5 Stupid Things Game Reviewers Do

GotGame: This is a quick, simple list article about the 5 stupid things game reviewers do, as the title obviously implies. Strap in, here we go.

[zeal0us]

Nowadays I don't even trust reviews anymore to be honest.

[saladthieves]

Couldn't agree more. Honestly the best way to see if a game is good or not, just watch the youtube gamemplay or something.

[SilentNegotiator]

When someone is getting paid to review things that their bosses are being paid to advertise....there's quite a red flag there.

I prefer reviewers like Zero Punctuation and Jim Sterling. They're mostly paid to entertain and most of the time I end up agreeing with their opinion of the game. They're insightful without being patronizing like some other reviews that read like the back of the box.

[Ramon3MR]

LOL...some can be a little odd.

[DigitalSmoke]

The Review scene has become so deluted by people who should never get a platform in the first place for their stupid shortsighted opinions, or money invluenced review numbers, that no review is to be trusted, non!

[creeping judas]

I don't trust your opinion of reviewers!!

[PR_FROM_OHIO]

Do people actually still care about reviews?? SMH

[smashcrashbash]

Put down one game for doing something but ignore it in another. They tear one game apart for doing more of the same and completely ignore it in another game that does the same. Reviewers are so biased.Whenever thyey really want something to get a bad score they can always bring out the 'more of the same or story not good enough' card but make sure not to bring those out for certain games. Do you know how long I have been listening to reviewers saying 'Gears of War story doesn't matter?' But then they will take something else and insist that the story does matter even if it doesn't.

[Unicron]

6) Using arbitrary scoring systems to sum up a game's worth. Sad.

[Hozi]

I think a lot of people today forgot what the true rating scheme of a game should look like...I'm no Journalist, but I can surely tell you that if you wanna review a game good, YOU DON'T deduct points for your own personal letdowns ie: Dante's hair color in DMC, or FFXIII-2 the main char. isn't lightning.

Rate the game fairly and stop dreaming and get back to reality. Some people's expectations for a game is too far ahead in time.

[Roccetarius]

Just going to point out that..

1. It's called DmC, not DMC. Don't link them to eachother.

2. Only people defending the reboot uses the hair as an excuse.

[Rex_Aeternae]

Well this is just my personal opinion but Adam Sessler is one of the few reviewers that I have seen who is good at reviewing likes playing games and generally tends to be unbiased.

[TuxedoMoon]

Aren't reviews just opinions and suggestions at the end of the day? A review is based on the reviewers experience with the product. Look at Skyrim. It got high reviews, but those that gave it low scores scored it that way because of the glitches. My first Vanilla Skyrim experience was pretty bad and based on my exp with the game, I'd give it a bad rating (if I had beaten the game at that point in time).

You have to have some sort of OPINION when making a review. I do disagree with his point of not comparing 1 game to a past game in the series. If you're reviewing Uncharted 3, you're going to have to make some mentions of the last game. This is either because of gameplay changes or for the story. You shouldn't dock points off for stupid reasons though. That much I agree with. You can't and shouldn't knock down points because Dante LOOKS emo or that Lara Croft LOOKS different. You have to look at the whole product and address bigger issues like glitches or strange story elements or something.

[Hicken]

They ARE opinions, but they're supposed to be more informative than anything else, with as little bias as possible. True, it's impossible to have NO opinion on something, but you can marginalize or otherwise separate your opinion from the rest of the info in your review.

A lot of that is simply based on the words you use. For example, a lot of people that prefer a game like Halo or CoD will NOT like Killzone. A reviewer with such an opinion may say that "the gameplay feels sluggish and unresponsive" when speaking of the weight of the guns and the character's motions. But that's only true in comparison to the super-fast gameplay of something like Call of Duty. The description given, however, makes the difference definitively negative, though it's really just the reviewer's opinion.

It could just as easily have been described as "more weighty, deliberate gameplay than other shooters." Gets the point across, and is devoid of any coloration by bias.

But how many reviewers try such a neutral stance?

Edit: Interesting, because I felt the weight was far less significant in KZ3, and was part of the reason I didn't like it as much. 154 hours played, more than 10,000 kills logged, over 250,000 rounds fired, and never had any problems with Killzone 2's controls exhibiting "lag." Not saying the game was perfect(cuz I know you'd like to make people think I'm saying that), but what's claimed here as an issue is something that never affected me.

In any case, I wasn't talking about "legit" concerns, as you must have obviously known and yet- for some reason- chosen to ignore. I was speaking of unnecessary comparisons colored by a reviewer's personal preferences. That's why I brought up Call of Duty and Halo, whose gamplay feels more similar to each other than that of Killzone, a game often compared to them.

How about this: it would be the same as me slamming Forza for not having a specific model of Skyline I love to drive in GT. Oh, or here's one that actually happened: complaining about the lack of iron sights in Halo because other games have them. Surely that rings a bell.

And, honestly, I can hate whatever company I want and still be qualified to speak on their products, provided I have experience with said products.

Oh, look: I do.

Before you say stupid things like that, do you ever stop and wonder, "Well, why does (Hicken) not like this company?" and try seeing if the things they complain about when DISCUSSING said company could be the reason? I mean, I think I've said it plenty enough times already, but I hate Microsoft for their greedy-ass tactics in the gaming industry. I hate them for pulling a bait-and-switch on their core users. And I hate them for creating a large contingent of people who will willingly pay for things they should be getting for free.

