Reviews in the gaming industry.

[Littleraven]

I almost never rely on reviews UNLESS they are user generated reviews (e.g. www.gamefaqs.com)... Not because I don't trust them (although that article makes me wonder), but because I almost never agree with them.

^this

it is rare that i ever give "pro" reviews the time of day anymore. i have seen them tear apart games that i personally love and vice versa....at the end of the day it comes down to personal preference....although i will admit that there are some legitimately terrible games that are released onto the market

[kharyll]

Agreed Bioshock was miles better

I am trying to say the exact opposite! Bioshock was a complete ripoff of System Shock 2. The only reason why critics and most people admired it was their lack of knowledge about System Shock 2.

EVERYTHING (except 1910's art nouveau style) was copied from System Shock. The plot, story telling elements, audio logs... EVERY FUCKIN THING. Yet reviews didn't hesitate to give rave reviews.

They can eat shit and I don't care.

That's only one but blatant example of how they are manipulative and ignorant. They don't have a clue about the domain they claim to be a critic of.

---------- Post added 2011-04-22 at 10:36 PM ----------

And what was innovative about Bioshock?

Or were you arguing the opposite...?

I am trying to say that Bioshock can't come close to System Shock 2 in terms of innovation, authenticity and overall quality. Bioshock is vastly inferior. Nothing but a lousy ripoff.

[Elementium]

That's interesting.. it goes to show you how far the corporate hand reaches >_>

Personally I read player reviews because they may not always be accurate but I can gather some info about the game regardless. 2 of the big christmas games were a gigantic disappointment yet they were over hyped like all hell..

The first being Fable III Which was so short it didn't warrant a 60$ price tag and so bare in terms of content that it was painful finishing the game. They completely stripped it down to either milk it for DLC or just get it out because it was going nowhere fast.

The second being CoD:Black Ops while the create a class system is great.. everything else is terrible from the graphics to the buggy lobbies and terrible hit detection, You can literally shoot someone in the head have them turn around and shoot your ankle and you die.

[Silentsnipe1212]

i dont think fable 3 was horrible, it was most certainly better than fable 2 which sucked so hard i deem it the worst game ever. and i didnt trust reviews anymore after i saw GTA 4 got a 10/10 on ign. i despise that game so much, its so boring to me. another game i hate is COD black-ops, its just riding the coattails of MWF2. "legacy" games like GTA and COD tend to score higher because one of its past games may have been good (vice city and san andreas, and cod 4)

[Elementium]

I don't know if I'd say Fable 3 was better than 2.. in all around story maybe.. but the end boss was cliched and unoriginal.. And all this bragging that Lionhead does doesn't help. I felt like I had more of an effect on the world in Dragon Age than I did in Fable 3. I'm not saying it's a bad game but it's not what it could have been.. infact you go through the game and you can see where the high standards were placed but weren't met.

[Ave07]

Reviews, watching gameplay on youtube, and asking friends/ community is what I use before I buy a game. I don't preorder or anything, ill wait a bit out before I buy.

[Video Games]

[Botoks]

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-ii made it really, really clear that professional reviews scene is in terrible shape.

Never was, and never will give a crap about professional reviews.

[Deleted]

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-ii made it really, really clear that professional reviews scene is in terrible shape.

Never was, and never will give a crap about professional reviews.

Indeed, the reviews are far too low on that one.

A better example would be portal 2, a game that stands on 95 metascore.

Anyone who would honestly rate portal 2 would probably give it 6 for lasting appeal, 7 for sounds (weird beeps and thump sounds + grand total of 3-5 voice actors), 6 for graphics (still the same 7-year-old source engine with fugly graphics), gameplay 10 and presentation 10

Would leave it hanging around 7-8 at best. But I suppose valve fanboyism is too strong and their games get extremely overrated reviews.

[Wilian]

Indeed, the reviews are far too low on that one.

A better example would be portal 2, a game that stands on 95 metascore.

Anyone who would honestly rate portal 2 would probably give it 6 for lasting appeal, 7 for sounds (weird beeps and thump sounds + grand total of 3-5 voice actors), 6 for graphics (still the same 7-year-old source engine with fugly graphics), gameplay 10 and presentation 10

Would leave it hanging around 7-8 at best. But I suppose valve fanboyism is too strong and their games get extremely overrated reviews.

Graphics and sounds are irrelevant. If gameplay and presentation is worth of 10 point then the game aswell is worth of 10. The rest is just unecessary fluff. And Portal 2 didn't look bad. It looked graphically the same as pretty much any console game these days.

[Deleted]

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-ii made it really, really clear that professional reviews scene is in terrible shape.

Never was, and never will give a crap about professional reviews.

It's funny when you cycle through the "current games", and notice that all professional reviews are higher than user reviews, sometimes by a shitload. The only exceptions are games developed by small studios that have higher user reviews than professional ones.

