Which games journalists are still trustworthy apart from Yahtzee
- Thread starter Sewblon
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Amnestic said:
Richard Groovy Pants said:
Syphonz said:
All four of these. Why on earth do you trust Yahtzee's criticism at all?D_987 said:
The way I see it, Yahtzee only recommended Bioshock, Prince of Persia, and Portal. Along with Grim Fandango and Dizzy... whatever, that leaves you with five games to play over and over. Have fun with that.
Since no one's said it yet: You can trust the boys at Rock, Paper, Shotgun [http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/] - your one-stop-shop for all your PC gaming needs. Updated 2-3 times a day by four of the best gaming journalists and all-around good guys in the Britain. Podcasts! Forums! Reviews! Silly British humour! Unabashed PC snobbery! And all for the low, low price of 0$! What a bargain!
I don't know who exactly is trustworthy anymore. All I know is that 1up.com is NOT trustworthy, and I'm actually starting to lose faith in IGN. Other than that, I just look at collective scores from all ratings.
Sorry about that, I probably should've been more clear with my statement.Not Good said:
But yeah, you're right, after looking through some of the previous issues I had remembered how funny some of their jokes were. But what I really meant about the lame jokes is when they sometimes try too hard and the jokes come off as, like you said, bland and awkward.
But don't get me wrong, I love GI, I think things like their Game Infarcer and Sacred Cow Barbecue segments are some of the funniest things I've ever read in any magazine. The only time I ever laughed at any other video game magazine's jokes was when I read Seanbaby's "Rest of the crap" segment in EGM, and even then, it felt a little forced.
I'm not going to say anything about Yahtzee's rants. I find games reviewers (independent ones) to be mostly trustworthy, but IGN suck, hype-mongers but I like gametrailers.
Yahtzee? The man that said a 3 hour long puzzle game with no multiplayer can be judged the height of gaming? The one who's never played the first two Fallouts before reviewing #3 (okay, that was kinda unnessecary, but come on.)?
I think you lost me on how he was trustworthy.
I think you lost me on how he was trustworthy.
The answer is easily, none of them. The only reason why I like yahtzee, not just because he is funny, but because most of what he says about games, I find to be accurate(except he should have ass raped fallout 3).
Basically, go with whomever enjoys the same games as you. If a reviewer loved fallout 3 and oblivion and you did too, then that might be the right reviewer for you. If however the reviewer loved fallout 3 and oblivion and you hated both, then that reviewer is probably full of shit and you should look elsewhere.
Basically, go with whomever enjoys the same games as you. If a reviewer loved fallout 3 and oblivion and you did too, then that might be the right reviewer for you. If however the reviewer loved fallout 3 and oblivion and you hated both, then that reviewer is probably full of shit and you should look elsewhere.
The only game reviewer you should trust, Is Your Self.
NEVER EVER listen to what anyone else ever says about a game/movie/book about how good or bad it is!
All it will do is bias how YOU actually feel about it.
If you go in with a nuetral outlook on a game/movie/book, you will quite often find, that you will like it more when most people who are 'over hyped' about a game that simply, sucks leading to the inevitable 'downer' leading to a horrible fan rating.
However, if you go in thinking every game is going to suck, not be in any way shape or form entertaining, you won't be let down when you find that at least, most games are in some way, entertaining, if at least for 6 hours. And if you actually find a game that sucks going in beliving it will suck, it must have been a truelly horrendous game!
Also, I got Fallout 3 with out knowing much of anything about it, never played the previous titles, let alone read any of the reviews.
When I got it, its was 'alright' very 'oblivion-esque', and I enjoyed the gameplay, story was 'meh'. And thats just me....
But hey, any game you can decapitate someone, automatically jumps to an 85% score, or a B+.
NEVER EVER listen to what anyone else ever says about a game/movie/book about how good or bad it is!
All it will do is bias how YOU actually feel about it.
If you go in with a nuetral outlook on a game/movie/book, you will quite often find, that you will like it more when most people who are 'over hyped' about a game that simply, sucks leading to the inevitable 'downer' leading to a horrible fan rating.
