As I explained in my post, that's kind of the whole point: the truth, when it comes to a review within gaming, is subjective. Your past experiences may lead you to think different than I when it comes to a video game that's newly released.

What you may feel is truth, I might call untrue. It just depends on about a million things; your past gaming experience, what you like to see in video games, how experienced you are in that particular genre (FPS, RPG) and about everything else you can come up with. A lot of people loved the gameplay dynamics between Ellie and Joel within the Last of Us, the same with Booker and Elizabeth in BioShock Infinite. Be it Elizabeth's contributions to the firefights (rifts and such) or providing bridges and ladders for Ellie, a lot of people loved how fresh that type of gameplay was. But for people who played through Enslaved: Odyssey to the West, the gameplay dynamism of a twosome wasn't new at all. Improved upon in ways, yes, but new or refreshing? Not really.

Those types of distinctions change our perceptions and opinions on a game.

To refer back to Sessler's review of BioShock Infinite: he loved the gameplay, and the unique additions Elizabeth added in firefights. Others call the gunplay the weakest part of BioShock Infinite. Who's right? What is the truth? WHICH ONE IS BEING EMOTIONAL!?!?!? AHHH!

Like I say, when someone reviews a game, it's their unique impressions of it. Can't take emotions, past experiences or anything else out of it. Your take on a game is yours and yours alone, period.

This week in Jacanuk's a doofus: He thinks a good reviewer should take their "emotions" out of a review.

Bleep Blorp. I-am-a-robot. I-have-no-emotion. Review-is-impersonal. DOES-NOT-COMPUTE.

News flash, Mr. Bad Opinions, no reviewer is capable of doing what you think they do, not even Adam Sessler. Oh and, about your 6.0 BioShock Infinite quip, Mr. Sessler himself reviewed that game. I'd embed it but why distract from my words, reading is already hard enough for you!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jchIi-vR_js

So he reviewed the game 5/5, no dislikes, calls the combat "absurdly fun" and thoroughly praises the world of BioShock Infinite (Columbia) throughout the 10 minute video.

I mean, just listen to the review. Almost every sentence he says is purely based on his past experiences, and chalked full of "emotions." How can you expect otherwise? HE'S A HUMAN BEING. If I find something sexist (like GTA V), or hilarious (like your opinions), it's because of my life experiences. I've seen enough sexism in my life to be able to identify its portrayal, and I've talked with enough dumb people to identify a ridiculously non-thought out opinion.

Your life experiences vary. You seem to think the world is controlled by the politically correct, and it's slowly invading our games. RUN! Either way, why ever you think that nonsense is based on your upbringing and life experiences.

If you were to review GTA V, it wouldn't sound like Carolyn's review. Neither would mine. But that's because we're all different, and it's literally impossible to not develop opinions based on your own personal life experiences. Think about Carolyn's position in reverse. EVEN if she were to think, "Well, everyone always says I'm being politically correct, and most won't think GTA V is misogynistic, so I'll just not write it up," that's still a decision based on her past experiences. She'd be recalling all of the times fools like you called her out for her opinions because they didn't align with your own.

Get a grip.

I haven't read a comment in this thread, but if you want to know why digital games retail at $60, it's because of the relationship Sony and Microsoft have with brick and mortar stores like Best Buy and Wal Mart. Essentially, Wal Mart/Best Buy won't allow the prices to drop. These establishments have all the power because at the end of the day, a bulk of a game's sales (and thus success) come from purchases made at these retailers.

Until the majority of gamers buy digitally, this will never change. Can't piss off your primary source of sales.

As an owner of both the PS4/Xbox One, I really think GameSpot lost a lot of traffic over 2013 E3 and during the next gen launch. Before then, I visited daily. Since then, maybe once a week.

But I can still remember some of the most outrageous, mostly speculative articles that came from this website around that time. Just pure nonsensical fanboyism, and it was downright embarrassing. I wonder if the traffic loss caused layoffs, because I do think a lot of people left the website around that time.

@Pedro

I mostly agree with what you're saying, but at the same time, there are definitely aspects to TLoU that make it really incredible. You liken TLoU to HL2, but there really isn't a comparison, based on what we both agree on in regards to TLoU's standard gameplay. HL2 revolutionized a lot, and what it didn't revolutionize it certainly created the blueprint that many other games have been using even in 2014. Physics, sound design, scripting, AI, graphics, animation and level composition... ask any programmer what they think of HL2's design if you think it's overrated. Believe me, it's a technical marvel. HL2 really layed out the power of the Source Engine as well, and as I'm sure you already know, Titanfall was built upon the same engine, albeit modified somewhat.

