@Lpedraja2002 @andrew_ribbons Feedbackula was a terrible idea from the start, as it did a lot to shame and ridicule the community. The entire thing just made the community look bad in general and that made the community upset. It was poorly handled from the get-go. And don't say that GS couldn't find reasonable responses to major articles. That's not true. Believe it or not, I've seen a lot of them on this site. There are some well-articulated folks who deliver not only introspective opinions, but the kinds that start and strongly execute a real discussion instead of a frantic statement. A discussion that gets others talking and sharing opinions organically. They're just not chosen to be featured for some reason.

@gamerx2015 Yes, they are opinions, and everyone should respect that. However, the people who read this review and weren't informed about the game's features and quality have opinions too. Reading the review, there's a lot of stuff that isn't referenced whatsoever, things that usually have a lot of weight to whether or not a game is good. It's also delivered in a very oblique way; there's so much waxing philosophic that gamers are unable to read into the game itself. No one should have to work to read a review. Any public scribe should be writing with their audience in mind. Inconveniencing your audience is the last thing any public speaker (or writer) should do.

And it has nothing to do with gamers being dumb or "uncultured." I've read many commenters here who have articulately expressed their dissatisfaction with how this review is presented. The information is being obscured and readers aren't able to decipher what exactly the game has or doesn't have. That's the problem I have: this isn't a WELL-WRITTEN review.

I personally don't have a problem with adding your opinion on how someone's character is presented in light of social elements. There's always an extreme, and if it's really that bad, note it. Rally, I don't care. However, focusing on that so prominently and eliminating any critique on other mechanics, ones that can affect how a game performs or plays (the default function of a game), that's something I really can't agree with at all.

@Gelugon_baat Seems more like that's something that the editorial leads are responsible for than Nick himself. I understand that Nick is simply taking what's assigned to him, and that's fine, but for the sake of making it simple and easy-to-navigate for your average internet user, I personally feel like GS should've pushed for a consistent comparison. A lot of the confusion could've been avoided that way, at least in my eyes.

@Gelugon_baat @gambr Diversity in opinions is fine, but I think the argument would've made more sense had consistency been preserved. If it was the exact same game, I'd understand, but not here.

I personally don't feel like this review was written with attention to the audience in question. I understand that expanding on the stylistic nature of critique is a good way to evolve your skills, but a review has a function and that's to make an argument toward a game's quality (or in this case, lack thereof). The argument, stylistically, might be articulate, but the message itself isn't presented in a way that the reader can easily understand the argument. This isn't really a reader-friendly review. This tends to ignore the audience's role in the matter and focuses solely on personal tone.

You don't have to give the audience what they want as far as content (you don't have to change the score), but there should be some effort to accommodate the expected tone and delivery of the information/argument. That's how audience-centered discourse works. That's what a review is: an argument to prove that a game is good or bad in the eyes of the critic. I can't say that this review does that at all.

@chibistevo This game's design is infinitely more appealing than Gone Home.

@Lacerz @Liquid_ @bunchanumbers Exactly. Both systems are extremely guilty of this.

@Crofty There's no such thing as a "correct" review because that's implying that it's objectively composed, which no review can be. A review is, at its definitive state, subjective. It's an opinion.

@tyronethenignog @TommyT456 @bunchanumbers Yeah, not many of those games are coming out in 2014, pal, especially not Quantum Break.

@bunchanumbers @simonwest80 Simon, look at the release calendar. Look at how many new, original games are set to release on Wii U this year, then see how many will be releasing on PS4 and Xbox One that aren't also on either PC or last-gen systems. There's a huge, HUGE difference, and it's why Nintendo's 2014 is actually worth caring about.