ign and gameinformer.
Nowadays for me it is more about seeing the game in motion, getting a feeling for the graphics, sound, difficulty and gameplay. Gamespot, IGN, Gametrailers provide 'Video Reviews' and for me it gives a better indication of a game rather than a written review. I do check out the positive and negative parts of a written review, but it is a video I prefer to see. If I am looking for an older game I usually check youtube to see some gameplay footage.
coolbeans said:
I recall an older one putting you in the 99% but I read your BC2 one and it's safe to say you're in the 1% in my eyes. Like mine, it needed some grammer tweaks and I recall one part mentioning "Since SP doesn't require an internet connection, we'll start there" ( |
I hate not having anyone to check my grammer >_< but thanks.

Whether it's the right decision or not, I usually trust IGN.
It weird tho but normally think ign scores way too high and gamespot scores too low. Of course, I really hate gamespot for taking points off just on the performance aspect which includes glitches and stuff, and ign does a good job on reviewing the entire game itself often looking for gameplay
Gametrailers is a good balance bcus the video reviews are spot on but the scores i sometime disagree with.

Above I'm a proud Gran Turismo fan, not a Sony fanboy, and now a proud 360 owner, but sharing xbox live accts ATM
End of 2009 Predictions (made Jan 1, 2009): My predictions were pretty accurate, the 360 was over and the Wii was just under.
Wii: 65 mil (yea I'm crazy) 360: 35 mil (its getting there) PS3: 30 mil (the slim better do well)
End of 2010 Predictions (made Jan 7, 2010):
Wii: 81 mil 360: 47 mil PS3: 45 mil
| coolbeans said: ^np and haha that's the same as it is for me as well. I don't enjoy proof-reading that much except others work. Hate seeing how royally I messed up on a certain sentence when going back to see the mistakes I made on a paper or in this case already posted a review. Edit: >_< or in this case MY VERY OWN POST. Hate when I'm typing too fast. Sorry about that mess above :( |
lol its fine, but you know, we could always help eachother =o (no homo)

The only review site I pay attention to is Gametrailers, as they actually take into account the full game and show you examples of what they're talking about when they're pointing out specific parts of the review. However, even with Gametrailers, they have specific bias towards certain systems. Spefically they seem to have a positive bias towards the PS3 (upscoring those games) and somewhat of a heavy bias against Nintendo (being rather harsh on those games and often downscoring games on the Wii and DS for things they wouldn't elsewhere). So even with Gametrailers, I have to take their reviews with a heavy grain of salt.
I find all other sites downscore games for petty reasons or are very inconsistent. And they have changed many times in the last few years, with multiple different editors coming and going. And with the recent firings or mass exoduses from such sites as GameSpot and IGN, its even more apparent that those sites are going to change even more. Its pointless to try to read those sites, let alone their reviews, when they can't even keep ahold of their own staff.
VGChartz, by a long shot. (Not a kiss-ass, that's actually how I feel...) Gametrailers and Screwattack are pretty reliable too.
I can't think of a reviewer right now that I absolutely loathe, but I will say that NOBODY should rely on My reviews! I usually write them when I'm EXTREMELY Bored, Drunk, Tired etc.
Gameinformer, Gametrailers, and zero punctuation. Zero usually will bash the game but I find him entertaining and usually he call most games crap but its all in good fun.
I am no good at grammar =)

DAMN IT! This EP is such a good idea