| anamme said: At the end of the day, as a site, they should have some kind of grading consensus, because there are only a handful of entertainment critics with some name recognition that you can trust as reliable, and Polygon is not there yet. When someone like Roger Ebert says your favorite movie sucked, it was okay because you knew the man had some principles and had earned respect when it came to his critiques, so you could just chalk it up to differing opinions. But, if you know a game is coming out that is highly-anticipated and apparently with great production values, you don't hand the review copy off to someone who doesn't like that sort of game, and then proceeds to give it a low score. That's just being that moron who says they didn't like 'The Godfather'. Yeah, your completely entitled to your opinion, but that doesn't make you right. You just end up sounding disconnected from what actual gamers are saying. And this isn't some pro-Sony thing. If Titanfall ends up getting a low score from Polygon, when the universe and your mother knows it's going to be a good game, there's no need to have that one person who didn't like it officially review it on behalf of your website or publication. Because that's what leads to Halo 9 and God of War 7. How about giving these companies a bit of a break for trying to do something new and introduce new IP's. Is that too much leeway to give them? |
How do you know that Titanfall is going to be a good game? It doesn't come out for months!
This is EXACTLY the problem. I'm beginning to think that moneyhatting publishers are not the problem but rather fan expectations are the real problem when it comes to reviews.
You haven't even played a game and yet you've already decided its fate. If a review comes out that disagrees with the narrative you have already built up in your head you will not accept it. This is why many people screamed bloody murder when TLOU got a 7.5, even though at the time most of those same people had not even played. Those folks had already decided months in advance that the game was great. Conversely the court of public opinion decided months in advance that Ryse and Knack were garbage and lo and behold the reviews have come forth to fulfill that prophecy.
I feel that a lot of these reviewers and review sites are forced to conform to whatever the general consensus has decided about a game months in advance. Before GTA V came out people decided it was the greatest game ever. It released and got 10's across the board. Any reviewer who veered from that predestined path was sure to be crucified... Because the internet was absolutely not willing to hear anything other than perfection. That is not healthy. We shouldn't be so closed minded about anticipated games being good or bad. All it does is lead to review scores that are based more on peer pressure than the merits of the game. Thats not the publishers fault that is the fans fault.
