Whats up with videogame reviews?

[Alex]

So, im reading game informer, who i usualy feel are pretty honest, and i come to two pages, halo 3 on the left, mass effect on the right.
They both got 9.75, almost perfect scores, but in the text of the review, i noticed something.
Mass Effect is sucked off hardcore, they stop right before saying it's the most important game ever made.
Halo 3, they point out the graphics aren't really better then halo 2, the gameplay hasn't changed much, the campaign is boring, and pretty much the only good thing is multiplayer.
So...why is it getting the same score when they talk down about it so much?

[StreetFighterRyu]

I think sometimes they just rate and commet. Like Amazon.com. I've seen games with poor ratings and really good comments and vice versa. So really, is just that funny.

And btw Halo 3 has better graphics. I don't know what they're talking about. And I was playing it on a reagular TV. Not HD. And it still looks that good. On HD it looked more detailed. So again, it's graphics is better than Halo 2.

[Sanagi]

They only put the numbers there to make people argue about them on the internet.

[Serik]

Videogame "journalism" is a crock. