The reason I ask is that some reviews that I have read have highlighted issues with a game that have made me think twice about buying it, but upon making the decision to shell out the cash that have not been any times that I have regretted it.
A case in point is NFS Carbon on the Wii. One reviewer has said that the controls were crap and that the only thing that saved it was the fact that the A button was used as an oversteer to give you extra cornering ability. So I was very doubtful about buying the game. However my local retailer was having a sale and I got the game at half price! Now having played it the problem highlighted by the reviewer just does not exist. I never use the oversteer button and I am progressing through the game just fine. As each car has different handling it depends entirely on which car is being driven. Yeah some of the cars are crap but not all. The Toyota Supra has the best of all the cars in my opinion!
I think that reviewers have a job to do but can easily get jaded, playing game after game, on one console then the next and always comparing the differences as opposed to reviewing the game objectively. Also if they have several reviews to write in a limited time then it must be hard to get too far into a game in the time available.
So...back to the question. Based on magazine reviews how often do you buy a game only to be disappointed? Or how often have you taken a risk on a game with a bad review and been thrilled with the purchase? Or do you just not buy games unless they have at least an 8/10 score from a review?
JRI.