[Deleted]

Graphics and sounds are irrelevant. If gameplay and presentation is worth of 10 point then the game aswell is worth of 10. The rest is just unecessary fluff. And Portal 2 didn't look bad. It looked graphically the same as pretty much any console game these days.

That's something I'd expect to read on a toilet wall not on forums. Are you serious that you think sound and graphics and lasting appeal don't matter? Seriously man, I don't give much credit to your opinion then.

[Sapho]

I never buy anything (not just games) based purely on reviews. It has to:

1) Catch my eye - an advert, word of mouth, I go browsing looking for something new and it stands out
2) Have plenty of detail available e.g. samples track list for a CD, summary about novel or film plot, full description of features on MP3 player, etc.
3) Meet my criteria: I generally have in mind a reasonable price for anything, even if I haven't gone looking with a specific budget. I also resist buying things pretty often because I know they look cool but won't see much use.
4) This is the point where user-generated reviews come in. But I don't rely on them too heavily. I'm generally more interested in the general reputation of the vendor (e.g. no hassle returns, fast delivery) than in reviews of the specific item.
5) More 'professional' reviews. But I generally start out expecting that the product will be hyped, and try to read between the lines. This element is by far the least important to me, simply because I don't really trust it. It is worth glancing over some reviews though - you might stumble across an honest one here or there.

Especially with ordering online, and subjective stuff like games, you're gonna get the occasional rubbish product - but you can decrease your risk by doing your research and keeping in mind the possibility of bias or downright lies.

[Wilian]

That's something I'd expect to read on a toilet wall not on forums. Are you serious that you think sound and graphics and lasting appeal don't matter? Seriously man, I don't give much credit to your opinion then.

Sounds and graphics do not create the "lasting appeal" for the game, and I never mentioned anything about the appeal. It's the gameplay which does create the said "lasting appeal", not the graphics, and gameplay is the reason that many of the older games are still being held up high.. And I've seen enough of your posts to know that I won't give credit to yours in any case.

[Deleted]

Sounds and graphics do not create the "lasting appeal" for the game, and I never mentioned anything about the appeal. It's the gameplay which does create the said "lasting appeal", not the graphics, and gameplay is the reason that many of the older games are still being held up high.. And I've seen enough of your posts to know that I won't give credit to yours in any case.

"If gameplay and presentation is worth of 10 point then the game aswell is worth of 10. The rest is just unecessary fluff. And Portal 2 didn't look bad. It looked graphically the same as pretty much any console game these days.

You just there called lasting appeal unecessary fluff.

[unholytestament]

I don't know if I'd say Fable 3 was better than 2.. in all around story maybe.. but the end boss was cliched and unoriginal.. And all this bragging that Lionhead does doesn't help. I felt like I had more of an effect on the world in Dragon Age than I did in Fable 3. I'm not saying it's a bad game but it's not what it could have been.. infact you go through the game and you can see where the high standards were placed but weren't met.

Hmm...

I'm of the mind that Fable 2 was a fairly decent game up until the very end. It had some severe flaws, like your spouse leaving you if you don't check in on them every hour or so, and the completely underwhelming final battle (you and the three other heroes fight waves of mooks you've killed hundreds of times before... yay...).

Fable 3 though, that one didn't really have very many shining moments. Everything outside the main story was bland and uninteresting, plus the way you moved around the world was extremely tedious and did more to make you feel disconnected from the world rather than be intuitive.

A minimap! MY KINGDOM FOR A MINIMAP! And why the bloody hell does the game slow down while I'm doing minigames?

Fable 3 was like an overcorrection of Fable 2. They tried to fix too much of what was broken in Fable 2 and only a few things worked.

[Wilian]

"If gameplay and presentation is worth of 10 point then the game aswell is worth of 10. The rest is just unecessary fluff. And Portal 2 didn't look bad. It looked graphically the same as pretty much any console game these days.

You just there called lasting appeal unecessary fluff.

Lasting appeal is not a feature to be listed, as you did, but an outcome of the gameplay, as I explained. Unless for you lasting appeal is created by watching pretty graphics, in which case your whole gaming thing is rather shallow.

[Deleted]

Lasting appeal is not a feature to be listed, as you did, but an outcome of the gameplay, as I explained. Unless for you lasting appeal is created by watching pretty graphics, in which case your whole gaming thing is rather shallow.

Lasting appeal is a feature most reviewers list or mention and it is outcome of the length of the game and quality of the gameplay. And don't go making assumptions what I think is lasting appeal, you're obviously very wrong.

[-Zait-]

<333 Bioshock

EVERYTHING about that game I love with a passion

[Senaelanna]

<333 Bioshock

EVERYTHING about that game I love with a passion

I thought that the gameplay was super bland. Rapture was neat. Sound/music was amazing. A little on the short side.

I'd give it an 8.5, if I were being objective. Of course, a real gaming review site would bump that up to a 9.7, to make it look good for the advertisers.