What in your opinion discredits a reviewer?

OXM, remember how Legendary outscored Dead Space? WTF was that?

[QUOTE="Console_Gamer93"]

Complaining about originality ;) (Look at my "Now Playing" if you don't get it)

bobcheeseball

I get that you are freaking out over a 9.3... :|

Man if that winking smiley could talk...he'd tell you i was poking fun at the amount of posts those threads got the past few days.

At least I wasn't complaining about the score :P.

Normally when the reviewer is a serial bandwagon jumper who never goes against the grain or showi any independent views. Someone who would give an automatic 10/10 if it has the word 'Metal Gear Solid', 'Mario', 'GTA' or 'Halo' stamped on it.

Or if they work for GamePro or GameTrailers. ;)

• Praising a bad game
• Insulting a good game
• Ignoring a crippling flaw
• Downplaying the severity of a crippling flaw
• Downplaying the quality or effect of an important feature
• Getting facts wrong, other than technicalities like release date
• Calling any game "perfect" without a prefix of "nearly", "almost", or "im"
• Devoting more than 10% of a review to graphics
• Praising the graphics of a monochrome game

Raters I dont trust: OXM, PSM, Nintendo Power, EGM (good riddence), Kotaku and Xplay

Raters I dont like: Gamespot, Game Informer, GameTrailers, Edge, Play,and 1UP

Raters I trust and like: Gamepro, IGN, and Sonicplys

[QUOTE="sonicthemegaman"][QUOTE="ogvampire"]

1. Then I guess you'll have to explain cuase I don't get what you're trying to say.

like i already said, reviewers (most of them) know better and dont dock points because its always been part of the gameplay. metroid does it in a way where it doesnt become annoying to backtrack, unlike other games that DO get docked points because the backtracking kills the flow of the game

2. SMG is pretty easy in general. Bowser wasn't really that hard of a boss either. I guess a better example would be WW as I never died once in the whole game. The second boss was the closest I got to death. The rest was so painfully easy with terribly made side quests. How it got a 9 here is a mystery.

wow. not only did it get 9.5 here, but its the second highest rated game this gen. its one thing if you dont like a game, thats your opinion, but its different if you are calling every reviewer biased.... thats just ridiculous

3. Zelda games often rehash the same items/weapons each game. Nothing wrong with that but MMBN did the same thing and reviewers began to trash it even when Capcom added in more gameplay elements.

almost every single sequel has most of the items/weapons from the previous game and add a couple here and there, funny how you only notice and have a problem with this with nintendo games....

[QUOTE="ogvampire"]

[QUOTE="sonicthemegaman"]

1. Then I guess you'll have to explain cuase I don't get what you're trying to say.

like i already said, reviewers (most of them) know better and dont dock points because its always been part of the gameplay. metroid does it in a way where it doesnt become annoying to backtrack, unlike other games that DO get docked points because the backtracking kills the flow of the game

2. SMG is pretty easy in general. Bowser wasn't really that hard of a boss either. I guess a better example would be WW as I never died once in the whole game. The second boss was the closest I got to death. The rest was so painfully easy with terribly made side quests. How it got a 9 here is a mystery.

wow. not only did it get 9.5 here, but its the second highest rated game this gen. its one thing if you dont like a game, thats your opinion, but its different if you are calling every reviewer biased.... thats just ridiculous

3. Zelda games often rehash the same items/weapons each game. Nothing wrong with that but MMBN did the same thing and reviewers began to trash it even when Capcom added in more gameplay elements.

almost every single sequel has most of the items/weapons from the previous game and add a couple here and there, funny how you only notice and have a problem with this with nintendo games....

sonicthemegaman

1. Backtracking DID kill MP's flow. Besides, did you not here about GT's reasoning behind the Uncharted review. It was "unoriginal" yet some games lack originality and get away with it. The reviewing system is broken.

backtracking killed MP's flow? alright, its fine if you think that. but just cause almost all the other reviewers didnt think so doesnt mean they are biased. i just love it when people cry foul when reviewers dont agree with them...

