520°
Submitted by Toasty 1220d ago | opinion piece

Duke Nukem Forever exposes crap reviewers - 100 reviews compared

Let’s be completely honest here; Duke Nukem Forever is not what we waited for back in 1996. In fact, it is not great at all. Having said that, it is also definitely not crap as well. In this post Xentax compares the final scores from 100 reviews that we can find online. Not that feable metacritic or shallow worldscore bias like we see so often eh? Setting aside nostalgia and looking at the game objectively, it’s a fair game. There’s enough fun to be had, giggles here and there, and some good shooting scenes. Overall we would agree that the game deserves somewhere between 65% and 70% as a score, as it matches up with that range of other fair shooters of late. Some reviewers do not appear to know what objectiveness is though. No, they take this opportunity to attract hits on their petty sites. (Duke Nukem Forever, PC, PS3, Xbox 360)

« 1 2 »
Kon  +   1220d ago
Wow, people are still trying to deny that this game sucks? I finished it today, and so far this is the worst game of 2011 imo.
Rageanitus  +   1220d ago
Just like how ppl were in denial that ODST SUCKED hard...

DNF is pretty bad but still it does have some pros to it... as it is not as good as iit is not as cinematic as the modern games... but I do admit It actually keeps my attention span of playing the game 30+ minutes per each gaming session.

I remember going through ODST and after playing 10-15 minutes playing each session I had to put the controller down or I was hoping for the next check point. I was playing the game game just for the sake of finishing it.
#1.1 (Edited 1220d ago ) | Agree(41) | Disagree(34) | Report | Reply
MerkinMax  +   1220d ago
Why did ODST get brought into this?
BrianG  +   1220d ago
@sltPoison, I think he did that for comparative sake.

@Rageanitus, I'm sure the game has it's positives, most games do. And the review sites are just getting worse for the most part. Who was it that gave this game a 0/10? Seriously? A 0, was the game not included?

Deducting points just because they can has become some what of the norm at some sites, not all, who review games. I swear some just wait a few weeks just to put out the lowest score review to be the worst review on Meta or GameRankings.
#1.1.2 (Edited 1220d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(3) | Report
omi25p  +   1220d ago
i actually enjoyed ODST and im not a halo fan.
LOGICWINS  +   1220d ago
"Just like how ppl were in denial that ODST SUCKED hard... "

So ODST sucked because YOU say so? I know several people who enjoyed it. I didn't, but I know others did.
SilentNegotiator  +   1220d ago
ODST didn't really "suck", it was just a massive rip-off and punch below the belt for Halo 3 gamers who already had all of the MP content.

But seriously, get over it Duke fanboys; DNF sucks. The humor is flat (the supposed epicenter of Duke; his non-existent parody and worse than ever one-liners), the gameplay is boring, the level design is atrocious, it's not polished, and the MP is tacked on worse than a brick being held to a wall with sticky-tack.
Kran  +   1220d ago
When making a game, you got to try and make it a great game, not one of the worst games out there.
RedDead  +   1219d ago
I enjoyed ODST quite a bit, rented, well worth a rent.
gamingdroid  +   1219d ago
I enjoyed Halo: ODST too, so I'm not sure what Rageanitus is trying to imply. It surely isn't of the same quality as Halo: Reach, but it was a well respected entry in the franchise.
Shinuz  +   1219d ago
I actually though that ODST was a lot better than Halo 3, now that game was way overrated and dare i say almost boring.
Brewski007  +   1219d ago
Shut up about ODST , Its completely off topic. Who cares, move on.

I rented DNF, and that's what i'd recommend to anyone who wants to play this game but isnt too compelled to now, since its got horrid reviews. I wouldnt buy this game over what else is out there on the market, but for nostlagia sake I found it was appealing to rent and hear that voice again.
EVILDEAD360  +   1219d ago
ODST one of the best campaigns in Halo history..
LMAO @ fan kids still mad trying to bash ODST two years later. The game was for Halo FANS and we loved it.

