Page 19 of 29 FirstFirst ...
9
17
18
19
20
21
... LastLast
  1. #361
    Legendary! Flurryfang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Empire of Man
    Posts
    6,451
    I guess a score of 0.5 means, that not only is the game bad, but the world got a little bit colder and darker because of it? xD
    May the lore be great and the stories interesting. A game without a story, is a game without a soul. Value the lore and it will reward you with fun!

    Don't let yourself be satisfied with what you expect and what you seem as obvious. Ask for something good, surprising and better. Your own standards ends up being other peoples standard.

  2. #362
    Immortal jackofwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Victoria, BC
    Posts
    7,098
    Quote Originally Posted by Flurryfang View Post
    I guess a score of 0.5 means, that not only is the game bad, but the world got a little bit colder and darker because of it? xD
    IMO ratings that low should go to games that actually don't function at all - things like Big Rigs. Games that aren't even working games because they're simply unplayable.
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    Because fuck you, that's why.

  3. #363
    Immortal jackofwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Victoria, BC
    Posts
    7,098
    Quote Originally Posted by lockybalboa View Post
    My opinion on what? If you mean people in your line of work I feel mainstream game journalists are all corrupted parasites robbing and lying for a living.
    What a shocking revelation, we never would have guessed.
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    Because fuck you, that's why.

  4. #364
    Quote Originally Posted by jackofwind View Post
    A) That's not what PC means.

    B) Reviewers not giving the score that you personally think they should isn't evidence of anything.
    Those so-called journalists are scums lying for a living. And it is not just me that feel that way. Just keep at the prevalent disparity between user opinions and these so-called "pro" journalists. They are nothing but parasites.

  5. #365
    Quote Originally Posted by lockybalboa View Post
    My opinion on what? If you mean people in your line of work I feel mainstream game journalists are all corrupted parasites robbing and lying for a living.
    Again, I'm not a game writer. This is a terrible argument to fall back on when the rest of your arguments fail.

  6. #366
    Immortal jackofwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Victoria, BC
    Posts
    7,098
    Quote Originally Posted by lockybalboa View Post
    Those so-called journalists are scums lying for a living. And it is not just me that feel that way. Just keep at the prevalent disparity between user opinions and these so-called "pro" journalists. They are nothing but parasites.
    Being extra vocal and indignant about your opinion doesn't make it anything greater than just your opinion.

    Also, the best way to stick it to the people you think are useless parasites is to simply not read their reviews, not pay attention to them, and be one person who provides less traffic to their websites. You're probably more heavily invested in them than most people right now, based on your vehemence.
    Last edited by jackofwind; 2020-02-04 at 09:57 PM.
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    Because fuck you, that's why.

  7. #367
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Again, I'm not a game writer. This is a terrible argument to fall back on when the rest of your arguments fail.
    How so? Just look at the PC and inflated scores they give. They are slaves beholden to developers and not sincere in their game appraisal.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by jackofwind View Post
    Being extra vocal and indignant about your opinion doesn't make it anything greater than just your opinion.

    Also, the best way to stick it to the people you think are useless parasites is to simply not read their reviews, not pay attention to them, and be one person who provides less traffic to their websites. You're probably more heavily invested in them than most people right now, based on your vehemence.
    I never pay heed to their appraisals but their blatant dishonesty irks the heck out of me.

  8. #368
    Quote Originally Posted by lockybalboa View Post
    Just look at the PC and inflated scores they give.
    You keep saying "PC" as if repeating it makes it true. It's not.

    You keep saying scores are inflated. That's your opinion, not an objective fact. Repeating it doesn't make it true.

    Quote Originally Posted by lockybalboa View Post
    They are slaves beholden to developers and not sincere in their game appraisal.
    This appears to be your foundation for your opinion and you seem to have no interest in accepting that it's blatantly wrong. You do you, dude. I'm done, because there's clearly no interest on your part in engaging in discussion.

  9. #369
    Immortal jackofwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Victoria, BC
    Posts
    7,098
    Quote Originally Posted by lockybalboa View Post
    I never pay heed to their appraisals but their blatant dishonesty irks the heck out of me.
    If you were truly not paying attention to their appraisals you wouldn't even know about the scores they were handing out. The more likely truth is that you actually do pay attention and the review scores upset you.

    Once again it's your personal opinion. You haven't done anything to back it up other than point at review scores and reiterate the same thing over and over, but it's still just your own opinion.

    You say there's a conspiracy, reviewers are slaves to developers, reviewers are shills and try to mislead the public, the list goes on. You have provided evidence for none of that. You say "it's common sense", but that's a logical fallacy you're using to get out of actually showing your evidence. People aren't going to be fooled by that kind of grade-school argumentation here.

    You say there's a conspiracy - so prove it. Prove it with more than your feelings, do it with actual tangible evidence. I'd love to read what this evidence is, so present it for me and lay out your argument without resorting to fallacies. Otherwise you're no different than a Flat Earther shouting that "it's just common sense".
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    Because fuck you, that's why.