2. WW came out this gen? It's funny how i say SMG and criticize ANOTHER game in the same sentence and it automatically means I'm bashing SMG. This is the fifth time you guys misread my post.

i was just talking about SMG... i didnt mention anything about WW, i never really played it so i cant comment

3. Funny how you guys only start debates with me when I criticize nintendo games. Really though, did all that stuff I said about MM being the same way not mean anything to you?

funny how you always bash nintendo games... like i already said but you ignored, MM is repetitive like beat-em ups tend to get repetitive. zelda is not repetitive and i havent read a review where they said it was

Marking down a game for idiotic reasons for example; "Variety..IN A RATCHET AND CLANK GAME?! Baw, Identity Crisis."

Anyone who gives into Hype or is swayed by SWAG BAGS. I honestly don't see how Halo ODST scored so high, I really just can't. Halo 3 is 100% acceptable it deserved those ratings.. but.. ODST?!? WHAT!?zero_snake99

ODST has a new campaign, with a higher level of difficulty on solo, firefight mode, and all the Halo 3 Maps (which I did not buy). In my Opinion, ODST Deserved a 9, even a 9.5.

Also, Where is the Proof that "SWAG BAGS" were given to reviewers, and what makes ODST so special. That is just an unfounded accusation, and if i was a fanboy I would probably say that about MGS4, with no proof whatsoever.

I guess that you did not like the game, and i respect that, but sometimes you just have to play it, and get used to the Halo style. Also, please don't give me the "i played at friend's house" BS. A few hours is not enough to show full potential.

[QUOTE="IronBass"]Giving a 9.3 to a PS3 exclusive = biased reviewer. Fact.ActicEdge

Second post nailed it. Also, if a game lacks originality, that's a flag for a bias reviewer. I mean ODST got a 9.

Sarcasm? You actually made a point there.

[QUOTE="zero_snake99"]Anyone who gives into Hype or is swayed by SWAG BAGS. I honestly don't see how Halo ODST scored so high, I really just can't. Halo 3 is 100% acceptable it deserved those ratings.. but.. ODST?!? WHAT!?siddhu33

ODST has a new campaign, with a higher level of difficulty on solo, firefight mode, and all the Halo 3 Maps (which I did not buy). In my Opinion, ODST Deserved a 9, even a 9.5.

Also, Where is the Proof that "SWAG BAGS" were given to reviewers, and what makes ODST so special. That is just an unfounded accusation, and if i was a fanboy I would probably say that about MGS4, with no proof whatsoever.

I guess that you did not like the game, and i respect that, but sometimes you just have to play it, and get used to the Halo style. Also, please don't give me the "i played at friend's house" BS. A few hours is not enough to show full potential.

[QUOTE="sonicthemegaman"][QUOTE="ogvampire"]

1. Backtracking DID kill MP's flow. Besides, did you not here about GT's reasoning behind the Uncharted review. It was "unoriginal" yet some games lack originality and get away with it. The reviewing system is broken.

backtracking killed MP's flow? alright, its fine if you think that. but just cause almost all the other reviewers didnt think so doesnt mean they are biased. i just love it when people cry foul when reviewers dont agree with them...

2. WW came out this gen? It's funny how i say SMG and criticize ANOTHER game in the same sentence and it automatically means I'm bashing SMG. This is the fifth time you guys misread my post.

i was just talking about SMG... i didnt mention anything about WW, i never really played it so i cant comment

3. Funny how you guys only start debates with me when I criticize nintendo games. Really though, did all that stuff I said about MM being the same way not mean anything to you?

funny how you always bash nintendo games... like i already said but you ignored, MM is repetitive like beat-em ups tend to get repetitive. zelda is not repetitive and i havent read a review where they said it was

[QUOTE="ogvampire"]

[QUOTE="sonicthemegaman"]

1. Backtracking DID kill MP's flow. Besides, did you not here about GT's reasoning behind the Uncharted review. It was "unoriginal" yet some games lack originality and get away with it. The reviewing system is broken.

backtracking killed MP's flow? alright, its fine if you think that. but just cause almost all the other reviewers didnt think so doesnt mean they are biased. i just love it when people cry foul when reviewers dont agree with them...