If campaign and firefight would've had matchmaking like Reach does we'd all still be playing it

Evil
MaxXAttaxX  +   1219d ago
Wow this topic is filled with double standards!
LOL
SilentNegotiator  +   1219d ago
"ODST one of the best campaigns in Halo history"

Go play Halo 1 and 2. Seriously, I don't believe that you've played them if you really believe that.
avengers1978  +   1220d ago
Can't we just admit that this is the worst game to come out in some time. I mean even the developers have apologized for the game. No review not one, even the first ones have said that the game is anygood.
mrsatan  +   1220d ago
We can't admit it because it isn't true. I can list many other games much more terrible than this.
MmaFan-Qc  +   1219d ago
"Duke Nukem Forever exposes crap reviewers"
....indeed, "reviewers" who gave this POS a good scores are clearly crap reviewers.
Shinuz  +   1219d ago
Well for me Crysis2 is a bigger letdown than DNF.
nopunctuation  +   1220d ago
Beat me to it. I guess the denial will wear off after a few weeks. I remember buying Unreal Tournament 3 for ps3 and I had a hard time accepting that the game was utter garbage but I had paid 60 bucks for it so I had to get something out of it. Later I was able to shake off the denial and sell the game. Duke Nukem was dead from the start. The developers killed the game multiple times during its 14 year development and now we are left with a corpse with life support jammed in it. Supporting this game would just mean supporting overly long devopment times with piss por releases that a competent developer could have made in a year or two. Dont do this. We are starting to get ahead in the gaming world and games like this threaten to pull us back down.
BiggCMan  +   1220d ago
I thought Unreal Tournament 3 was fantastic by the way. Is that a bad thing?? XD
Pacman321  +   1220d ago
Couldn't agree more, unreal tournament 3 was the biggest disappointment and i kept trying to convince myself that it was a good game, but i couldn't.
Adam2101  +   1220d ago
One of the worst in a while and not just in 2011, but you cant give it a 0.

Reviewers are dumb nowadays, give anybody 10 and then in a year they say does it deserve a 10?

And they aren't very serious about reviews, they get all hyped then give a 10 to a game and never mentioned it again.

example is bulletstorm, gamesradar gave it a 10.and now we hear nothing about the game, its fun but not a 10. they fooled themself by the hype.
the_kutaragi_baka  +   1220d ago
Sad thing this garbage game will sell well, whereas better games won't... sad this really!!
fourthpersonview  +   1220d ago
People are entitled to their opinions. If they think Duke Nukem Forever sucks, don't bash them because they voiced out their opinions.
djhsecondnature  +   1219d ago
A review is not/should not be an opinion.
Bimkoblerutso  +   1219d ago
That is the definition of a review. That's what it is. You can get previews, interviews, screenshots and videos before these games are released if you are fundamentally opposed to reading an editors subjective review of the game.

Just for the record, I disagree with some of the scores these editors have been giving the game too, but to try and bring "objectivity" into the definition of a review is ridiculous. It's a critique, and therefore it is subject to editor bias just as any other opinion is going to be. Again though, if you are fundamentally against reading the opinions of others (as opposed to simply respectfully disagreeing with them) then I have very good news for you....you don't have to read it.
ash_divine  +   1219d ago
Actually, djhsecondnature is right. A review is/should be an intelligent examination of all important aspects of a game.(and wether or not those aspects make up a quality experience).

Not just someone's opinion.
spec_ops_comm  +   1219d ago
Well said Bimko.

The author of this article is more of a joke than any of the reviews he has 'analyzed' himself.

This is like asking people what their favourite ice cream is. Since I like strawberry ice cream best, it is therefore the only acceptable answer. If you do not like strawberry ice cream, you're opinion will never be taken into account again.

N4G is becoming the shithole of gaming journalism (quite the feat) because articles like this keep getting approved.
Kakihara  +   1219d ago
@Bimkoblerutso

So are you telling me you wouldn't have any problems if all the major review sites reviewed Uncharted 2, giving it a 3/10 and saying things like, 'I hate third person shooters, they all suck so this game sucks too' and 'This game starts on a train and features a character with a moustache so it's no good'??

Of course everyone's viewpoint on everything is subjective ultimately but a reviewer really should try to get over their subjective biases to some extent in order to better inform people who may not share those biases whether or not the game is likely to be a worthwhile purchase.
ginganinja  +   1219d ago
@Kakihara
If i read such a review for UC3, i'd question the sense in giving that editor the review to start with - especially if it was from a 'major' site.
If that was the authors honest opinion about it, then there's nothing wrong with the validity of the review itself.
fourthpersonview  +   1218d ago
I think I was misunderstood. lol

I'm talking about the article writer, that he shouldn't bash other people for their opinions.

Anyway, I think that reviews are subjective. You can point out the technical stuff but in the end it comes down to you, whether you like the game or not(opinions)
#2.1.6 (Edited 1218d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
Merivigian  +   1220d ago
I actually like this game, I haven't had fun like this in a long time, it really reminds me of Xbox gaming. I went into it not knowing a thing about Duke Nukem, never played any of the stuff, nothing. Perhaps that's the best way to go in - without expectations. I've only made it to "The Lady Killer Pt. 2", yet I've had more amusement from this than LA Noire.

