| The_vagabond7 said: That's exactly what I'm saying. Gamers sitting around complaining about reviews deserve the kind of reviews that they are getting. Score inflation is a direct result of people complaining about low scores. It doesn't mean they don't say what they think, it means they grade on a 7-10 scale so as not to anger their audience. It can't be both ways. Either everybody complains that they are stupid money hats because they give games low scores or they are stupid money hats because they give high scores.
Also, there is no moneyhat conspiracy. Activision is not bribing Giant Bomb for better reviews. That doesn't even make sense. Publishers use metacritic to gauge any number of factors ranging from sequels, to funding for teams, why would they pay to screw up their own metric that they are using? It doesn't even make sense.
And your argument now comes down to "Yeah, well amatuer reviews are stupid and biased too, but you can ignore those and read the ones that are good, you know just like with professional ones...but those all suck...all of them" Which isn't even a sensical argument, it's a crass generalization of a vast broad and varied group accompanied by special pleading for a group so massive no consistency can even be hoped for. I don't give a shit about reviews, professional or otherwise. I'm 26 and I know what games I like by now. I don't even read reviews, I don't know what GT5 is averaging on metacritic, I don't know how black ops did critically. Stupidity just drives me nuts, and when I see people say dumb shit like "professional reviews are becoming irrelevant" and "Amatuers write better reviews", I feel the need to interject. The first statement is blatantly untrue, proffesional reviews are incredibly relevant, go ask any publisher. The second one doesn't even make sense on account of it's tens of thousands of people compared to a few hundred, and you have to shuffle through mounds of amatuer crap to get to something halfway readable and informative. If you want to go read ten reader reviews for a game, knock yourself out. But the statement that they do a better job doesn't even make sense. |
Yes it does mean they don't say what they think most professional reviews leave out whole aspects of popular games, and as for the 7-10 scale it's only used on the popular hyped highly advertised games so it creates a gap of like 2 points and if a game really is a 9 they leave it at 9 instead of giving it points but if it's a 7 they'll make it a 8.5-9 so relatively to each other they are way off it's a crappy review system, the reviewer should not be swayed by people bitching that the score is too low or by how much the game is advertising on their site but they are swayed by both making user reviewers FAR better
I never said they were taking bribes bottom line game advertisements pay the bills for most of these sites, it's a case of not bitting the hand that feeds you, they aren't going to give a game who's company is paying the most of advertisements on their site anything less then a 6 no matter how horrible the game is
On average there more good user reviews compared to bad ones then there are good professional reviews compared to bad ones, but you wouldn't know that since you haven't read any user ones in the last year, go to gamefaqs and read a few they are way better then anything from IGN
So you have no idea what you are talking about and all of your arguments are based on your random assumptions most of which aren't valid, and you are calling us stupid?