2. WW came out this gen? It's funny how i say SMG and criticize ANOTHER game in the same sentence and it automatically means I'm bashing SMG. This is the fifth time you guys misread my post.

i was just talking about SMG... i didnt mention anything about WW, i never really played it so i cant comment

3. Funny how you guys only start debates with me when I criticize nintendo games. Really though, did all that stuff I said about MM being the same way not mean anything to you?

funny how you always bash nintendo games... like i already said but you ignored, MM is repetitive like beat-em ups tend to get repetitive. zelda is not repetitive and i havent read a review where they said it was

sonicthemegaman

scores only matter to SW for ownage purposes, other than that... its just another persons opinion. so if their opinion is that backtracking was not a problem, then i dont see what issue you have with that... think about it

2. Well I was talking about WW so please try to keep up.

I had nothing to say about WW so what is there to keep up about? i specifically just spoke about SMG...

3. No. I "bash" several other games that aren't Nintendo games. It's because you're an obvious Nintendo fan is why you only notice this. You have no idea what my opinions are on other games. All because I happen to think a lot of Nintendo games are overhyped to high hell doesn't mean I don't feel the same about other games. Everyone with a brain already knows MM is repetitive. I don't know why you keep mentioning beat-em ups considering how shallow combat is in the Zelda games and then turn around and claim it's not repetitive. Each game is really just more of the same with a new twist to try and make you forget that you're going through more dungeons, solving more puzzles, killing more monsters, and if you're lucky, this all leads to yet another battle with Ganon. If I remember correctly, the GS score for the game was lowered due to an overall lack of originality that made the game feel dated. Besides, reviews shouldn't be your main defense against it being repetitve. That's essentially hiding behind other people's opinions. If you have a point to make, you wouldn't have to that.

thats fair... you dont ONLY bash nintendo and nintendo games... but nintendo is where most of your bashing is aimed at

zelda is half adventure and half action... which is why its not really seen as 'repetitive' since the action is broken up by different types of gameplay, unlike MM and beat-em ups

'Each game is really just more of the same with a new twist to try and make you forget that you're going through more dungeons, solving more puzzles, killing more monsters'

reality check: you have just described 99% of 'sequels'.... of course you only notice this in nintendo games... how convenient :roll:

i also love how you just quote the GS review... which gave it one of the lowest scores... again, very convenient

Having the name Ben Croshaw.

In all honesty though, nothing. I have never seen factual proof that would discredit a reviewer, and the person trying to do the discrediting is usually doing damage control.

Having the name Ben Croshaw.

In all honesty though, nothing. I have never seen factual proof that would discredit a reviewer, and the person trying to do the discrediting is usually doing damage control.

789shadow

[QUOTE="sonicthemegaman"][QUOTE="ogvampire"]

scores only matter to SW for ownage purposes, other than that... its just another persons opinion. so if their opinion is that backtracking was not a problem, then i dont see what issue you have with that... think about it

2. Well I was talking about WW so please try to keep up.

I had nothing to say about WW so what is there to keep up about? i specifically just spoke about SMG...

