By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
crissindahouse on 19 February 2013
Edit Thread
Asriel said:
crissindahouse said:
Asriel said:
God forbid different reviewers should have different opinions regarding a game. We wouldn't want there to actually be a diverse reaction to a major release! That would be AWFUL.

but there is a difference between different opinions or something which is just wrong. if someone says something is so broken even if almost everyone else has not really a problem with that it just makes no sense then.

i can also say messi is one of the worst football players of the planet but that doesn't make it right just because we have different opinions.


But there can be a huge range of subjective reactions to videogames; this is just something the vast majority of players aren't used too. Look at what happens with major film releases, even BAFTA and Oscar winning films have a range of reactions from a range of critics. They don't all go "this is incredible", but obviously the ones that do are pushed to the forefront of any advertising campaign. Major literary and television releases are the same; critics aren't afraid to step away from a general consensus, and at times, no general consensus is even reached.

Even the most positive review of Metal Gear Rising (the Eurogamer review) mentions technical problems, they even explicitly state the game would be a 10 if it weren't for the camera issues. The fact is, mileage varies from person to person when playing a game, and the technical flaws that cause some people to hate the game are barely noticed by others. The same can be said for design choices; one person's trash is anothers treasure. That's not one person being wrong and everyone else being right; it's naturally subjective reactions. The fact gamers still have trouble when this happens is alarming, but also indicative of many hyped titles garnering near uniform reactions from critics. Look at the disparity between the critical reaction to Mass Effect 3 and the fan reaction, for example. Universal acclaim on one hand, an outpouring ranging from derision to glee (and everything in between) on the other hand.

We should encourage critics to have a range of reactions to games. There's no definitive opinion, and we should welcome more reviews that can stimulate thoughtful debate around the pros and cons of any given game, rather than every major release needing to shoot to a 90 plus metacritic or be deemed failure, or engage in hate campaigns against reviewers who simply don't get what the fuss is about. Look at the reaction to some hugely anticipated titles recieving an 8/10: Eurogamer's Uncharted 3 review was an intelligent critique of the limitations of the linear, cinematic design that Uncharted employs and is enjoyed by millions of people. That particular critic thought the formula had pushed its limits and been found wanting, fan expecting the game to recieve another perfect score bombarded the review with hate. Gamers just aren't used to the big games being the result of genuinely divisive and constructed debate, because the vast majority of the time, reviews don't function that way.

So long as the review score is backed up by a sufficient analysis and critique of the game, what's the problem? I agree there are troll reviews and poor reviews, but this doesn't seem to be one. The same issues are mentioned across reviews, some of which approach this level of negativity, others completely forgive the technical issues (Eurogamer) while some penalise the game for them slightly (7/10 in Edge). Subjectivity is completely natural when reviewing entertainment products: there is no objective reaction and we shouldn't expect one. People are perfectly capable of drawing radically different conclusions from the same source material, and we should be prepared to accept that with gaming reviews.

the probem i see is that i think a review should at least tell people if they might like it even if he doesn't like it. i mean, yes he is complaining about the camera problems and whatever and they are reality but instead of acting as if the game is unplayable and no one should ever buy the game (he even acts like it was a huge fail to even release the game as if it is a fact that it's unplayable and it has a metascore of 82 without his review lol), he should try to tell people that those issues are too much for him but might be not really a problem for most others. 

he should think about the possibility that someone might only read one review and that his could be this review.