Machiavellian said:
Instead of painting the whole site just from one review, would you not just paint the reviewer. Many sites do not just staff game reviewers but have them on call for articles. I know I personally look at the reviewer first then decide from their previous work if they have the same taste as me and care when reading their reviews. I stop associating reviews with a site but instead to the opinion of the actual reviewer. Even with this review, I see nothing wrong with it. As with any review, its the reviewer opinion and he does give a description on his concerns. I as the reader can easily say to myself, "Do I care" or not. If I do not care then I move on. |
Problem is when he isn't objective and also put his opinion as fact and being wrong about the whole thing.
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."