3. No. I "bash" several other games that aren't Nintendo games. It's because you're an obvious Nintendo fan is why you only notice this. You have no idea what my opinions are on other games. All because I happen to think a lot of Nintendo games are overhyped to high hell doesn't mean I don't feel the same about other games. Everyone with a brain already knows MM is repetitive. I don't know why you keep mentioning beat-em ups considering how shallow combat is in the Zelda games and then turn around and claim it's not repetitive. Each game is really just more of the same with a new twist to try and make you forget that you're going through more dungeons, solving more puzzles, killing more monsters, and if you're lucky, this all leads to yet another battle with Ganon. If I remember correctly, the GS score for the game was lowered due to an overall lack of originality that made the game feel dated. Besides, reviews shouldn't be your main defense against it being repetitve. That's essentially hiding behind other people's opinions. If you have a point to make, you wouldn't have to that.

thats fair... you dont ONLY bash nintendo and nintendo games... but nintendo is where most of your bashing is aimed at

zelda is half adventure and half action... which is why its not really seen as 'repetitive' since the action is broken up by different types of gameplay, unlike MM and beat-em ups

'Each game is really just more of the same with a new twist to try and make you forget that you're going through more dungeons, solving more puzzles, killing more monsters'

reality check: you have just described 99% of 'sequels'.... of course you only notice this in nintendo games... how convenient :roll:

i also love how you just quote the GS review... which gave it one of the lowest scores... again, very convenient

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

Having the name Ben Croshaw.

In all honesty though, nothing. I have never seen factual proof that would discredit a reviewer, and the person trying to do the discrediting is usually doing damage control.

Blixxed

No, the guy is ridiculous. He's absolutely hilarious, but I think he puts too much a focus on criticism to get laughs.

I've played every single Halo (except Halo Wars) and each one I can honestly give ABOVE an 8.5 but ODST imo deserved a 7 or 8. The campaign was cool but just too short. The co-op was tacked on. The lack of dev time and effort shows. Firefight was cool, but they need to patch in matchmaking, otherwise it's almost pointless. And the Halo 3 MP is just stupid. I'm not saying Halo 3's MP is stupid, I'm saying it's stupid to use it as a crutch to get people to play your game. So they gave you every map and slightly upped graphics? Not worth it IMO, especially considering MOST (not all) of those who bought ODST already bought Halo 3 with all of its maps, which is just pure milking. Even if they haven't bought the maps, I don't see how a 5 hour campaign, 1 new game mode and halo 3's MP can be considered a great game when only about half of the game is new contentzero_snake99

You are, of course, entitled to your own opinion. On the other hand I do want to point out how flawed your logic is on this matter. It isn't as if ODST has been praised to high hell by everyone. Reviews are generally good and the average is in the mid-80's. The fact that some like it more than others is not a sign of "swag bucks" or whatever. I mean, this whole review conspiracy thing is just nonsense. I've bought games that have scored high from sites and loved them. I've bought games that have scored low and loved them. I've also bought games that have scored high and hated them. The thing is people have differing opinions.

You say ODST is a 7 or 8 tops but I say it's very much a 9.0. You say it took you five hours to complete the game but it took me 8 and a half to get through it my first time and I liked it so much I play through it to find all of the audio logs which took me another 8 hours.

The extra Halo 3 multiplayer maps are tossed in as a nice addition but in my eyes they aren't necessary to make this game worth the $60 because the campaign disc alone is worth it. It has new ideas that take a flexible gameplay system and makes it feel fresh, it has an innovative story-telling method, a strong atmosphere and a cool co-op multiplayer mode.

On the other hand I agree that campaign co-op is integrated horribly and should not have been included (though if that had happened people would have screamed for it), I think MatchMaking should have been included, and other minor flaws. But in the grand scheme I view it as a 9.0 and so do many others including some review sites which includes GameSpot.

What I'm trying to tell you is that everyone's opinion will vary. I see ODST as a complete package and you don't. That's fine. But how "swag bucks" or whatever nonsense you assume is going on is just ridiculous. There are reviews that gave ODST a 7, even a small few that gave it a 6. Your opinion is likely to differ from the next person's it's just how things work and a difference of opinion is no reason to disparage a site's review integrity or opinion.

EDIT- Everytime I put Swag Bucks I meant Swag Bags. My bad. :P