I think it has become more apparent over the months that reviewers are abusing the compilers to their benefit. The compilers need to start limiting themselves to reputable reviewers. That being professional review sites that are self supporting, and show a consistency of delivery in excess of no less then forty reviews monthly.
The fringe has far too much incentive to be either overly generous, or overly inflammatory all as a matter of coarse in getting hits to their site. They have all the incentive to bring poor reviewing standards to the table, because it is what can generate positive cash flow to their site.
I can understand if the compilers make due with fringe reviewers when a particular game is under covered which actually happens quite often. The major reviewers overlook them while they review the mainstream titles, but the quality reviewers should be polled first, and if they do not fill a quota then go to the first available fringe reviewer.
We have seen this time and again this year. Metal Gear Solid 4 got panned by a few eighties. Mario Kart got hammered with a 45 from one reviewer. Smash Brothers got a 65. Even Grand Theft Auto 4 with 47 perfect scores somehow managed to warrant a few eighty scores. Bottom line when you see a review that is twenty, thirty, forty, or more points off the mean or average. Not only is the reviewer far from reputable, but the reviewer is probably looking for attention that they are not worthy of having.
There is just no way that a game can go from perfect at one of the spectrum in the eyes of many to below average on the other end especially when the title is in no way niche. This is the kind of nonsense that is going to make these compilers worthless to use.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