I use the hell outta Windows and Microsoft Word, though. Especially the latter: being a writer, I've typed up untold thousands of pages in various iterations of Word over the years.

... but according to you, since I hate Microsoft, I can't talk about Word.

Funny, I do it all the time. Wonder how that works...

[MikeMyers]

http://www.destructoid.com/...

There were legit concerns with Killzone 2. That is why they patched it and improved the controls for Killzone 3. You see, sometimes there really is legitimate negative criticisms.

I don't mind reviewers who like shooter type games reviewing them. What I have a problem with are reviewers who may not like sports games doing reviews on them or reviewers who may not like racing games doing them or JRPG's and so on.

Just like there's no point in taking someone opinion seriously who doesn't like Microsoft giving an opinion on the next Xbox.

[MikeMyers]

Hicken wrote,
"In any case, I wasn't talking about "legit" concerns, as you must have obviously known and yet- for some reason- chosen to ignore. I was speaking of unnecessary comparisons colored by a reviewer's personal preferences. That's why I brought up Call of Duty and Halo, whose gamplay feels more similar to each other than that of Killzone, a game often compared to them."

I think the real problem with you isn't so much Killzone and how some reviewers may have reviewed it unfairly but your whole bias in general. Where you think the world is against Sony. Which is why you try so hard to overcompensate and feel the need all the time to bring up Microsoft. Thinking that somehow bringing them down to a certain level will somehow elevate Sony to where you think they ought to be. Why does everything have to be Halo versus Killzone and Forza versus Gran Turismo? I have played Killzone and Halo and enjoy both of them. I also enjoy Forza and Gran Turismo. Call me weird for actually liking the games and not putting all of my attention to the platform they reside on. However in your eyes you think there is a bias that exists to where reviewers will pick apart things much more so when it come to Sony exclusives. If that's true maybe you should take up a new hobby because you're reading way too much into reviews then.

"And, honestly, I can hate whatever company I want and still be qualified to speak on their products, provided I have experience with said products."

You're only as qualified as you think you are. Just like how my opinion is qualified. You can say whatever you like but it really doesn't have any impact believe it or not.

As for your own reasons for hating Microsoft that is your problem, not mine. I don't see them as some big huge entity where it trickles down to games like Forza. Meaning that because they work for Microsoft that it somehow leaves a bad taste in my mouth and therefore I will be that much more critical to the franchise. Again, if you start thinking that deeply into a hobby perhaps it's time to change hobbies. I enjoy the Forza games because i think they are very fun to play. The same thing with Gran Turimso. I don't see them as Sony games or Microsoft games, I simply see them as racing games.

"I use the hell outta Windows and Microsoft Word, though. Especially the latter: being a writer, I've typed up untold thousands of pages in various iterations of Word over the years."

The difference is Word is not competing with your beloved Sony franchises. So you don't see Microsoft Word as a threat to Sony's gaming division. That is likely the reason for many of your issues with the Xbox brand, you see them as a threat to the Playstation brand which is why you will always feel the need to compare franchises like Gran Turimso to Forza and Killzone to Halo. And conveniently enough you will always pick the Sony franchise because of your bias towards Microsoft and your inability to distinguish the game from the platform holder.

[maniacmayhem]

@Hicken,

DO you even realize just how crazy and insane you sound sometimes?

How many people on N4G have called you out about your complete lack of sense and inability to look past your blind obsession with Sony and your complete hate for MS?

If there were more than ten people constantly telling me the same thing over the years (as there have plus many more) I would consider it and maybe see that I have a problem.

Again you keep bringing up 360 titles which you have no idea about. You haven't spent nearly as much time on any those titles you constantly mention to form a valid opinion and yet you blast others for hating a Sony product who write less concerns than even YOU do!

You constantly attack anyone who has a less than favorable opinion about Sony and even go as far as to tell them to stay out of Sony articles if they don't like Sony or PS games. But you yourself can't seem to keep MS, 360 and its games out of your mouth.
Double standard much?

"I hate Microsoft for their greedy-ass tactics in the gaming industry."

What tactics? The same tactics other companies like Sony pull? But you got it in your head that MS is this evil empire and you must rebel or else. I think you are caught up in the hype train, the popularity of hating MS/Apple or any big name company that's cool to hate on forums. I constantly see you copying and pasting other remarks and passing them off as your own. You know exactly what I'm talking about.

"I hate them for pulling a bait-and-switch on their core users."

How can you hate them for that when YOU were never their core user? This is what baffles me about you. I'm a core 360 user and I have no problems with them. Do I wish they would bring a new Perfect Dark or a better Crackdown. Yes I do, but do I hate them for not doing it? No! Get off your soap box and stop pretending you even care what the 360 core wants. Especially since you have no intention of being the core.

"And I hate them for creating a large contingent of people who will willingly pay for things they should be getting for free."

They pay because it's a great service with ease of use, great UI and quality that is unmatched. Sony is just NOW catching up to what Live has been since day 1. And Sony's real quality service is a paid subscription just like 360 called PS+! The irony of that is hilarious. And don't give me this "They offer free games" crap because every game they offer is damn near almost decade old (exaggeration).

Again, there is no problem in discussing games or consoles. But you have made it so very clear of your extreme hate towards MS and your bias against 360. Kind of makes discussing anything with you pointless.