Critics

Wrath

Wrath

DARKLY Middleman
Fumble

Fumble

A Little Darkly
Well reading the links provided, seems like just a mistake. Nothing big there. HOWEVER:

Reviewers have always been suspect to corruption and bribery. But nowhere else is it as bad as it is in the gaming world. Gaming critics don't even need to get bribed, they are at complete mercy to game developers. Anyone who actually takes gaming reviews with anything but a grain of salt is completely ignorant of whats been going on with the game review world. It's corruption and unethical behavior is well documented with numerous firing of legit reviewers and threats of ads being pulled.

With that said, its also caused another problem and that is that grading scales are now completely screwed up. I remember back in the day a 5/10 was an average game. Meaning a 6/10 game was already above average. Nowadays, if a game cant even score a 8/10, your probably better off flipping a coin while having a seizure than play that piece of junk. It creates very disproportional ratings where you dont even know what a 9/10 game means because every game worth playing is around that range. Nothing distinguishes them apart. Its utterly disgusting and useless.

There are now tons of examples of terrible games getting great scores. It would be nice if user reviews were more accurate and it wasent just full of reviews from fanboys and haters. The only saving grace is that at least there is some correlation between score and quality of game but its small. Gone are the days where if you bought a game that was highly rated with a 9-10/10, you know your about to go for a ride of a lifetime. Nowadays when you buy a 10/10 game, your probably playing call of duty or some trash game that has a lot of advertisements.
 
Discodude

Discodude

TF2 Admin
Fumble said:
Well reading the links provided, seems like just a mistake. Nothing big there. HOWEVER:

Reviewers have always been suspect to corruption and bribery. But nowhere else is it as bad as it is in the gaming world. Gaming critics don't even need to get bribed, they are at complete mercy to game developers. Anyone who actually takes gaming reviews with anything but a grain of salt is completely ignorant of whats been going on with the game review world. It's corruption and unethical behavior is well documented with numerous firing of legit reviewers and threats of ads being pulled.

With that said, its also caused another problem and that is that grading scales are now completely screwed up. I remember back in the day a 5/10 was an average game. Meaning a 6/10 game was already above average. Nowadays, if a game cant even score a 8/10, your probably better off flipping a coin while having a seizure than play that piece of junk. It creates very disproportional ratings where you dont even know what a 9/10 game means because every game worth playing is around that range. Nothing distinguishes them apart. Its utterly disgusting and useless.

There are now tons of examples of terrible games getting great scores. It would be nice if user reviews were more accurate and it wasent just full of reviews from fanboys and haters. The only saving grace is that at least there is some correlation between score and quality of game but its small. Gone are the days where if you bought a game that was highly rated with a 9-10/10, you know your about to go for a ride of a lifetime. Nowadays when you buy a 10/10 game, your probably playing call of duty or some trash game that has a lot of advertisements.
Click to expand...

I've known several indie games to get high scores... of course they can't afford the better ratings of, say, CoD ...that I did play for days (without playing another game) until I finished. Mark of the Ninja, and Braid, for example, both got really good scores.

What you are saying is general (although, in general, I do agree with you).

Why it is funny is because I heard people say the redeeming thing about the game was the campaign. Nope. No way. I finished it faster than I finished either of those games I previously said. It did, on the easiest difficulty, end faster than Castle Crashers did. A shame critics in the gaming world don't actually "critic" or rather, review, games in their PoV. Rather commercial sales or bribe-type-stuff, etc.

It's a shame.
 
Wrath

Wrath

DARKLY Middleman
Fumble Completely agreed with you but then if these reviews are flawed, why still have them up? I'm a little annoyed at Steam using MetaCritic near the games where some have ratings, others don't have anything, giving some of the games an uneven competition at making sales.

Then you have some games that make me feel as if the editor did not take enough time to fully play the game. Some of these games have little to 30 minutes of game-play before they start spewing their bullshit. Look at Call Of Duty...compared to...Red Orchestra. What are the guidelines for playing a game? Surely they should be somewhere like 12 hours SP/Solo and 12 MP/Co-Op to fully understand it, in my opinion because just from where the publisher is attacking, there's more to it! *Killing Floor a big example*
 
Fumble

Fumble

A Little Darkly
[quote="Wrath, post: 128383, member: 2384"

Then you have some games that make me feel as if the editor did not take enough time to fully play the game. Some of these games have little to 30 minutes of game-play before they start spewing their bullshit. Look at Call Of Duty...compared to...Red Orchestra. What are the guidelines for playing a game? Surely they should be somewhere like 12 hours SP/Solo and 12 MP/Co-Op to fully understand it, in my opinion because just from where the publisher is attacking, there's more to it! *Killing Floor a big example*[/quote]

This brings up a good point. Like I remember when I watched reviews on the run years ago, the reviewers would flat out say they have not played much of the multiplayer or have not even beat the game yet and yet they still are giving out reviews. I feel that gaming critics are missing out on a small but key demographic in the gaming world. And that is gamers that enjoy deep games which they can play for years. I think it would be hard to implement a fair grading scale for it as majority games are just simple short one player games. A new site dedicated to these type of gamers would need to be made.

Reviews for deep games are out of whack. Reviewers don't take into account the amount the things that make a game much more fun after you have gained the experience to appreciate the deeper things. Street fighter 4 is a good example (although coincidentally it did get good reviews). SF4 is only a decent fighting game if you don't go all out to try and improve. However it becomes such a deep game even after you learn basic strategies like cross ups, footsie game, spacing and etc. It makes the fighting game so much more fun when your able to do links/chain combos and can metagame the opponent with a mix up game. Without learning these complex tasks which reviewers never have the time to do, it is just a game where you smash buttons in an uncoordinated manner and spam a random move here and there. I would never recommend SF4 to a friend who I know just likes to play games casually. However to a hardcore gamer its one of the best games ever. CS is kinda the same thing but to a lesser effect since FPS are for everybody.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top