metacritic. that's all.

i made a similar thread on the off topic forum about game demos being important. i think that a game demo is very important to me more than a review. with the demo you get a feel for the controller format and a feel for how smooth the game runs.
Reviews really don't work for me cause i think i got a different taste than most but i do read what people say on websites. i check this site, gametrailers.com, and sometime i go to youtube and see what people comment when i search for some gameplay footage.

games i know that i want, i get regardless of reviews (gt5:p), because i know i want to play it. games i'm unsure of, (haze), i turn to reviews. my store credit has been saved this week thanks to ign.

Mainly I use the internet to get information about the latest games. That includes reviews. I use gamerankings.com for an overview and than I check some reviews, but mainly those of IGN. I always like to read IGN reviews, cause they usually explain why they give that figure to the game and exactly tell me what's good and what's not.

If it's an RPG, I also use a site like RPG fan, cause they usually pay more attention to the less familiar RPG's than the average site who only gives good attention to big budget titles.

Since most games are not released worldwide, European have the `advantage` of getting more reviews. Cause after the American we get teh European as well. that's why I usually read some magazines as well.

I would like to agree with that system if it wasn't for the Blue Dragon demo.

The demo was absolutely wretched while the game itself was quite fun.

In most cases, though, demos are a pretty solid indicator of a game. 

Metacritic it is then....I was looking at that site a couple of minutes ago. And I was about to log in and ask you guys about that site..

I will look into that site for my buying decisions. I buy games alot but I got to budget now. Don't want to spend all my money on games. And I would rather hear what the community likes (Metacritic and VGChartz) overall opinion on the game.

Metacritic fits the bill for me. Thanks a bunch guys :)

I usualy check ign cause i think they have one of the most professional reivewers. But i just check on what they think.

Gamerakings.

I generally check my trifecta, which is:

Gametrailers
IGN
Gamespot

If the game gets good reviews from all those websites, then I consider it.

If one site dislikes the game, I check G4TV, 1up, Edge UK, and the "lowest" review given to see if I find hidden faults discussed that I would have otherwise missed without as thorough a background check.


You usually can find the most out about a game by reading the lowest review, unless the review is from a terrible source.

If it's a game I have high interest in (FF, Ace Attorney, Smash Bro), I avoid all reviews in other not to spoil anything. If it's a game I know nothing about, I watch gametrailers because you view the game in action (they actually convince me not to get Soul Calibur Legends). After I read the worst reviews from non-retarded users on gamefaqs or gamespot because they tend to focus on the negative aspect and I can determine if it's a big deal for me or not.

I don't look at any reviews for most of the games I buy, because I know I am going to like them. Like the Mario games.
For games I don't know too well, but seem to be nice, i'll read some reviews to look if they are good.