Related video
Prototype  +   1219d ago
Outside the xbox gaming I agree, its a nice break from the traditional "serious" storyline and puts fun back on the map at some places. The 90's references were the biggest thing - finally someone who pokes fun at things people thought were hits back then.

My only real complaint so far (I'm at the middle of the game) is the lack of lesbian sex/jokes (I know there's some but I expected way more especially with Gearbox involved).
Merivigian  +   1219d ago
Haha, by Xbox gaming I meant (and you have to agree on some bit) that there were more games back then that didn't take themselves seriously. I love DNF because it knows it's a joke, it's not a try hard game.
MintBerryCrunch  +   1220d ago
haters gonna hate
bwazy  +   1220d ago
Obvious statement is obvious.
Spenok  +   1219d ago
Typical responce is typical?
NYC_Gamer  +   1220d ago
cant expect everyone to like a game because you do
bwazy  +   1220d ago
Exactly. Its like how I think NYC is the biggest cestpool in the world. It all comes down to personal opinions.
Red_Phoenix  +   1220d ago
I believe that it's the developers own fault. I am not saying that it's a awful game, like the reviews claim. After looking through all the extras the game had to offer, such as the time line and the e3 videos from 90s to now, I see that the developers could not make up their mind on the final build. They went through multiple engines and multiple directions on how the game should be. I understand that they were only trying to do it for the best, but the developers have to learn to pick one path and follow it.
ijkabob  +   1220d ago
Wow. Yes there opinion is wrong, good article.

I hated uncharted 2. Would have given it a 6/10. It got 10/10. I Loved MAG. Would have given it a 10/10. It got 7/10. Point being it's an opinion. This article is garbage.
omi25p  +   1220d ago
What did you hate about uncharted?? (not being a fanboy, im just curious)
ijkabob  +   1220d ago
All the climbing sequences. Just so much... I remember after i beat the game I went back to just mess around on some levels and there were like 2 or 3 parts where there was actual shooting. The rest was that incredably boring, skilless parkour where you just mashed x in the direction to go. I just didn't like it.

I get the feeling i'm gonna lose bubbles for this post...
aPerson  +   1220d ago
Wait... all you care about in Uncharted is the shooting sequences? Like, seriously???
nopunctuation  +   1220d ago
Uncharted 2 was a good rollercoaster game. That is to say you have a blast the first time but each playthrough loses its appeal. That is the problem GOW III had and its a road games are taking that really reduces their longevity. If we are going to be paying 60 bucks for games then they need to have more than 10 hours of play value behind them. Mini games that comeout on PSN such as Peggle and Super Stardust HD have much more replay value than these 60 dollar disc games do and people should to these kind of games to really extend the value of a game. Stories are great and all but they should really come as an afterthought. If I want a stor, I will watch a 10 dollar movie or read a book but I should have to pay 60 dollars for a 5 hour game.
despair  +   1220d ago
@nopunctuation

Its all a matter of taste, I for one love great stories in games. Look at bayonetta, I liked the combat style and gameplay, but the VO, story and music annoyed me to the point of a literal migraine and I put down the game about half way through and never thought twice of playing it again.

Sure games like peggle and SSHD have a lot of replay value, but thats because they were designed for it, and for pick up and play. I don't want my games to all be pure gameplay with no story of design.

Some games I want for story, some combat, some replayability and the rare one with a good combination of some or all. If all games followed the same formula then gaming would get boring fast. Personally I love Uncharted 2, I beat it through twice for the platinum and played the online for a few months, there's your replay value right there.

I do agree with GOW III though, loved it first time through, but my second run was not nearly as fun as my second play-through on UC2, it one of those play it once for the amazing experience games, still didn't stop me from getting the plat though :)
BrianG  +   1220d ago
Good example, it is an opinion. But some reviewers take their opinions too far.

The review site that gave this game a 0 out of 10. That is just ludicrous, disrespectful, and down right wrong to do to the developer and readers.

If someone is that biased towards a series that they can not do an adequate, semi objective review, someone else on the site should do the review.

