Reviews?

[Raynos]

 

...ok...and what about Wiki sites? What about this thing called "gathering info from different sources and put it all together in one piece"? You don't have to make a decision from reading some single source! Clever person makes decision, based on researching from various sources, not just one! Like for example, you read that wiki page, then you went on youtube watched the video, then you heard a "rumor" from some random guy, then it rumor confirmed to be either true or a lie! And so on! All i'm saying is that reviewers lure you in making you think you're going to buy quality product! You can't really trust them and the ones, who do - are naive!...

 

Ok, I think we're falling off-track here.

When you say "reviewers" are you talking specifically about the big "journalist" sites? IGN, Gamespot, CVG, EDGE or ANY reviewer?

To be honest, I don't know anyone that bases their game buying decisions off a single website or reviewer, I thought it was common practice to read multiple reviews before investing in any product. It could be professional sites or consumer reviews.

 

Most of the time I watch/read reviews for new screenshots, details and features about a game, it can be a great source of information, the review score from most sites doesn't bother me, the next step is gamer reviews, thoughts and opinions of gamers on forums is a great contributing factor for games that I'm unsure of. My definition of a review is any critic made of a product by a user or professional.

[Fuzzknuckles]

I'm pretty sure this guy is trolling, and it's likely this is a second account for a regular.

[ItsJustMeSrsly]

 

 

...ok...and what about Wiki sites? What about this thing called "gathering info from different sources and put it all together in one piece"? You don't have to make a decision from reading some single source! Clever person makes decision, based on researching from various sources, not just one! Like for example, you read that wiki page, then you went on youtube watched the video, then you heard a "rumor" from some random guy, then it rumor confirmed to be either true or a lie! And so on! All i'm saying is that reviewers lure you in making you think you're going to buy quality product! You can't really trust them and the ones, who do - are naive!...

 

Ok, I think we're falling off-track here.

When you say "reviewers" are you talking specifically about the big "journalist" sites? IGN, Gamespot, CVG, EDGE or ANY reviewer?

To be honest, I don't know anyone that bases their game buying decisions off a single website or reviewer, I thought it was common practice to read multiple reviews before investing in any product. It could be professional sites or consumer reviews.

 

Most of the time I watch/read reviews for new screenshots, details and features about a game, it can be a great source of information, the review score from most sites doesn't bother me, the next step is gamer reviews, thoughts and opinions of gamers on forums is a great contributing factor for games that I'm unsure of. My definition of a review is any critic made of a product by a user or professional.

 

 

Well now...someone has really bad time trying to hit nail on the head, isn't it? Previous user got it right! Ask him to explain to you my logic please...

Edited November 12, 2014 by ItsJustMeSrsly

[ramtastic]

I think review sites still have relevance, especially since demos are becoming rarer and rarer. Personally, I find the comments section of reviews to be of more use than the writer's own opinion, primarily because taste is a subjective thing (and also because nobody really knows who's paying who in the review world) and a wider consensus should (in theory) deliver a more accurate picture.

In the end, the only review that counts is your own and I often wonder why, in this age of on demand gaming, the idea of rental isn't so mainstream. In days gone by, I'd always rent a game from Blockbuster for 24 hrs before deciding whether to buy the full version or not. Surely the same process would work in the digital sense? Sony have made steps into a similar (but not the same) idea with shareplay - but that relies on you having a friend with the title you're thinking about buying, not to mention them being happy with you taking control of their ps for a while.

[MrWuggy]

 

 

GameSpot might renew their review and probably give it a 10 unlike just updating Carolyn Petite's biased and feministic review...IGN and CVG will just update their great 10s reviews with new verdicts.

I actually stopped using gamespot since that review.

 

Occasionally go on it but only once a month max.

 

 

I dont even care about rating "scores" or genuine gameplay critique. However...

 

Any site that pushes some pro modern day man hating feminist agenda on video games deserves all the hate and negativity they got. They knew what they were doing when they put a person with that mindset down to review GTA. Good to see them fall and fail so miserably since then, They earned it.

 

 

She still rated the game highly and the part criticising the depiction of women was a mere 30 seconds in her video review.

The problematic depiction of women in some of these games was the elephant in the room for a number of years, but there's been a shift lately, the demographics of video games are diversifying and people want women to be better represented in these games. Would it seriously be that bad if we got a complex, nuanced protagonist who happened to be a woman?

 

It was courageous of her to allude to it since she knew the hate that would ensue.

If we want video games to be regarded as an art form, then we've got to accept what comes with that: Deep scrutiny.

I can't for the life of me understand why someone should be subjected to a torrent of abuse because their perception of a game differs from the prevailing opinion; that's the definition of parochial thinking.

Edited November 12, 2014 by MrWuggy

[Fuzzknuckles]

 

I can't for the life of me understand why someone should be subjected to a torrent of abuse because their perception of a game differs from the prevailing opinion; that's the definition of parochial thinking.

 

I can't for the life of me understand why gamers are so intolerant of other opinions. That's a discussion for elsewhere though, and one we'd be better off not getting into here. Gamers suck is the overall gist, though.

 

Reviews work for some, not for others. To dismiss them as worthless is nonsense.

