Fallout 4 may be a little high. That's just splitting hairs though.

Every GS review is stepped in horse shit.

Splatoon, was riddled with problems and features imo

Witcher 3 comes to mind first. Not say I didn't enjoy my time with the game, because I did. But based on how poor the combat is, and how frequent you're placed into combat scenarios, it did not deserve its 10.

MGSV as a whole is undeserving of its score (but chapter one makes a strong case for it). But broken? Que? In what way?

@drinkerofjuice: Online bases didn't work the first couple days.

Yoshi's Woolly World. The game is much better than the idiotic GS review says it is.

Tales of Zestiria. Same as above.

Journey PS4

I would hardly call that broken, especially since FOBs aren't even available until you're nearly done the first chapter. So unless somebody was playing the game for a full two days on release and never bothered to take a break, I'm pretty sure this an issue the vast majority of gamers never encountered.

MGSV is an 8 at most.

It's not gamespot reviews, it's a single person remember, it's that sole persons opinion, that's how gamespot wants it done which is ridiculous. I disagree with all of them because there seems to be no schema on how to score games around here. Then there is the whole "money talks" thing.

Wait, I can only pick one?

Also, if you all hate the reviews so much (and based on some of your histories, the news as well), why do you still come around?

@drinkerofjuice: Broken is broken, it's just an example of how bad the reviews are when a game that isn't even 100% working on launch day got a perfect score. The past 2 years they've been handing out perfect scores like a priest handing out candy in church. Everyone I know thought the game was great, but none thought it was a 10/10, because a 10/10 does not exist, and never will.

You're so classy. XoXo

Arkham Knight was given a 7/10 and Mad Max a 6/10, **** they apparently hate fun, and/or maybe WBIE for some reason. I guess as far as GameSpot defines it 6/10 is "FAIR", 7/10 is "GOOD", but in game politics it's like "WHOSE DICK DIDN'T I SUCK?!" Anyhow, still not as disgustingly awful as last years Dead Rising 3: Apocalypse Edition for PC review, they gave that a 3/10, like "3" as in "Dead Rising 3/10... haha, so clever".

Fallout 4. Id have given it 5/10.

i've never seen a priest handing out candy in church. I feel this might be frowned upon given the stigma around priests and children

Me too. There are really to many to list to be honest.

LOL glad we finally agree on something.

@with_teeth26: lol Exactly!

Also, big fan of Hunter S Thompson! Love his work.

MGS5 no contest, It has a really good first half, but that game utterly folds on the halfway. (Still the first half is pretty darn amazing).

Typically I will never agree with a 10, hard to justify such a score, While I really REALLY liked TW3 I did not agree that it was a 10 (would place the first half of MGS5 and TW3 at a 9), basicly all 10's I tend to disagree with.

I do tend to find GS relatively in the "middle" of reviews, and the reviewers tend to know what they are doing on a whole. I can find many sites which has much worse reviews (we are talking about the written review here, not the scores). Which might be the reason it is sometimes so jarring when something is not mentioned which I see as a glaring mistake.

Cause this is our home.

Yoshi Woolly World and Kirby and the Rainbow Curse were down right horrible reviews.

Im enjoying the new reviewers though, Scott is a pretty awesome one.

@mesome713: Fair enough. Just like checking in from time to time. If only ya'll would be interested in reading, like, a user review roundup from, say, other System Wars posters.

Halo 5 Guardians. They gave Halo MCC 6 because of problems with MP despite it coming with 4 amazing campaigns that made a fantastic collection. Then they give Halo 5 8 because of great MP despite the fact the single player campaign is the worst in the entire series and the whole thing looks last gen.

Basically, GS are reviewing games now based soley on their multiplayer content. SP is effectively ignored. They ought to state that at the beginning of each review so people know where they stand. I want to know why games that only have single player content don't score 0.

@digitaldame: I just test them myself and review them. If i dont like the game ill trade it in or sell it.