Low score reviews are fine, peoples opinions differ, but some low score reviews are unwarranted, and it is easy to tell.
#7.2 (Edited 1220d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
Tachyon_Nova  +   1220d ago
They didnt give it 0, they gave it an F. Meta converted that to a 0
BrianG  +   1219d ago
Tachyon,

Ouch, that's a fail for Meta. An F could be anything between a 0 and 60, slightly different depending on what your used to.
xabmol  +   1220d ago
I disagree strongly with your opinion about Uncharted 2, but I will defend to the death your logic.

I've played 5/10 games that I loved, and 10/10 games that I couldn't bare to finish.
spektical  +   1220d ago
i thought it was an average - below average game at 6-7. Not horrible, not broken... it has many frame drops, textures are very bland.

no memorable moments for me, it was just an average experience at best.
djhsecondnature  +   1219d ago
Average/below average at a 6/7? Come on now. Maths isn't that hard.
shayol33t  +   1219d ago
Just kind of highlights the review structure at the moment. If its not a 9/10 out of ten "OMFG WTF?! EPIC FAIL GAME, REVIEWER IS BIASED!" (works for all consoles). Where as if you like the genre I think a 5/6+ out of ten will make the game enjoyable for you.
Hockeydud19  +   1220d ago
Whoa wait a sec?! IGN isn't on that list. What a surprise for once haha. I think they gave the game a 6 something?
Hockeydud19  +   1220d ago
On the other hand I know not to take that site seriously anymore lol. Some of those sites on that list give some of the fairest review scores around and to say that because of one review they are no longer trustworthy?! BS right there.
kaze1o1  +   1220d ago
The author is saying the reviewers are not trustworthy. Not the actual sites they reviewed for. At least that's the way I read it.
Hockeydud19  +   1220d ago
That's pretty much what I meant. I mean the authors are "the site" pretty much.
T3MPL3TON  +   1220d ago
DNF sucks. It's as simple as that. It's not an opinion it's fact. The game is bad. People need to stop hiding behind the "oh, well that's just their opinion" BS the game sucks!
KMxRetro  +   1219d ago
No, its an opinion. You can't say "I think this. THAT'S A FACT." because it damned well isn't.

Fool.
T3MPL3TON  +   1219d ago
Did I say, "I think the game sucks?"
No.
I said, "THE GAME SUCKS"
That's a fact statement.
Not an expression of opinion.

If I had said, "I think this game is terrible and makes me want to shake babies" then you could say it was my opinion.

I never said any of the following, "I think-My opinion is-This is what I think-I say."

I didn't place myself in it at all. Thus meaning I typed it all as fact.

You know why I typed it all as fact? I'll tell you. Because, DNF sucks ass.

Deal with it, fool.
Arnon  +   1219d ago
So tell me, what sucks about it? Or have you played it?
KMxRetro  +   1218d ago
Yes, but being a complete idiot T3MPL3TON, you wouldn't understand that you can't remove "I think" or "my opinion is" and suddenly turn a personal opinion into fact.

That isn't how it works.

I don't like the game, but it isn't "a fact" that it isn't great.
GiNJAXL  +   1219d ago
You pretty mad their T3mpl3ton, but you're right DNF does suck.

The game took an absurd amount of time to come out and then it did and it plays like a game from 1995. I'm all for the nostalgic feeling but the game just isn't fun at all.
jophus  +   1220d ago
Can we hate Ben Reeves from Game Informer just for fun?
QuodEratDemonstrandm  +   1220d ago
I'm not convinced, probably because I know what a decent argument looks like. Name calling doesn't support your case. It just makes you look like a fool.

And how do you know the low reviews are just trying to get hits? Because they didn't share your opinion? Are you really taking low reviews of this game so personally that you have to write this drivel and call them all liars? Maybe they just have higher standards. Maybe they saw through the toilet humor and strippers to the game itself. Maybe [insert another perfectly valid reason here].
The game got mixed reviews. It happens. Get over it.
Duke must really suck if people are trying to prove that it's "fair." Mediocrity is not something to strive for on the world I'm from.
Jack-Dangerously  +   1220d ago
Sadly the vast majority of people on here can't put together a well spoken, intelligent comment such as that.

Too many rude and immature people on here.

I was hoping(not expecting) that DNF would be good. But mediocrity isn't worth $60. It's worth a bargain bin price for the novelty of it.
v7seven  +   1220d ago
Exactly. Ironically it seems more likely that this "journalist" is trying to get more hits by bashing more well known sites. He basically gave it an arbitrary score around the "middle" of the grading scale and decided that anyone who believed the game to not be within that margin is "biased".

