Are reviews too generous?.
Ladyxxmacbeth
Posts: 1,868
Forum Member
✭✭✭
Discuss...
It appears recently that a lot of games seem to be getting excellent reviews and then going on amazon appears to give a different view.
Are reviewers too generous with their scores?
For example ign give
Max Payne a 9/10
Dark souls a 9/10
Arkham city 9.5
Black ops 9.3
Hitman absolution 9
Forza horizon 9
Dishonoured 9.2
All but one f those was meh to me
It appears recently that a lot of games seem to be getting excellent reviews and then going on amazon appears to give a different view.
Are reviewers too generous with their scores?
For example ign give
Max Payne a 9/10
Dark souls a 9/10
Arkham city 9.5
Black ops 9.3
Hitman absolution 9
Forza horizon 9
Dishonoured 9.2
All but one f those was meh to me
0
Comments
http://youtu.be/bcAZdxrYI8Y
I like that guy he speaks the truth
No, reviews are opinions some you agree with, some you don't
that doesn't mean when you think a review is to high that they are being to generous, it just means you don't agree with them it's that simple
In gaming journalism, certain games get put with certain reviewers who generally enjoy the genre and can give a good overview on it, like, someone who enjoys FPS games on the team will be doing the COD reviews, whilst someone who enjoys MMORPGs will be given games like Old Republic, etc, so even though all YOU see is a website followed by a number rating, there's bound to be 10 to 20 different people on the review team for major websites and the games are pushed to the ones who will enjoy them best, which yeah, will make the score seem inflated if you personally don't enjoy a certain type.
I think the important one is Amazon reviews here- it's all well and good going on about professional reviewers working to a "four point scale" but amateur reviewers (or at least, the kind that put reviews on Amazon) work to a two point scale- "best game ever" or "valueless trash".
People are going to want to knock games more than praise them, so it's probably more that Amazon reviewers score too low.
It's also worth pointing out that there's not a lot of money in games journalism, so often mainstream outlets won't waste money or attention on reviewing bad games or games outside what they think their market is interested in unless it's a really big name (Duke Nukem Forever, Aliens: CM) they want to make a point (Eurogamer's review of Hyperdimension Neptunia) or they just want to trash the game for humour value (Shovelware) or linkbait.
This does mean that a lot of stuff gets missed (Remember how Deadly Premonition passed nearly everyone by?) but then that's what niche press is for.
I'm not going to pretend that there aren't upwards forces on review score that are a little less savoury, but the vast majority of noise about that is simply conspiracy theories from people trying to rationalise away the idea that someone might have a different opinion to them.
My first Call of Duty was Modern Warfare 2, and I loved it. It was amazing. At the time I would have rated it a 10. Then I got Blops. and I was still loving it, another 10. But then Blops 2 came out and I was getting bored of the COD series and this felt the same as the previous 2, and I'd only give it a 5 or 6. Its not that its worse than the others, I'm just bored of the series.
As for professional reviewers, they do always seem to give higher scores than what I'd award, but its all subjective.
These tools think they are doing good for the game's industry thinking positive reviews=better sales, but if a game has a positive review but it is actually absolutely rubbish, that has long term affects on a consumer buying habit's.
Their greed and dishonesty is basically going to be the death of them.
Corruption is rife, some of the time they aren't even subtle. The whole industry is embarrassing, tbh.
Is it IGN that always rates EA very highly? Does anyone know.
D
All Uncharted games get 10/10 from me. All COD games get 2/10. Sleeping Dogs gets 8/10. The new Tomb Raider.... erm not had time to play any yet, but my guess its gonna be a 10.
Those review score are accurate, you can't beat that
I agree 100% with you ! Therefore You are a good reviewer! And i will bow to you Lol
When you review you cannot always pick up on the long term appeal of a game.
But also looking at the review scores on Gamespot whilst 7 games get a 10, 7 games also get a 9.9. However no 9.9 scores have been awarded since 2000, 3 of the 10's have been awarded in the last four years or so, and since 2006 no game has been given a score between 9.6 and 9.9 which makes me wonder if scores are being rounded these days.
Couldn't have said it better!!!
It's a funny old world lol.
I suppose the litmus test is wait a few weeks before buying games and then read the opinions.
As for the scores they are only a very small part of it for me.
A reviewer should be independent. If they aren't their opinion has to be questioned. Is their review their honest opinion or are they saying things to get access to news, information, review copies, advertising revenue or something else?
The best reviewers need to not only be independent, but ideally have an interest, love or at knowledge of the genre. I personally don't like racing games so I would be a terrible reviewer for any of the games. I can't with knowledge compare one with another as I don't play them. Before the disc is in the machine I know I'm going to be bored by it. Even if I make a concerted effort to be positive about the game with fans of the genre hailing it a masterpiece, it will be lucky to get above a 5/10 as it will at best be "alright, not good, not bad."
Unfortunately reviewers often have to review things they have no interest and sometimes just don't like, because they have to cover all genres and that will always have an impact on the review.
No coincidence that a lot of these highly rated games also provide ad funding to the review sites.
Looking at my games collection I have many games I would rate 6, 7 or 8 that are all very enjoyable and great if you enjoy the genre but the people who review games seem adverse to actually scoring a game this low :eek: which is crazy as those scores are all above average.
Also I dont like when scores are broken down into percentages, is their really a difference between a 98%, a 97% or a 9.5 they are all great 'must buy' games (And dont get me started putting a point something on a rating system out of ten which basically just means you using a percentage system :rolleyes: ).
I have always preferred reviews with no ratings or a simple rating system with 5 = must buy genre defining game, 4 = great game as long as you enjoy the genre, 3 = average but really enjoyable if you like the theme / genre, 2 = rent or avoid, cheap purchase at best, 1= avoid, avoid, avoid.
What annoys me most about reviews is how much stock people put into the score. I often see over at Eurogamer people saying they're canceling their preorder just because a game scores a 7/10. Why put so much faith into one person's opinion? I'll never understand that. Reviews are nothing more than a rough guide to what a game is like.
Reviewers often get it wrong, I remember the year Gamespot gave Skyward Sword a 7.5, I mean WTF is that? I also remember them awarding the best driving game of the year to Dirt 3, the same year Forza Motorsport 4 came out. Do these guys even play these games? I can safely say one thing though, if all reviews were like Greg Miller's then I wouldn't even read/watch any of them at all. :sleep: