zen, you just nailed it. Would you be interested in co-writing my next editorial? I'm finally moving into a place where I can dedicate time to writing. PM me. I would PM you but my iPhone doesn't like PMing.
Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/
Most my life I've never relied on a reviewers opinion.
I'll go with E.
Reviewers seem to spend more time talking about the games presentation instead of what we should all worry about. The game play. Happened so many times where I read reviews of high rated game and find flaws in the game play yet no one lifts a finger about it.
They also don't play the game all the way through most the time as well. They don't have to PAY for there games as well.
So why should I trust someone's opinion when I can't relate to them at all on the subject? We don't get hand outs or paid to play games, its just a hobby for us.
Seeing how Jeff got fired for his review on Kayne and Lynch as well Matt from IGN saying he was purposely going to give Wii music a bad review well before he got a copy pretty much reconfirms my belief on the gaming review system.
| Hephaestos said: reviews should stick to rating a game Great Good OK Bad Abismal with most games getting Good and OK ratings. The rest should be sentences in the review. I mean in class you get a 100.... does that mean you're equal to the other guy that had 100? no it just means you both passed the test perfectly.... but a much harder test he could get 50 while you still get 100. Reviewers have opinions and as such rate diferently because of these. Wii music for example is a badly reviewed game that reviewers say is for kids... well kids would give it 100. On the other hand, I doubt a little girl would give GT4 anything above a 2/100... cause shooting people doesn't resonate with her. When all reviewers are 20-35 male they tend to have tastes that go with it... Example: Enchanted - DS Avg Ratio: 65% Based On 4 Media Outlets That is a D score.... my girlfriend borrowed it from her cousin, she liked it a lot and wanted me to buy it for her. The best example of Review not reviewing the game itself: Dynasty Warriors 4 - PS2 Avg Ratio: 78% Based On 46 Media Outlets Dynasty Warriors 5: Xtreme Legends - PS2 Avg Ratio: 59% Based On 24 Media Outlets Dynasty Warriors 6 - PS3 Avg Ratio: 60% Based On 32 Media Outlets How does a game, known for almost not changing at all in it's iterations, that scores well (78% is more than decent) then turns bad (59%) when you add stuff to it?? or even when you boost all it's atributes for the HD one??? The low scores are there because reviewers think the game is the same, not new...they don't rate the game but the fact that they are bored playing it so many times for reviewing all iterations. I personnaly bought 2 and 3 of these series... wanted a new one recently but didn't know between gundamn or 6.... well I can't say that review scores have been much help. |
No matter how bad a game is, SOMEBODY will want to buy it. SOMEBODY will enjoy it. Does that make it good? No.
I'm sure there were people who liked Haze, right?
And I don't know of ANY children who would give Wii Music a 10/10. Not one. You underestimate the gaming tastes of kids- I saw this 9 year old who said he loved Oblivion.
"Aimed at Casuals/Children" is not an excuse to smack an extra 30% onto a title. Sure, let a casual review a casual game. But PLEASE tell them how to write and score a review. Please. Just because you thought it was the most zomgwtfpwnage game in existence does not mean that everybody will. Would Wii Music quality graphics be tolerated in MGS4? Gears of War? Crysis? No, they wouldn't. So, because it's aimed at casuals, the technical expectations are lowered? I don't see how that's fair to developers who spend millions making a game to lose in score to something which looks like it was put together with 5 people, a few weeks and some packets of Doritos.
A review site does not write reviews for the game's audience, it writes them for its own audience. If a game came out in a week that half-elephant half-hyenas loved, and it was aimed at half elephant half hyenas, would review sites give it a 10? Not unless their audience happens to be half elephant half hyenas (see: EuroGamer 
)
(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective 
| frybread said: Nintendo Channel stats > Reviews If the game is good, people will play it a lot. |
Nintendo Channel stats = Reviews for me.. they express a much greater example as to whether the game is enjoyable.. because you can see on average how many times it has been run, how long per session, how long total, etc.. it really is the best run down
That said.. i wouldn't buy a game based on either
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
