By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
generic-user-1 on 29 August 2015
Edit Thread
nuckles87 said:
generic-user-1 said:
midrange said:
The people on miiverse who got the game were probably interested in it from the very beginning. Critics go in without bias or preference (hopefully).

One rates subjectively, the other is meant to rate objectively.

It's nice that people are enjoying the game (I'll try it free on PC), but don't read too much into it


wasnt there a shitload of articles in the gaming press that said fuck objectivity? and then there are the fuckn shitlord sexists at kotaku who were totaly fine with indie devs buying good reviews

Reviews, by their very nature, are SUPPOSED to be "subjective". That's the whole damn point of a review. So if their were a shitload of articles saying "fuck objectivity", they were merely stating the obvious.

The difference between a professional review and the Miiverse (and any online community for that matter) is what they are subjective ABOUT. Online community "reviews" can be subjective based around something silly like company preference, aka fanboyism. A professional review is supposed to throw away petty things like company loyalty and instead focus on what they thought about the things that matter, ie game play, controls, graphics, value, etc.

If you want an objective review, they would all pretty much be like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMU1_-_4WKg

 

 

I've no interest in getting involved with GamerGate nonsense, but this kind of talk always irritates me, so I HAD to say something. Hopefully I actually shed some light on this subject rather then just pissed you (or someone else) off.

 

I think in the end, it often comes down to reviewers simply having higher standards than regular gamers, and also simply not having the time to invest in a lot of games. I've enjoyed my share of poorly reviewed titles, and I've not cared for plenty of games that were praised. It's all subjective, and in the end only my preference matters to me. But game critics do serve an important function, as anti-bodies within the games industry meant to steer consumers away from potentially bad purchases and experiences, and towards ones that they will more likely enjoy. We didn't have these antibodies before the crash of 83, which was at least partially caused by many consumers being burned by bad purchases they had no way to evaluate before hand, in a market that was being flooded with software, with no means for consumers to decide what would be good for them beyond the box art and commercials.

Much like The Order, I will probably steer clear of this title until the price comes down, so that I can check it out out of curiousity. I probably won't hate it, but I also have better games I could be playing.

 

 

they could analyse the plotstructure they could messure the loadtime, framerate, bugs per hour, etc.

and they could come up with a gamepay drill for a somewhat objective review. but they wll not, thats hard work, and math is waaay to much for 90% of gaming critics.

if you make personal non objective reviews, you need a person people can trust in the front like jim fuckn sterling.

thats why i trust small youtube reviews alot more than big website reviews, sure, both are  full of their own taste, but you can find the taste of the smal youtuber and check if its close to yours way easyer.