Does anyone notice the double standard and the bias?

[CollectiveCynic]

Barozi said:

CollectiveCynic said:

FaRmLaNd said:
Agreed.

I personally think that fallout 3, whilst a good to great game certainly wasn't as amazing as the originals and I think that games critics do have a sheep like mentality when its comes to reviewing hight profile releases.

It's been an on going trend amongst critics during this generation of gaming. Many games receive "rave" reviews despite their obvious flaws, they're so caught in the hype, that they become oblivious to the flaws.

Examples:

• Grand Theft Auto IV (Excellent game, but not worthy of a 98 average rating)
• Gears of War 2 (Great single-player mode and horde mode is a lot of fun, but the multi-player...)
• Modern Warfare 2
• Oblivion
• Any Halo title after the Combat Evolved
• Fable II
• Fallout 3

They're all good games, but hardly deserving of the accolades that the influx of the media give it.

Total disagree and I'm not a game critic. All those games easily deserve 90+ scores and are the best of their respective genres. (Fable 2 being the exception).

conspiracy theory rejected.

It's not a conspiracy, it's buisness and marketing.

Then again, the Gerstmann Gate incident was wildly exaggerrated. So is the notion that critics are being bribed.

Also, Modern Warfare 2 was a clusterfuck multi-player experience. It tries to add too much, it failed miserably, Infinity Ward need to understand that less is more. I could make a 12 pages rant about the balance issues. The single-player was a lot of fun, but it was too short and a bit too Michael Bayish, the plot was also more nonsensical than anything Hideo Kojima churned out. Spec-Ops was the best thing about the game, one of the best co-op experiences I've played.