Worst review ever?
- Thread starter Ando85
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I find I'll be far more likely to trust the opinion of some random online schmuck gushing about a game than I will a professional, paid reviewer. Which might be counterintuitive, but the thing is I'm actually looking for bias in reviews. If a game affected you so strongly all you can do is rant your own opinion for paragraphs on end, that tells me "hey! I'm probably gonna get a big emotional reaction hopefully along the same lines as this guy!"
So if someone's review "suffers" from huge amounts of bias in favour of a particular game, they obviously liked it so much they'd compromise being objective just cause it was that awesome. Which is the best kind of recommendation possible; for me at least.
More in line with the topic, I had to scratch my head a few times at Leigh Alexander's RPS take on Katawa Shoujo, where her one of her main complaints seemed to be "it's just not very sexy/erotic for a porn game." It...uh...wasn't supposed to be. At all. It's not even supposed to be a porn game, any more than Mass Effect is a dating sim.
Not the "worst review ever" by any means, just...missing the point.
So if someone's review "suffers" from huge amounts of bias in favour of a particular game, they obviously liked it so much they'd compromise being objective just cause it was that awesome. Which is the best kind of recommendation possible; for me at least.
More in line with the topic, I had to scratch my head a few times at Leigh Alexander's RPS take on Katawa Shoujo, where her one of her main complaints seemed to be "it's just not very sexy/erotic for a porn game." It...uh...wasn't supposed to be. At all. It's not even supposed to be a porn game, any more than Mass Effect is a dating sim.
Not the "worst review ever" by any means, just...missing the point.
I know, please don't flame me, but i have to say it.
I don't watch reviews from that many sites but the worst i saw was the one of Dragon Age 2 by Greg Tito.
I just think that most of his arguments are simply wrong.
(There's more to it, just look on the last comment page of the review
i say it all there)
Then again it's just an opinion.
I don't watch reviews from that many sites but the worst i saw was the one of Dragon Age 2 by Greg Tito.
I just think that most of his arguments are simply wrong.
(There's more to it, just look on the last comment page of the review
i say it all there)
Then again it's just an opinion.
Actually Space Marine came out in 1992 but you know how warp transit can be. Time fluctuations can be unpredictable. I personally blame Tzeentch.scnj said:
OT: This sites review of Dragon Age 2. It really felt like "Its Bioware so that right there is 8/10. Its a game so thats a extra point and it loaded so theres another point. 10/10!"
Just a all round horrible review.
Pretty much any reviewer who says "this game is too hard," but then doesn't go to back it up objectively, is one I can safely ignore.
Gametrailers' review or Modern Warfare 2. Especially when you compare it to their Crysis review. Jesus fuckin' Christ on a pogo stick that is some retarded shit.
I concur with this. I only played the game for the first time recently, pretty much every single thing I heard about it was extreme to mild bad press - but I liked the sound of it, so I sought it out, got it, and loved it to death.Windcaler said:
Jeez, this complaint again?
As a writer myself, and someone who's done a number of reviews (film reviews, specifically), I'll say that one should always remember that these reviews are being written by people who consume a larger amount of media than the norm, and they have to play through games (or sit through movies) regardless of whether they are interested in them as a fan or not. Readers complain when a film critic takes a big summer blockbuster to task for stupid plots or boring characters, but they forget that a film critic probably sees more than 100 movies a year. A professional game reviewer probably plays 50+ games a year, give or take. Playing that many games, or watching that many movies, means that said critic has seen certain trends or mechanics copied over multiple games or movies.
But that aside, a good review should do two things:
1. Deliver objective information about the game such as basic story, genre, and control info, such that readers can decide if they're interested in the game even if the reviewer doesn't like it.
2. Give their own, honest opinion. A reviewer shouldn't lie about their game experience to make readers happy. If they didn't like said game, then they should explain why in an honest manner.
The problem, as I see it, is when fans complain that a reviewer didn't have the exact same opinion that they did. Why? Why does it matter? Why should it bother you that a reviewer didn't like a game that you did? Really, readers need to find reviewers who have opinions similar to their own as well as cross-check reviews with other reviewers or fans. Sure, there are times when a reviewer's own integrity might be in question (or totally, undoubtedly broken as in Harry Knowles' review of Blade 2: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/11793), but that dearth of journalistic integrity is usually easy to spot.
Really, the complaining about reviews doesn't accomplish anything. If reviewers start lying in their reviews to make fans happy, then their opinions become worthless and the usefulness of reviews becomes nil.
As a writer myself, and someone who's done a number of reviews (film reviews, specifically), I'll say that one should always remember that these reviews are being written by people who consume a larger amount of media than the norm, and they have to play through games (or sit through movies) regardless of whether they are interested in them as a fan or not. Readers complain when a film critic takes a big summer blockbuster to task for stupid plots or boring characters, but they forget that a film critic probably sees more than 100 movies a year. A professional game reviewer probably plays 50+ games a year, give or take. Playing that many games, or watching that many movies, means that said critic has seen certain trends or mechanics copied over multiple games or movies.
But that aside, a good review should do two things:
1. Deliver objective information about the game such as basic story, genre, and control info, such that readers can decide if they're interested in the game even if the reviewer doesn't like it.
2. Give their own, honest opinion. A reviewer shouldn't lie about their game experience to make readers happy. If they didn't like said game, then they should explain why in an honest manner.
The problem, as I see it, is when fans complain that a reviewer didn't have the exact same opinion that they did. Why? Why does it matter? Why should it bother you that a reviewer didn't like a game that you did? Really, readers need to find reviewers who have opinions similar to their own as well as cross-check reviews with other reviewers or fans. Sure, there are times when a reviewer's own integrity might be in question (or totally, undoubtedly broken as in Harry Knowles' review of Blade 2: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/11793), but that dearth of journalistic integrity is usually easy to spot.
Really, the complaining about reviews doesn't accomplish anything. If reviewers start lying in their reviews to make fans happy, then their opinions become worthless and the usefulness of reviews becomes nil.
Some of Yahtzee "reviews" are pretty horrible. I know it's his "thing" to nitpick a game to death, but his Dead Island review was pretty awful since all the negative things he pointed out were really minor, like the escort quests, of which there are very few and most of them are optional. His Bulletstorm review was likewise pretty crappy since the entire video is just of him saying "This game isn't like DOOM/Painkiller!"
Thankfully, I watch his reviews for entertainment, not because I value his opinion.
Thankfully, I watch his reviews for entertainment, not because I value his opinion.