This year, I played a game called 3D Dot Game Heroes on my PS3. If you were to believe reviews, it is a game probably not worth playing. Gamespot and Destructoid gave it a 75/100. 1Up gave it a 67/100, and Eurogamer, Edge, and Giant Bomb all gave it a 60/100.
However, I played 3D Dot Game Heroes and loved every minute of it. Not once did I lose interest. To me, it's a great game. But the reviews would say that I should have been disappointed by it.
Later this year, I played a game called Call of Duty: Black Ops. The single-player suffered from a few glitches, but it was the multiplayer that was downright broken. I first played it on the PS3 on loan from a buddy, and then - to see if it was just the PS3 version - I also played it on my neighbor's 360. Both versions were a mess, and I can't imagine how broken it is on the PC.
Yet, this game received a great deal of 9/10 and 10/10 scores, leading readers to believe that this game is excellent and should be played by everyone.
Nowadays, reviews are less about informing the reader and more about getting hits and advertising dollars. As "journalists", those who write video game reviews are obligated to inform their readers about game-breaking glitches, graphical problems, bad gameplay mechanics, and so forth. It's beyond me how 75% of the glitches in video games never seem to get mentioned, as it's beyond me how in the world a broken game like Fallout: New Vegas ever managed to get scores above a 5/10. And then, we have reviews that are poorly researched or even state false information (Gran Turismo 5 reviews are a fantastic recent example).
The inconsistency of reviews makes it even worse. I'll use IGN as an example, since they're so popular around here: their reviews of The Fight and Tumble would make you believe that those games aren't even playable. However, having played both of these games, I am confused. Neither of these games are broken. Not even close. It's their opinion, though, and I suppose they didn't like those games. Oh, but wait. This same "opinion" that dislikes inaccurate controls, lack of content, bad menu organization, and whatnot apparently vanished when it came time to review Kinect's games like Kinectimals, Joy Ride, and Kinect Adventures. These Kinect games suffered from many of the exact same problems the IGN reviewers claimed The Fight and Tumble suffered from, and yet these games get a pass. This has also happened with multiplatform reviews, when in one case, there will be big differences between two multiplatform games (Final Fantasy 13) yet the scores will be the same, but in another case there will be slight differences and the reviewers feel the need to mark one version or another version down a few points. Huh? How can we take reviewers seriously when they pull stunts like that? And when IGN is advertised on Xbox Live dashboard and belongs to Gamestop, it gets even harder to take their views as objective.
But it all goes back to 3D Dot Game Heroes and how listening to review scores could have robbed me of playing one of my favorite games of the year. I'm sure many of you have similar experiences with video game reviews. As gamers, we've been idiots by siding with various reviewers in "teh console warz" and using their arbitrary and useless numbers as our ammunition. Instead, we should be telling "professional" reviewers to shut the hell up and let us gamers enjoy our games. Sure, if reviewers actually reviewed games and gave us important information such as...
- any game-breaking glitches?
- is the online mode smooth?
- roughly how many hours of content is there?
- are the controls sloppy?
...we'd be inclined to lighten up. But reviews are covering these topics less and less.
"Professional" reviewers need to wake up and do their job. Yeah, I know that's really tough to do when Konami is flying you to a private playing of Metal Gear Solid 4 or when Microsoft is handing you free video game consoles, but if reviewers want gamers to take them seriously, then reviewers need to start taking their job seriously.
Stunlock confirmed to Wccftech PC-PS5 crossplay for V Rising is 'pretty unlikely'. They also commented on potential ports to other consoles.
The cover art for Ubisoft's Assassin's Creed Shadows has been leaked online, and it confirms that the game will feature dual protagonists.
The samurai dude is black....because of course he is. Because that makes total f***ing sense. I honestly wouldn't expect anything less from Ubisoft.
Yasuke, he was a samurai who served under Nobunaga and was in fact black. However that is where his foot note in history begins and ends as he seemingly did nothing of note throughout his service.
There are far better general's they could have focused on who had major moments in history... But nope.
EDIT: I do want to add though, that since there is nothing of note from him in history, it does open up what you can do from a fictional writing stand point.
@Hofstaderman Would be interesting if that armor actually slowed you down during stealth gameplay.
You are such a dumb ass racist, I honestly wouldn't expect anything less from you either.
Gaming has given birth to some of the best DLCs ever made that enhance the base game significantly. Here are a few top recommendations.
"However, I played 3D Dot Game Heroes and loved every minute of it. Not once did I lose interest. To me, it's a great game. But the reviews would say that I should have been disappointed by it."
...No they didn't.
It sits at a respectable 77 on Metacritic with mostly positive reviews.
Other peoples opinions that you do not agree with = "killing gaming"?
If 3D Dot Game Heroes received nothing but 9's and 10's I doubt you would be writing a blog complaining about it's high scores. The game received most of those scores because <gasps!> it deserved them.
Stick to writing exclusive game lists, petitions and creating EDGE conspiracy blogs on blogspot, PS3 fanboy pls go.
I think the bigger problem nowadays is that any game that receives any score (be it a sole-review or an aggregate score like on Metacritic) below 80 it's pretty much shit in their eyes, which is just a pathetic case of events for gaming, reviewers and websites alike. Apart from the odd website with real reviewers that don't have a score system that only contains 9/10 out of 10 for 90 out of 100 games like most sites these days (I'm looking at you IGN) unless you read reviews from a certain reviewer which you know or have a similar understanding of then realistically reviews aren't a great source anymore for deciding whether to buy or not to buy a game.
The most I use reviews for is to see common traits in various ones to see if what they're saying is actually true (i.e. for example good storytelling, poor enemy/opponent AI, things like that), but nothing more.
Reviews are opinions, just because YOU liked 3D-Dot hero doesn't mean others will.
It is unfortunate but true that the larger sites that people consider to be the all of the in the know when it comes to doing reviews when it isn't the case. There are so many good games out there that don't get good reviews, why? Those that are writing the reviews are simply not being balanced or fair or simply don't care about the title.
Websites like that of IGN are big corporate owned websites that are selling a product as well and they will do what they will in part that they have a big name and are the big website vs. the no name sites which give good honest reviews and insight into what the game will be like only to be overshadowed in part that they aren't a big corporately owned news site.
Yes, iam one of several partners in one of those no name sites, however the games in which we can and do review we try our best in doing reviews that the player will use in there determination. We don't get kickbacks, we do it in part that we like the different dynamics of what is what in the gaming industry.
Though in the end, it could be about being ethical in your review of the game you are doing a review on.