By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
DKHustlin said:
fighter said:

I fully agree with Twestern here.

1 - As corrupt, incompetent, or irrelevant reviewers might be (hypothetically speaking here), their declared opinion will always be more reliable than that of the editor.

2 - The amount of games out there is insane. Without reviewers to somehow regulate expectations and prevent a shovelware-style crisis as that of the 80's what would we have ?

Console fabricants & editors & fans - a trinity sent from hell

 

i cant say anything about your first point because im not going to try to change your opinion, but as for the second point, the reviewers arent needed to regulate anything

the consumers will regulate expectations by buying the games they think are good and not buying games they are not interested in


I've never understood the idea that a consumer purchase was a sign of good quality.  People buy the games they think are good sure, but if they haven't tried it out before hand they can't know for certain and then that purchase is less a proof that the game is good and deserves sales and more proof that the game is seen as worth a shot. 



...