By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
OttoniBastos on 02 February 2015
Edit Thread
the_dengle said:

Gaming is a bit different. The critics have pretty much the same taste as the audience. Basically because most video game critics are just regular people who play a lot of games, rather than experts on game design who can really analyze what they're playing.

Adding to that, each publication assigns one person out of dozens to review a game, usually someone who actually wants to play the game and generally has a default positive opinion of it before even starting. Whereas major publications typically seem to have only a few film critics, who see every film released in the year whether they want to or not. You get a lot more instances of film critics reviewing a film that is obviously not made with them in mind as an audience than you get of game critics doing that. This is natural, since it takes much longer that the normal 2-3 hour movie length to play most games, but it's still a problem.

I disagree with you here.I don't think Reviewer share of the same taste of the comunity as most people think.GTA 4,God hand,FF13,Dark souls 2,dragon age 2,rome 2 total war,skyward sword....these are examples of games that reviewers praised/trashed and people had the opposite opinion.

Imo most of the time,critics just give a score based on what they believe people will think about the game.

The best example is God hand.When god hand came out ign gave a bad score for it.They trashed the game cause,let face it,it was not the most polished,well design game of all time.But then,for some random reason it became a cult classic and after that ign made an article talking about the 100 best games of playstation 2 and guess what? god hand was there and they actually praised the game saying "it easy to confuse god hand as a bad game...." i laugh so hard when i read this...

Sometimes they give a score based on some biased political agenda like polygon's review of bayonetta 2 where they literally ignored all the things that actually matter for a game,like gameplay quality,and focused on their feminist propaganda (aka "muh..sexism!!11")

and sometimes they give a score based on some deal or special relationship with the publishers like IGN infamous Mass effect 3 review.

Unfortunately just a few journalist actually give their opinion for the game.That is one of the reasons why e-celebs like angry joe/boogie/jim sterling are becoming more and more popular and this sites are losing strength.When you see a angry review you actually see joe playing and having fun or getting frustrating or experiencing some kind of bug,.it makes his opinion more believable even if you don't agree with them.