[ItsJustMeSrsly]

General consensus is "Not To Trust Reviewer" At least its MY way of things! I can't push luck trying to figure, which is lying and which is telling the truth, which got paid to increase sales and hype and which is fair and sqaure with you! Its much safer to keep the distance from ANY reviews, then risking trusting some of them, so you end up being disappointed! Believe me i know what i'm saying! It is based on my personal experience and not just for the sake of hating reviewers/journalists for no reason! You may call me a troll, but i only want to help people save their money by offering alternate solutions, that's all! But if you think this is trolling - then be my guest, but don't say then - "you know you were right i should have listened to you, when i had a chance" when there is time...

Edited November 12, 2014 by ItsJustMeSrsly

[Raynos]

Well now...someone has really bad time trying to hit nail on the head, isn't it? Previous user got it right! Ask him to explain to you my logic please...

 

Your "logic", if there is any. You condemn "reviewers" to be worthless yet advocate using wikies, watching youtube videos and confirming some random guys rumour to be true or not etc etc

What you are doing dear Sir is reading/watching material that others have "reviewed". Try to understand what it means.

Customer review is what you are basing your decision to buy. Still technically a review.

 

Granted that some reviewers are brainwashed or have had their pockets lined to sell a product, yes, this occurs everywhere, no one uses a single source for reviews.

 

Try to understand the word or use it in a correct context, your original statement puts out a blanket statement.

People, who trust reviewers are very naive and lack sense of individual judgement!

Yes, the only way to NOT trust reviewers is to buy the game yourself and judge it yourself. So once again, How is one meant to know what a game is like if it weren't for the millions of reviewers both professional and on youtube? Oh thats right, some random guy..

[ItsJustMeSrsly]

 

Well now...someone has really bad time trying to hit nail on the head, isn't it? Previous user got it right! Ask him to explain to you my logic please...

 

Your "logic", if there is any. You condemn "reviewers" to be worthless yet advocate using wikies, watching youtube videos and confirming some random guys rumour to be true or not etc etc

What you are doing dear Sir is reading/watching material that others have "reviewed". Try to understand what it means.

Customer review is what you are basing your decision to buy. Still technically a review.

 

Granted that some reviewers are brainwashed or have had their pockets lined to sell a product, yes, this occurs everywhere, no one uses a single source for reviews.

 

Try to understand the word or use it in a correct context, your original statement puts out a blanket statement.

People, who trust reviewers are very naive and lack sense of individual judgement!

Yes, the only way to NOT trust reviewers is to buy the game yourself and judge it yourself. So once again, How is one meant to know what a game is like if it weren't for the millions of reviewers both professional and on youtube? Oh thats right, some random guy..

 

 

Persist arguing still? Okay...here we go! First i wasn't talking about ANY kind of reviewers, i was talking about commercial reviewers who just pull that "In you face" stunt dick move and lie to you! Sites like wiki pages and other stuff, which give details about the game helps to understand game's nature better, while commercial reviewers like IGN (or whatever...they're all the same in my book, some are a bit worth, some are a bit better...but reviewer is a reviewer in the end of the day...so yeah...) keeps promising the game is going to rock because of that "shiny object" kind of argument...The only category of people i see, who'd still rather listen to commercial reviewers are the ones, who don't like many spoilers, since researching about some upcoming game by yourself reading different opinions and facts, might eventually lead to a lots of spoilers before you can get your hands on the game! But thats the only FAIR reason to justify trust for a reviewer, because they never give much details about the game just a "whole picture to understand the basics", but thats all about those small details that together in pieces build up your opinion about the game, not the common knowledge like better graphics or good handling etc...

[CarlitoDorito]

If there are any reviews, it'll vary quite a bit, at first it'll 10's, loads of tens. Then you'll get a certain type of reviewer, they love everything nintendo, they say things like 'nintendo games are better than anything on ps4 or xbox 360 or xbox 1 or pc or maybe even ps2'' They hated the last of us, said gears of war was overly macho, lacking in strong females. They'll give it 6/10, calling it boring, trying to be alternative.

 

Never trust reviews.

[ear2ear]

 

If we want video games to be regarded as an art form, then we've got to accept what comes with that: Deep scrutiny.

 

 

Agreed. Having purchased the game twice now, I obviously enjoy it tremendously. But I was perturbed by the same things Carolyn Petit noted in her review.

 

GTA V is such a matured video game in many ways, in terms of the format, graphics, acting, elaborate story-telling. And yet the satire, arguably the star of the entire series, hasn't matured in the same sense. I'm hoping the open discussion from recent events will prompt the writing team at Rockstar to be more reflective of this in forthcoming games/expansions. For all the championing of what they've been able to accomplish on old technology, it's a shame the only blemish on the game comes from it's most low tech component.

[gonetoplaythegame]

Maturity is f*cking overrated and would just turn the game into some boring ass sims clone, The humour comes from mirroring american culture. Over emphasising it for humorous effect. Pushing some false equality bullsh*t and man hating crap to the top of the "this is why i didnt give it a certain number" forefront just leaves her open to being shot down. None of the men in gta are painted as being superior or classy people. They are trashed more then the women. Its a non starter as a critique.