  10. #370
    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    That is what Blizzard promised when they revealed the game two years ago.
    Yes, they promised a remastered game... not a new game.

  11. #371
    Quote Originally Posted by jackofwind View Post
    If you were truly not paying attention to their appraisals you wouldn't even know about the scores they were handing out. The more likely truth is that you actually do pay attention and the review scores upset you.

    Once again it's your personal opinion. You haven't done anything to back it up other than point at review scores and reiterate the same thing over and over, but it's still just your own opinion.

    You say there's a conspiracy, reviewers are slaves to developers, reviewers are shills and try to mislead the public, the list goes on. You have provided evidence for none of that. You say "it's common sense", but that's a logical fallacy you're using to get out of actually showing your evidence. People aren't going to be fooled by that kind of grade-school argumentation here.

    You say there's a conspiracy - so prove it. Prove it with more than your feelings, do it with actual tangible evidence. I'd love to read what this evidence is, so present it for me and lay out your argument without resorting to fallacies. Otherwise you're no different than a Flat Earther shouting that "it's just common sense".
    All you've done is say " Oh I know you're not right oh I know what you've said is merely a conspiracy" A 5 yr old can do better dodging.

    Again let me repeat. I say reviewers tend not to give overly low scores to big developers because there is subtle pressure. The way it happens is that the PR at the gaming companies puts subtle pressure on the review sites to keep the scores high. They create conditional review embargos (you can't release your review before X date unless the score is higher than 80), buy ads on the site, and the gaming sites are reliant on the developers for content. So there is a lot of pressure to keep developers happy on the business end.
    Last edited by lockybalboa; 2020-02-04 at 10:27 PM.

  12. #372
    Quote Originally Posted by lockybalboa View Post
    They create conditional review embargos (you can't release your review before X date unless the score is higher than 80)
    Sorry, going back on my word here but this is purely to correct factual issues.

    This is not, and has never been, accurate, and no media outlet would agree to such an embargo. Ever. Post evidence of this.

    Quote Originally Posted by lockybalboa View Post
    buy ads on the site
    PR does not in any way touch advertising, they're different disciplines. PR is "earned" media, advertising is "paid" media.

    Additionally, editorial at outlets (especially major outlets) don't have any involvement with ads. If they're big enough they have their own ad-sales teams that manage the ads separately from editorial ("Church and State"), and for smaller sites they outsource to third party ad managers as they don't know how to handle that or don't have the bandwidth (in addition to that being highly questionable ethically)

    Quote Originally Posted by lockybalboa View Post
    and the gaming sites are reliant on the developers for content.
    In no way, shape, or form does this ever make them review games more positively. If this was the case, every review would be glowing because they'd all be terrified of being blacklisted - something that' extremely rare.

    You really need to stop talking about shit that you haven't the first clue about.

  13. #373
    Yet here people are reacting this way to genuine reviews...?

    IDK seems weird to me bud

    Ohhh boo hoo our corporate overlords didn't deserve such a miserable score. lol

    Yes they did they made better 20 years ago

    People whining about negative brigading need to find something else to do with their time just as bad as the people bragading the reviews

  14. #374
    Immortal jackofwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Victoria, BC
    Posts
    7,098
    Quote Originally Posted by lockybalboa View Post
    All you've done is say " Oh I know you're not right oh I know what you've said is merely a conspiracy" A 5 yr old can do better dodging.

    Again let me repeat. I say reviewers tend not to give overly low scores to big developers because there is subtle pressure. The way it happens is that the PR at the gaming companies puts subtle pressure on the review sites to keep the scores high. They create conditional review embargos (you can't release your review before X date unless the score is higher than 80), buy ads on the site, and the gaming sites are reliant on the developers for content. So there is a lot of pressure to keep developers happy on the business end.
    I'm not dodging. You presented the initial argument, it's on your to back it up. That's how debate works.

    You have no actual evidence to point to that the conspiracy you believe in is happening, but you have strong personal feelings about it. That's great, but I'm not interested in engaging with someone who can't actually present their argument without resorting to logical fallacies.

    You just listed a laundry list of things that - if you could actually back them up with solid evidence - would be valid points worth listening to. Unfortunately, you haven't backed them up at all. If these things are happening show me tangible evidence, otherwise it's literally just a lie.

    The irony of this is that people like you claim to be woke because of the conspiracies you believe in but it's actually you who believe in things that have no extant proof of being real.
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    Because fuck you, that's why.

  15. #375
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Sorry, going back on my word here but this is purely to correct factual issues.

    This is not, and has never been, accurate, and no media outlet would agree to such an embargo. Ever. Post evidence of this.



    PR does not in any way touch advertising, they're different disciplines. PR is "earned" media, advertising is "paid" media.

    Additionally, editorial at outlets (especially major outlets) don't have any involvement with ads. If they're big enough they have their own ad-sales teams that manage the ads separately from editorial ("Church and State"), and for smaller sites they outsource to third party ad managers as they don't know how to handle that or don't have the bandwidth (in addition to that being highly questionable ethically)



    In no way, shape, or form does this ever make them review games more positively. If this was the case, every review would be glowing because they'd all be terrified of being blacklisted - something that' extremely rare.