However, if you go in thinking every game is going to suck, not be in any way shape or form entertaining, you won't be let down when you find that at least, most games are in some way, entertaining, if at least for 6 hours. And if you actually find a game that sucks going in beliving it will suck, it must have been a truelly horrendous game!
Also, I got Fallout 3 with out knowing much of anything about it, never played the previous titles, let alone read any of the reviews.
When I got it, its was 'alright' very 'oblivion-esque', and I enjoyed the gameplay, story was 'meh'. And thats just me....
But hey, any game you can decapitate someone, automatically jumps to an 85% score, or a B+.
Gamesradar is funny at times, with their features that is, and I trust their reviews, Gametrailers is also a semi trustworthy site.
I go to Gamerankings to find the general score of the game, and I usually go to IGN. And Yahtzee isnt a very trustworthy journalist. He likes to rip apart games for any tiny detail, and they arent exactly the greatest reviews, but they are hilarious. But really, its better if you play the game yourself, and rate it, instead of letting other people's opinions control you.
I think the reason the majority of the people defending Yahtzee's trustworthiness are doing so is because while he may be biased, he's at least open about it. We generally have a pretty good idea going in of whether he's going to like a game or not based on the genre and content. He also has high standards, so people know that when he says a game is good, it's probably pretty damn good.
I have found that nearly all of his reviews point out the flaws quite well, and as he's said, he's a critic, it's his job to criticize. Despite all the shit he rakes up, he actually has liked a lot of the games he's reviewed. Obviously he makes a lot of use of hyperbole, but that's part of what makes it funny; I just make sure to take the criticisms with a cup of salt, as they probably aren't as annoying as he makes them out to be. I also tend to put a lot more stock in story than he does, regardless of how cliche it is, so I know that "too much story" for him is often "cool, lots of story" for me.
Anyway, to answer the original topic, the reviewer I trust the most is myself playing the demo. Yahtzee hated Burnout: Paradise, but after playing the demo I found the visceral crashes to much to pass up, and after buying it found that I really enjoyed exploring and learning the ins and outs of Paradise City. After playing the Tomb Raider: Underworld demo, I think that's on my list too, at least to rent. Long story short: there's a demo for nearly every game nowadays, and it's usually a good indicator.
Other than that, I've come to trust GameTrailers, for a few reasons:
1. They balance the good with the bad. They actually often tend to bring up a lot of the same criticisms as Yahtzee.
2. They take the perspective of a fan of the series/fan of the genre. They know that people who hated the first two Halo games (read: most people here) aren't going to buy Halo 3, so they focus on what it brought to the table that the second one didn't, which is the selling point for fans of the series. The same goes for fighting games, or JRPGs, both of which we know Yahtzee is inherently biased against.
3. They review all the content. Staying on the Halo 3 example, I don't think Yahtzee realized that by the time of the third installment, the main draw of the series, for most fans, was the multiplayer. Sure, they wanted to "finish the fight," but most people wanted great multiplayer from the title more than anything else.
4. They rarely, if ever, actually contradict Yahtzee's points, and the consistency adds to the notion that they aren't getting free money for giving the game a good score.
I have found that nearly all of his reviews point out the flaws quite well, and as he's said, he's a critic, it's his job to criticize. Despite all the shit he rakes up, he actually has liked a lot of the games he's reviewed. Obviously he makes a lot of use of hyperbole, but that's part of what makes it funny; I just make sure to take the criticisms with a cup of salt, as they probably aren't as annoying as he makes them out to be. I also tend to put a lot more stock in story than he does, regardless of how cliche it is, so I know that "too much story" for him is often "cool, lots of story" for me.
Anyway, to answer the original topic, the reviewer I trust the most is myself playing the demo. Yahtzee hated Burnout: Paradise, but after playing the demo I found the visceral crashes to much to pass up, and after buying it found that I really enjoyed exploring and learning the ins and outs of Paradise City. After playing the Tomb Raider: Underworld demo, I think that's on my list too, at least to rent. Long story short: there's a demo for nearly every game nowadays, and it's usually a good indicator.