I don't disagree with any of them.

But i must say, the F6 review was lacking in info.

@mesome713: Neat! I'll give you a follow and check out some of your stuff on my bus ride home.

@blueinheaven: I mean... That's not exactly accurate. They do often wait so they can make sure the MP element is tested/played. But I wouldn't say we focus "solely on their multiplayer content."

Also, because I sometimes think it's important to point out, those were two different people (Chris Watters, and Mike Mahardy).

Yoshi WW getting the same score as Mario Tennis.

Yet it would be pretty silly to rate games on a one to nine scale.

The thing about any game getting a 10 is that it's immediately put in the spotlight and all of a sudden expectations are amplified. The moment a flaw is exposed people are extremely quick to call foul and declare X game overrated.

More than ever now that score harms a game's reputation more than it helps it.

@drinkerofjuice: Actually, if you really think about it, they're sort of reviewed on a 2-9 scale (given how few and far between 1's and 10's seem to come along).

@drinkerofjuice: I don't see any reason why they can't give it a 9.9, still puts it in the spotlight but leaves open the possibility that no one mistakes it as being perfect. You look at all the games that are in gamespots 10/10 list, and all but one are no where near a top 10 game all time.

@suicidesn0wman: I think that's why we changed our definition from "prime" to "essential." Which, I think, is supposed to convey that if you think of yourself as a "core gamer" that you should experience a title that is given a 10. Or, you know, something else entirely.

I don't want to take you to task with this because I know none of it is your fault but I'll clarify my comment if it helps. GS gave MCC the lowest score out of all major review sites (I don't think any of the minor ones pissed on it to that extent either) purely because the MP wasn't working at launch. The reviewer ignored the incredible amount of content which amounted to every single main Halo game since the series began remastered and instead whined about the MP. It struck me as though some kid was reviewing it and couldn't play MP with his friends in the office at lunchtime so threw a hissy fit and gave MCC a score which was nothing short of a disgrace in my eyes and many others were shocked too.

I know there was a different reviewer for Halo 5 but the MP was fine so he gives it an 8 despite slagging off the campaign and many GS staff saying how crap the campaign was too. IGN hosted a whole show with most of their staff completely slagging it off and ripping it apart and they gave it a fucking 9 lol.

I am just disappointed at how reviews seem to be based on how much fun the reviewer had (or didn't have in the case of the clown who reviewed MCC) in the office with his workmates while playing MP. To describe this as unprofessional is something of an understatement to say the least. I don't think reviewers write reviews for their readership any more, they haven't done for a very long time. I remember when reviewers had a sense of responsibility to inform readers to help them make a decision on whether to buy or not. Now they just seem to spend all their time on MP and dip into the SP for maybe an hour and throw out a score based on that. Ironic really since 343 took the same approach to Halo 5 they didn't even attempt to hide the fact they did next to nothing on the single player.

I'm sure I'll get blasted for this by people who spend all their time playing online and maybe that's part of the problem, reviewers think that's all anyone cares about. Whatever.

@digitaldame: A lot of games 9.5 or higher would be essential, and almost any game that got 9.9, or even 9.8 would probably be a guaranteed essential. The Last of Us would be one of those games that everyone should play, it didn't get a 10, and you could argue that it's better than most of the gamespot 10/10 games.

WWE2K16 is not a 4/10

@blueinheaven: That is very interesting feedback (which you're of course entitled to) but I'll say that I respectfully disagree with your statements. That being said, you're probably not one to be easily convinced so we can just end this little debate at that. ;)

That being said;

@suicidesn0wman:Personally, I wish we could just get rid of the number score entirely.

I have no idea, I agree with a lot of the reviews. Some people think there is some grand conspiracy or people's pockets are getting loaded. It's a little absurd.

@Legend002 I was playing that last night, 4 player free for all type match. Andre is a beast and was having a blast with it. I have no idea how there's such a huge score difference between gamespots and ign's score.