    You really need to stop talking about shit that you haven't the first clue about.

    "no media outlet would agree to such an embargo" Woah. How are you sure. Prove evidence. "Additionally, editorial at outlets (especially major outlets) don't have any involvement with ads." -But the company they are working with are concerned with ad revenues. The editorial team' written work affects it more or less. They write less than flattery reviews, ads get pulled out. And how can you be sure that sites are being "ethical" all the time

    "In no way, shape, or form does this ever make them review games more positively" -Prove it.

    "If this was the case, every review would be glowing because they'd all be terrified of being blacklisted "-That's exactly what is happening: That is why so many scores given by major game-sites are so inflated.

    Don't say what I've said are all BS. You are talking BS if all can you counter with is "It's BS because i say it is"


    If you wanna keep covering your ears and eyes there's no point in arguing with a wall.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by jackofwind View Post
    I'm not dodging. You presented the initial argument, it's on your to back it up. That's how debate works.

    You have no actual evidence to point to that the conspiracy you believe in is happening, but you have strong personal feelings about it. That's great, but I'm not interested in engaging with someone who can't actually present their argument without resorting to logical fallacies.

    You just listed a laundry list of things that - if you could actually back them up with solid evidence - would be valid points worth listening to. Unfortunately, you haven't backed them up at all. If these things are happening show me tangible evidence, otherwise it's literally just a lie.

    The irony of this is that people like you claim to be woke because of the conspiracies you believe in but it's actually you who believe in things that have no extant proof of being real.
    Fucking hell what a tortoise you are lol.

  16. #376
    Immortal jackofwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Victoria, BC
    Posts
    7,098
    Quote Originally Posted by lockybalboa View Post
    Fucking hell what a tortoise you are lol.
    Show me your evidence. If it's so obvious and easy to find you should have no trouble coming up with it.
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    Because fuck you, that's why.

  17. #377
    Legendary! Flurryfang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Empire of Man
    Posts
    6,451
    Quote Originally Posted by jackofwind View Post
    IMO ratings that low should go to games that actually don't function at all - things like Big Rigs. Games that aren't even working games because they're simply unplayable.
    That is if the only thing you are rating is the actual fun factor/playability of the game.

    The question is if scores ever should be made based upon the performance of other games, like when it comes to sequels or, in this instance, remasters.
    May the lore be great and the stories interesting. A game without a story, is a game without a soul. Value the lore and it will reward you with fun!

    Don't let yourself be satisfied with what you expect and what you seem as obvious. Ask for something good, surprising and better. Your own standards ends up being other peoples standard.

  18. #378
    Immortal jackofwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Victoria, BC
    Posts
    7,098
    Quote Originally Posted by Flurryfang View Post
    That is if the only thing you are rating is the actual fun factor/playability of the game.

    The question is if scores ever should be made based upon the performance of other games, like when it comes to sequels or, in this instance, remasters.
    Reviews based on the performance of other games become too subjective to be meaningful for my tastes. It's already a medium with a fair amount of subjectivity in it, so I think every review needs to essentially exist in a void, compared only to the rubric by which all reviews are written.
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    Because fuck you, that's why.

  19. #379
    Epic! Ihsatakar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Stormreaver US
    Posts
    1,531
    Never before had a game retroactively destroy a different game I already owned and loved upon its release, so a <1 score is warranted.

  20. #380
    Legendary! Flurryfang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Empire of Man
    Posts
    6,451
    Quote Originally Posted by jackofwind View Post
    Reviews based on the performance of other games become too subjective to be meaningful for my tastes. It's already a medium with a fair amount of subjectivity in it, so I think every review needs to essentially exist in a void, compared only to the rubric by which all reviews are written.
    Hmm i think comparing to other games, is not more subjective than when it comes to liking game art style and theme. Game reviewers are already talking from a unique perspective, as people who play way more games than who they are making the review for.

    That aside, if we see a review as guide to buy/not buy, ain't it natural to honest if a game is good compared to its direct competition? If car game A is much better than car game B, is it not in place to talk about the one product as lesser in its review?

    Im really unsure about this. I understand that Reforged is, in a void, an alright game. It retains the positive elements of Warcraft 3 pretty well. But it is also a copy of another game. If somebody asked me if they should buy Reforged, im not sure it would be an ethical review if i did not tell them about the option of getting original WC3.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Ihsatakar View Post
    Never before had a game retroactively destroy a different game I already owned and loved upon its release, so a <1 score is warranted.
    Maybe we can talk about the idea of a (-) score, since the game actually reduced the value of more than its own game xD
    May the lore be great and the stories interesting. A game without a story, is a game without a soul. Value the lore and it will reward you with fun!

    Don't let yourself be satisfied with what you expect and what you seem as obvious. Ask for something good, surprising and better. Your own standards ends up being other peoples standard.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •