By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Akvod on 29 November 2013
Edit Thread
d21lewis said:
Frequency said:
 

So my point was giving an comment that spans across all platforms without experience on the other platforms, and your rebuttal is to post content from someone who HAS had experience with both machines?, regardless of if the general statement is the same, my point is a matter of perspective from a personal experience, specifically i am not saying he is WRONG to say ryse is the best looking game, as i fully agree, my point was to make a broad comment reaching across platforms without experience with another platform detracts from the "unbiased" tag.

Jay already responded that the unbiased part is just something he throws in for every review, so that was the end of it.


The thing with all of these "Unbiased reviews" is that nobody is given these games for free.  The reviewer goes out and buys these games and then tries to give a review without being a fanboy.  Some people might give Halo an inflated review because they like Microsoft or give Zelda an inflated review because they like Nintendo.  The few that have pitched in for these reviews tend to be pretty fair about giving their point of view about their personal experiences.  The criticisms and praises are usually legit and the final score reflects it.  The problem is, as stated before, they have to buy these games.  In a way, it's a more honest review than the pros because the reviewer lets us know if they got their money's worth.  In a way, it's less because--who buys a game that they don't intend to like?

So don't take the "unbiased" portion so literally.  It's just the name of the review series.

 

*dammit.  quoted the wrong person!*


So then the reviewers who didn't make an financial investment into the game are relatively more biased than those that did? Whereas a person who made a personal investment won't have their opinion influenced (have their frusturations even more amplified since they wasted their money, be more lenient so that they can justify their purchase more, defend the game because they want to defend their purchase and not admit they made a mistake)?

I'm sorry, I just think that the whole concept of an unbiased review is ridiculous.

If it even did exist, just imagine how boring it would be too. I want to get a review from a human being, with the history of games they played, their social background, their values and beliefs influencing their evaluation of a game.

The critical point is not that a reviewer be "unbiased" or "biased". It's how open the reviewer is about WHY they liked or dislike a game. That they're open about the reason and elaborate more (for example, a reviewer dings a game for a torture scene because they were once a soldier or because they feel it supports torture used by the US government). Hell, to me, that's a more interesting and insightful review than an "unbiased" one.

And to be open and more descriptive about those things, you need to openly do away with the whole concept of an "unbiased" review. You can't explain your unique opinions without acknowleding that you have them and that you want to express them.