I do think some people go way overboard with their praise of the game, but even still, it's deserving of being called one of the greatest of all time. Curiously, did you play it when it came out in 2004, or later? I find that most of the people who don't feel the HL2 hype didn't play it when it dropped, so I'm just wondering.

Back to TLoU: the gameplay wasn't innovative, to be certain. With that said, I loved the story -- some didn't, and I get that some people hate the disconnect between gameplay and a story's message/tone, but keep in mind, we're dealing with an interactive medium here, one that is controlled by people with tens of millions of dollars. What I'm saying is, as much as I'd have no problem with TLoU being an adventure game, or at least a game less gory and third-person shooter-like (and more in line with the story's tone), I'm sure these kinds of decisions are made with financial interests in mind. Anything with a "shooter" genre attached to it tends to do better, sales wise. It's sad, and I'm the first person to say "publishers shouldn't influence anything", but at the same time, it's not my 50 million dollars going into the game, so what can I say. I don't think the disconnect with the story and gameplay is so bad.

But then again, I loved BioShock Infinite, even more than TLoU, and a lot of people call that overrated as well. I'm more of a sucker for interesting stories than most, I guess.

I'm actually enjoying his posts more than Jacanuk's.

Guy's on these forums debating games like Oblivion and TLoU, because that's worthwhile, but a societal issue that has permeated into a huge genre of entertainment? Well, who cares. Offended by sexism in the video game industry? Don't have such a weak mind.

Join the strong minds, where we debate MEANINGFUL things...like which Gears of War game to buy.

Oh, the sweet irony of someone taking the time to complain about people who complain.

Pedro, Pedro... We all just need to MAN up. Be tough guys! Can't you tell? Who cares about sexism? If we all just took it, and didn't complain... well yeah, nothing would change, but we'd still be mentally stronger for it. And that's all that matters. Us.

Well, to some extent I see where you're coming from, but keep in mind that a lot of what you're saying when it comes to the DMC franchise is just an opinion. While I enjoyed DMC3, it's not even in my top 5 best action games ever, but that just comes down to preference.

The point I'm making, I feel, is uniquely suited in that there's not really a counter argument against it. It's one thing to debate whether the next game in a franchise was better off due to player feedback, the same can be said for changes in patches within a competitive game. Some people hate changes made in patches (particularly if their class was nerfed, if you want an MMO example), others appreciate it because, in their view, it makes the game more balanced.

The difference here is that female inclusion within a video game, in and of itself, doesn't make a game bad or good. And it is because of this fact that no one should have a problem with a more equal gender representation within video games.

@hailtothequeen

I admire your persistence when it comes to dealing with people like Jacanuk. Believe me, some of us have had the pleasure of embarrassing him through debate for a long time now. Unfortunately, you've probably already noticed it's a lost cause. Some people just want to live in their own bubbles, because it's too scary to view the world through unbiased, honest eyes.

@Jacanuk

Let me try once more with you. By now, I've heard your arguments.

Argument 1: female inclusion within video games is already really fair.
Argument 2: More female inclusion would hurt developer's creativity, because they'd be doing it to be politically correct. They'd be afraid of the backlash, you'd say.

While all of that is utterly ridiculous, let me argue from your faulty premise.

Argument 1/2 counter: What's wrong with listening to your fanbase? During Microsoft's Xbox One fiasco, a lot of their policies changed. Why? Due to feedback from the masses. Do you find that wrong? That they listened to a sizeable chunk of their player base? How is this any different? There are a lot of people who complain about the lack of female inclusion within video games. If developers do listen to this audience, what's wrong with that? Why is it wrong to listen to (and react accordingly to) player feedback? It's literally done ALL the time, especially within competitive games, both FPS and otherwise. Hell, most patches in games are a DIRECT result of player feedback.

There is almost no difference, can you not see that? You may not agree with the sentiment that females within video games are poorly represented. The same way someone will complain about a class nerf in an MMO, or a gun tweak in an FPS after a patch. That's fine, you're entitled to your opinion. But listening to consumer feedback is a practice that's been around for decades in the gaming industry. It's never been wrong to listen to your player base.

Here's what makes you look like a sexist jerk: this particular issue (female inclusion within video games) deals with an ENTIRE gender of the human species. We're talking about women here, not the DPS of a Rogue rotation, and not the bullet spread of an M4. A huge portion of women have been rightfully complaining about this problem for years. Who are you to tell them they don't know what they're talking about?

I agree, but it really is a shame though.