Other than that, I've come to trust GameTrailers, for a few reasons:
1. They balance the good with the bad. They actually often tend to bring up a lot of the same criticisms as Yahtzee.
2. They take the perspective of a fan of the series/fan of the genre. They know that people who hated the first two Halo games (read: most people here) aren't going to buy Halo 3, so they focus on what it brought to the table that the second one didn't, which is the selling point for fans of the series. The same goes for fighting games, or JRPGs, both of which we know Yahtzee is inherently biased against.
3. They review all the content. Staying on the Halo 3 example, I don't think Yahtzee realized that by the time of the third installment, the main draw of the series, for most fans, was the multiplayer. Sure, they wanted to "finish the fight," but most people wanted great multiplayer from the title more than anything else.
4. They rarely, if ever, actually contradict Yahtzee's points, and the consistency adds to the notion that they aren't getting free money for giving the game a good score.
A couple of people have mentioned metacritic and gamerankings as trustworthy but I often find them way off base (for example the LoZ: OoT score). If the majority of game reviews are biased puff pieces then the aggregate scores are clearly going to reflect this. Also I tend to distrust 'group think'.
This blog doesn't do reviews but it's excellent for critical analysis.
http://magicalwasteland.com/
This blog doesn't do reviews but it's excellent for critical analysis.
http://magicalwasteland.com/
Victor Lucas (EP,Reivews on the Run, and good ole Judgment Day) is trustworthy (unless Greedy Productions (his company) then the score balloons like it did in the Turok review).
None, including Yatzee
Yatzee is well intentioned but seems to put on too much of an 'indie reviewer' hat and as such ends up taking the exact opposite position to whatever game hes reviewing. He rips it apart and sometimes reticules those who enjoy it a bit much simply for the sake of giving a 'real review'. At least thats how it seems. He is honest, just not as objective as he used to be.
Anyone on TV should be out right away. They are all either getting paid off by big companies, working for people who are, relishing the status as some sort of minor gaming celeb or just repeating things others have typed up, never having touched the game. Usually these generalizations extend out to magazine reviewers as well, save the latter. After all it makes no sense to hire a writer who does not play the game themselves since odds are good most fan will never see that person live.
Dan Hsu is obviously someone you can trust as much as you can trust anyone. He has Journalistic integrity. Some of the others who have served with him on EGM are pretty good too, though trusting any of them fully is foolish.
James Rolfe is one guy who seems to have a passion for what he makes, and who reviews things that I doubt game companies care about much anymore. Bashing Simons quest isn't going to step on anyones toes. He just wants to make a good product.
But you really should only trust one review, Your own. Games are intended to be fun. If you want to know what games are good then read a few reviews, take it objectively, look at games you like, rent if possible, then just go for it. You are the only one who knows what you find fun after all.
Yatzee is well intentioned but seems to put on too much of an 'indie reviewer' hat and as such ends up taking the exact opposite position to whatever game hes reviewing. He rips it apart and sometimes reticules those who enjoy it a bit much simply for the sake of giving a 'real review'. At least thats how it seems. He is honest, just not as objective as he used to be.
Anyone on TV should be out right away. They are all either getting paid off by big companies, working for people who are, relishing the status as some sort of minor gaming celeb or just repeating things others have typed up, never having touched the game. Usually these generalizations extend out to magazine reviewers as well, save the latter. After all it makes no sense to hire a writer who does not play the game themselves since odds are good most fan will never see that person live.
Dan Hsu is obviously someone you can trust as much as you can trust anyone. He has Journalistic integrity. Some of the others who have served with him on EGM are pretty good too, though trusting any of them fully is foolish.
James Rolfe is one guy who seems to have a passion for what he makes, and who reviews things that I doubt game companies care about much anymore. Bashing Simons quest isn't going to step on anyones toes. He just wants to make a good product.
But you really should only trust one review, Your own. Games are intended to be fun. If you want to know what games are good then read a few reviews, take it objectively, look at games you like, rent if possible, then just go for it. You are the only one who knows what you find fun after all.