Why do people get so upset when any reviewer doesn't give the game that they love a 9.5 or 10 rating? When a critic gives their opinion, it's just that, a personal opinion. All this outrage over MW3 and the new Uncharted game seems silly to me. It would be like shouting at a person who said that a band you love isn't the best band ever.
THIS RATING IS AN OUTRAGE!!!
- Thread starter DailonCmann
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Because they're socially awkward malcontents who unfortunately have access to their parents' computers.
And I'm not joking, that's really the answer.
And I'm not joking, that's really the answer.
Because if people disagree with them it takes away their God fantasy.
EDIT: Or they're just plain cunts, seems more likely.
EDIT: Or they're just plain cunts, seems more likely.
It seems to me that the serious fans of a franchise tend to closely associate themselves with the brand, so they interpret a less-than-perfect review score as a sort of personal attack. Though I still don't know how they get so obsessed in the first place.
For the same reason people get upset when someone tells them their favorite movie sucks. They take it as a personal insult as if the reviewer is saying something's wrong with them for liking it. It's not a rational reaction by any means, and most often I don't think people consciously think of it like that, but on some level they're insulted that someone did not like something as much as them.
The same can be said for someone who dislikes something others like. It picks at that need to be part of the group and thus upsets them because they perceive themselves to not have the "normal" opinion on it. Let's face it reviewers do affect the way people think of a game. If they didn't then sites like Metacritic would have gone out of business ages ago. Thus, reviewers represent a personal threat of being alienated from the majority. With the typical reaction from someone who does not agree to be much butthurt.
The same can be said for someone who dislikes something others like. It picks at that need to be part of the group and thus upsets them because they perceive themselves to not have the "normal" opinion on it. Let's face it reviewers do affect the way people think of a game. If they didn't then sites like Metacritic would have gone out of business ages ago. Thus, reviewers represent a personal threat of being alienated from the majority. With the typical reaction from someone who does not agree to be much butthurt.
Why do people always insist on pushing their own opinions as definite fact? Why is it impossible for people to accept that other people might like things they don't like? Why is it impossible for people to accept that other people might not like things they do like? Why do the vocal minority of people on the internet laud a game for four years but then, suddenly, after that fifth year passes, everyone begins calling it an overrated piece of crap? These are but a few of the questions I've been wondering lately, it's often why I simply avoid posting in a lot of threads that I read because it's just impossible for the vast majority of people on the internet to understand that not everyone shares their particular opinion.
Same reason people get mad when 'their' hockey team performs poorly.
They have created an arbitrary bond, with which to vicariously succeed through.
They have created an arbitrary bond, with which to vicariously succeed through.
Because people tie their egos to media products and subsequently take attacks on their favorite games as SLANDER AND LIBEL directed at them personally
Also
Also
ThisAidinthel said:
ThisOldKingClancy said:
ThisResonanceGames said:
Aaaand this.anthony87 said:
For me, review scores have been worthless since around 1998 when Ocarina of Time got all those perfect scores.
Also most reviews are too shallow for me, and focus on the part of the game I tend to care about the least: the first few hours of learning how to play. I enjoy the deep side of games that shows itself once you get to know them, not the first impressions of a newbie.
Also most reviews are too shallow for me, and focus on the part of the game I tend to care about the least: the first few hours of learning how to play. I enjoy the deep side of games that shows itself once you get to know them, not the first impressions of a newbie.
Wanted to post that vid for a while now.
OT: Because personal feelings obviously shout down professional opinions.
Or in other words, what the guys above me stated. I just added a video to my point.
I came to this thread purely to bring up Tony Harrison. Kudos to you, good sir, for your fine taste in British comedy programs.Sassafrass said:
As for the actual topic, I believe most bases have been covered save the emotional investment coming from money spent. Some people enter a kind of denial phase when they spent money on a game and it's not very good. But I suspect that's the minority of cases when compared to all the reasons already listed.