Discrediting others does not make you more credible, nor do bar graphs. The problem with this "unbiased" article is that its pseudo-science is reliant completely on the subjective opinion that Duke Nukem is an" average" game.
hazelamy  +   1220d ago
"Some reviewers do not appear to know what objectiveness is though. No, they take this opportunity to attract hits on their petty sites"

ironic much?

he seems to be under the misconception that his opinion = fact.
everybody who agrees with him is right and everybody else is wrong?

and should we trust anything from a site that hosts a guide and tools for hacking xbox games?

fuck you mrmouse.
rdgneoz3  +   1220d ago
"and should we trust anything from a site that hosts a guide and tools for hacking xbox games?"

Your "ironic much" comment works pretty well here when you consider articles getting put on N4G publicizing all the exploits of hackers, giving them the fame they want, as well linking to sites on the latest hacks or work arounds for software updates for systems.

Also, you can't say that some sites don't put up certain ratings just to get hits (low balling games or giving high scores just because of hype). Vanquish getting a 50 from Destructiod, inFamous a 60 from Edge, Portal 2 a 70, LBP a 75, etc (from metacritic).

Or all the reviewers that gave GTA 4 10s across the board because of hype. While its a great game that I loved to play, it is not a 10/10 game. Or FO: New Vegas. Loved that as well, but so many bugs. Hell, I couldn't play it for a while because of a bug where the game would freeze whenever I went near Mr. Vegas' casino. I could go anywhere else in the game, but if I went near the entrance to that section of the strip, the game would freeze the system and I'd have to turn it off an on.

Overall, your quote of him is pretty true. Some reviewers give games a pass and ignore the little faults, while ripping others to shreds. And some reviewers just give inflated or crap scores to get hits for their sites.
Darkfiber  +   1220d ago
Yes, it's the reviewers' fault that this game sucks.
bobrea  +   1220d ago
Why is it so hard to believe that this game just sucks?
jophus  +   1220d ago
It's less that and hard for some to swallow that other people can and will disagree with them.

Personally I'm having a blast with the game.
nolifeking  +   1219d ago
Couldn't that mean you enjoy a poorly made game? I never understood how people think them enjoying something makes it good.
Bolts  +   1220d ago
Because its Duke Nukem I guess. Hating Duke is like hating mom, apple pie and the American Flag. It's too epic to fail in the eye of the devs and all the reviewers are just haters who can't handle Duke's awesomeness.
mobijoker  +   1220d ago
Nice take and statistical view on matter.I think a list of sites should be made for different platforms which can show which one is biased or not.
Plus methodolgy for console and pc games rating is not uniform.Consoles games get a free pass on graphics side as they are almost at the limit.On the pc 95% games get penalties for graphics as the limit is virtually infinite.DNF is a mess,no doubt but is it a broken or does it deserve F grade?Hell no.Some reviewers mindlessly give away 10s and 0s which makes them look idiotic when a real good game arrives.I wonder what'll happen to GTA5 if it turns out better than GTA4.Then how will you place it above in the meta score to justify its superiority?
ion666  +   1220d ago
Is it ironic or just me. But the acronymn is dnf, duke nuke`em forever or did not finish?. lmao.
armycore  +   1220d ago
So wait, let me get this straight. This site says "Overall we would agree that the game deserves somewhere between 65% and 70% as a score, as it matches up with that range of other fair shooters of late." and then shows sites that scored it less than 60-70% as crap reviewers. ISN'T THE BIG ISSUE HAPPENING TODAY WITH GAMERS IS HOW NO ONE GOES BELOW 70% ON GAME REVIEWS?! How can anyone not criticize this article for it's utter BS?
Deadman_Senji  +   1220d ago
Xentax has the nerve to call other sites "petty" and looking for hits.

I've never even heard of Xentax. Probably some retarded /v/ kids who just can't let go of the "ALWAYS BET ON DUKE" meme.

The game isn't that good, you waited over 10 years for nothing. How does that make you feel?
mattiebo123  +   1220d ago
This is ridiculous.

A review score is built up from opinion, not fact, and so to say that the game deserves around 80% is absolute crap. In fact, that's the writer's opinion.

There is no standard score that a review should feature, because different scores come from people of different backgrounds. A reader will pick a background that suits them and read a review that suits them too.

For example, a 30 year old man who loved the Duke Nukem games isn't going to give a toss about a review written by an 18 year old guy who has never played a game in the series.
#22 (Edited 1220d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
TheStonedSheep  +   1220d ago
I get the feeling that this post was entirely satire, just because of a) the hyperbolic language which I find it hard to believe would come from someone speaking seriously and b) the sheer stupidity of the reasoning.

