Lately, I have seen more and more bias reviews from websites trying to either get people to go to their website or favoring one console or the other. I and many others are frustrated from these reviews because we all just want to know if the game is good or bad.
So recently, I have been searching through the websites and trying to find the website that is least bias than the others.
One was Gamespot.com. Though they show a little bit more bias for the 360 in terms of scores, they generally give great reasons why or why not to by a game for all the games. They also have user scores and reviews to see if they gave the game the right score.
Another one would be a little known website called classicgameroom.net. For some history, The Game Room was the first site to have video reviews on the internet in 1999. Because it was before DSL, it was impossible to see the videos. Nearly a year later, they went bust. Now, they are back and posting reviews again. Classic Game Room is not bias to any console and focuses more on gameplay then anything else. Though they do not post a score, they give you a ton of information on the gameplay.
If you disagree with me, please post it on the comments below to help everyone including me to find a better website for reviews.
Console Creatures writes, "Raidou Remastered: The Mystery of the Soulless Army is a standout example of what bringing an older title to modern consoles should be."
I want to buy this but I don’t have time right now to play it so I’ll wait a little bit to grab a copy.
Gen Z and Gen Alpha are reshaping gaming with new habits and higher expectations. Here's what the latest research says.
Feels off ive seen a ton of younger kids get more into traditional gaming through the switch.
Mario and even sonic are still huge franchises that kids want to get all the merchandise for and I think more traditional gaming will stay safe.
@ai/obscured
I see your new spamming tactics even using one word it’s easy to spot you idiets comments 🤦🏿 🤣
" game subscriptions as standard" LOL. They like throwing their money away only to complain once a game they play all the time gets removed. They need to be taught on how to torrent, Usenet would probably be too much involved for them.
WTMG's Kyle Nicol: "System Shock 2 is an all-time great, easily one of the most important games of all time, and Nightdive’s 25th Anniversary Remaster edition makes it a touch more accessible without ever gutting its core, or anything that made it so cherished in the first place. The excellent core gameplay and stellar level design come together for an unforgettable experience. Furthermore, the fact it works shockingly well on a controller is already something worthy of a medal of honor for the studio. Now, while we’re at it, where’s that System Shock 3 we were promised all those years ago? I’m hungry for more!"
Am I ironically biased for saying I think most of my own reviews are mostly unbiased? XD
Anyway, when I review stuff at rpgland.com, my point is to convey my opinion of a game based on how it plays, overall. The system, to me, doesn't matter, the series name or developer doesn't matter; it's all about the game in question. We might remove "scores" some day because sometimes all people do is look at a number and not read the text. That's disappointing, because then your site gets labeled as "biased" unfairly by people who don't read WHY a reviewer feels the way he/she does.
So anyway, there's that.
First off, this whole "unbiased review" thing is not even worth it. That's an argument for people who compare scores, not people interested in the game itself. It behooves those truly looking to purchase to read the review and learn to read between the lines.
Remember how some called Killzone 2 "too grey"? Now, I don't like shooters much. And I don't own the game and I don't want to own it. But I know "too grey" isn't something that would put me off purchase. As long as the review presents worthwhile information, even a terrible write up may sway you toward the game if you can pick out the facts.
I've never read a GI review and felt that it contained bias.
You are correct about sites that are a lil fishy. Especially the unknown sites that give a controversial review just to get hits. Halo ODST is a perfect example. All the respected and major sites have given this game a 9 or up while at the bottom of the list is a bunch of weird ass sites I never heard of giving it 7 and under. I just read a site called TheGo giving it a 5. :p
Game Informer are usually spot on with all their reviews. That's all I really pay attention too.
giant bomb isn't bad either. one of the site's founders was fired from his old job because he being honest about a game...