windbane said: I just wish Eurogamer and Edge had people that were actually fans of the series review the game.

Why? So they can inflate scores?

Personally, I am much more impressed by a "hater" giving a game an 8/10 than a fanboy giving every piece of shit that neatly fits into his favorite genre a 9/10 or higher.

With the non-fan, you're getting an objective view of the game... With the fanboy, subjective. It's in their head and they're too willing to gloss over serious faults because they want to like the game no matter what.

Remember, an 8/10 is still a "B" rating... Still a good game, still much better than average, and still worth playing. Most importantly, you know that review is coming from someone who hasn't jerked off to every Kojima interview for the past three years. That means something and I guarantee that whatever that guy has to say is going to reflect the game more accurately than anything most fanboy reviewers gush over in the typical "AAA" review.

rocketpig said: windbane said: I just wish Eurogamer and Edge had people that were actually fans of the series review the game. Why? So they can inflate scores? Personally, I am much more impressed by a "hater" giving a game an 8/10 than a fanboy giving every piece of shit that neatly fits into his favorite genre a 9/10 or higher. With the non-fan, you're getting an objective view of the game... With the fanboy, subjective. It's in their head and they're too willing to gloss over serious faults because they want to like the game no matter what. Remember, an 8/10 is still a "B" rating... Still a good game, still much better than average, and still worth playing. Most importantly, you know that review is coming from someone who hasn't jerked off to every Kojima interview for the past three years. That means something and I guarantee that whatever that guy has to say is going to reflect the game more accurately than anything most fanboy reviewers gush over in the typical "AAA" review.

Most places have a policy to let people review games they are inclined to enjoy. That policy at least applies to genres and often to certain game series. A fan of the series can tell if there is a drop in quality from the previous games. There is no "objective" view of a videogame, anyway. But I don't really care what the reviews are, except I want a lot of people to play the game. I'd buy Metal Gear Solid games no matter what the review scores were, unless perhaps Kojima had nothing to do with it.

I do understand what you mean, though. If someone that wasn't even looking forward to playing the game gives it an "8," and I don't know if that was the case really except that MGS3 was a great game and got the same score, then obviously there is something impressive about the game that got the person to enjoy it.

If Bod played a MGS game and gave it anything over a 6 I would be shocked, for instance. I just would rather a fan of a series review a game because that tells me that if I'm inclined to like it, I will. It is still hard for a game to get perfect scores when someone is a fan of it, so games that get really high scores are still highly regarded.

A new detail from the EDGE review (since we're on subject) states what is probably the single biggest reason for the "low" (or so called...) score of 8. The reviewer mentions that the game is unappealing to reviewers who didn't enjoy the self indulgent philosophical babble during the ending of MGS2 as MGS4 is as if not more self indulgent than the former.

from neogaf.

DTG said: A new detail from the EDGE review (since we're on subject) states what is probably the single biggest reason for the "low" (or so called...) score of 8. The reviewer mentions that the game is unappealing to reviewers who didn't enjoy the self indulgent philosophical babble during the ending of MGS2 as MGS4 is as if not more self indulgent than the former. from neogaf.

When will they stop whining about a bit of philosophical debate?

DTG is billy isn't he? Really wish he'd get off it.

What? I'm simply reporting the news from Edge. Many people would be interested in this considering the love hate relationshiop players seemed to have with MGS2's philosophy.

windbane said: rocketpig said: windbane said: I just wish Eurogamer and Edge had people that were actually fans of the series review the game. Why? So they can inflate scores? Personally, I am much more impressed by a "hater" giving a game an 8/10 than a fanboy giving every piece of shit that neatly fits into his favorite genre a 9/10 or higher. With the non-fan, you're getting an objective view of the game... With the fanboy, subjective. It's in their head and they're too willing to gloss over serious faults because they want to like the game no matter what. Remember, an 8/10 is still a "B" rating... Still a good game, still much better than average, and still worth playing. Most importantly, you know that review is coming from someone who hasn't jerked off to every Kojima interview for the past three years. That means something and I guarantee that whatever that guy has to say is going to reflect the game more accurately than anything most fanboy reviewers gush over in the typical "AAA" review. Most places have a policy to let people review games they are inclined to enjoy. That policy at least applies to genres and often to certain game series. A fan of the series can tell if there is a drop in quality from the previous games. There is no "objective" view of a videogame, anyway. But I don't really care what the reviews are, except I want a lot of people to play the game. I'd buy Metal Gear Solid games no matter what the review scores were, unless perhaps Kojima had nothing to do with it.

Why can't anyone view a video game objectively, based on its own merits and without a preconceived notion of what the game "could be" versus what it really is?

A game reviewer should be able to pick up any game and review it. Part of reviewing is putting your own personal bias to the side for a moment (as best one can, anyway) and viewing the title on its own merits. Putting a fan of that genre on the review defeats that. He or she is then writing the review for fans of the series, not Joe Gamer. Fans of the series are already going to buy the game. Giving a fanboy review is not only disingenuous, it also undermines the nature of the review process and the credibility of the publication. It also perpetuates the "Core Gamer" debacle by giving games like MGS "OMG teh C3ll 10/10!!!1" while non-traditional titles like WiiFit are thrown under a bus because they're not hardcore enough.

With this type of attitude, gaming will have a hard time ever losing the teenage-geek-in-a-basement stigma. 

Anyway, that is the wrong way to do things. You put the most neutral person possible on a review, not the person who hates or loves the genre or game series. If publications do that, they're just setting themselves up for a skewed review that doesn't accurately represent what the game really offers.