I mean, at least I hope that it is satire . . .
KMxRetro  +   1219d ago
It really isn't though, is it?
paladinaz  +   1219d ago
Math:

If we exclude "crap" reviewers from average score, we will get higher average score and all "good" reviews will have to be also marked as "crap".

Fact: Article is written by a retard.
#24 (Edited 1219d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Soldierone  +   1219d ago
I could understand the logic if it were a very few crap reviews pulling the score down. Perhaps a few sites here and there, maybe a couple no name sites whatever...

However they listed a bunch and its pretty much every known name site there is that gave it a bad review. Like the game or not, EVERY named site gave the game a bad review. If that doesn't trigger something I don't know what will.
Soldierone  +   1219d ago
I rented it from Redbox and already beat it in less than two days, with about 2 to 3 hours per day playing time.

I all i have to say is its basically Duke Nukem in 3d with no improvements, and major set backs. The game is funny when it wants to be funny, the entire opening was pretty funny. Then the story of the girls getting stolen gets kicked in and it keeps recycling the same jokes over and over, dont even really get to see women anywhere or strippers that turn into aliens...And why are ALL the enemies pretty much pigs? That was only for cops in 3D, they had a crap ton of different aliens in Duke 3D...

Ill stop complaining there...Thanks Gearbox for hardly trying at all to bring Duke Back. Kinda sad Bulletstorm not only stole your Duke Nukem ego, but showed you how to correctly use the Unreal Engine. (If you want to see how much quality is in the visuals and gameplay, watch the monster truck jump into a giant thing of water....most amazing water effects ever! /s)
Torasko  +   1219d ago
So I've been called a crap reviewer by this 'Mr. Mouse'. Some of the text is bold, so it must be true. :)
QuodEratDemonstrandm  +   1219d ago
And he's got bar graphs. We all know that bar graphs automatically make people right.
rob_gamestribe  +   1219d ago
What a pathetic article. It beggars belief how many people are incapable of comprehending the fact that other people may not always think the same as you do. Exactly what scientific method have you applied to Duke Nukem Forever to come to the conclusion that it should score between 65 - 70%? And then to label a list of established games writers as 'crap' simply because they have an opinion that differs from yours is puerile beyond belief. Grow up - it's people like you, Toasty, that give gamers a bad rep.
Jacobite  +   1219d ago
Opinions are like A$$holes everyone has one,and some A$$holes drop crap more than others, so who should care about DNF scores, if you like it "good" if you don't "thats fine".
palaeomerus  +   1219d ago
I don't think a bimodal historgram of the distribution of review scores shows ANYTHING.
R834  +   1219d ago
This is a stupid article. You can't call people crap reviewers just because they didn't rate the game according to your opinion.

If everyone scored games exactly the same there'd be no point in reviews at all.

Just look around the N4G comments and you'll see that some people despise DNF and some people love it - everyone's going to have a different opinion.

While I have no opinion on Duke Nukem as I haven't played it, it annoys me that people complain about review scores. I often write reviews for my site and *a lot* of work goes in to them, so it's very annoying to see people instantly complain that I've rated the game too high/low having only seen the score.
RGD  +   1219d ago
This is one of the most offensive and outrageous articles i have ever seen, calling out the integrity of gaming journalists just because this author feels that Duke Nukem is a better game than they do? This 'Mr.Mouse' is a disgrace to the gaming industry right now.
« 1 2 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember
New stories

Enterchained Review - Slimgamer

9m ago - Gladiator games have generally done pretty well on Android, but aren’t too many great ones out th... | Android
20°

The Walking Dead: Season Two is Now Available for Xbox One

16m ago - The sequel to 2012’s Game of the Year continues the story of Clementine, a young girl orphaned by... | Xbox One
20°

EGX 2014: Lords of the Fallen Preview - VGU

16m ago - At EGX 2014, Dom was able to get his hands on the new title from Square Enix, Lords of the Fallen... | PS4
10°

Super Smash Bros. 3DS Review | Awesome Games

21m ago - Rhys from Awesome Games writes: 'It’s that time again. A time where legendary icons square off ag... | 3DS
Ad

Get a Free Kindle Fire HD!

Now - Check out details here! | Promoted post
20°

Fantasia: Music Evolved review - gamesradar

22m ago - "Inspired by 1930s production notes for the original Fantasia, Music Evolved is billed as a direc... | Xbox 360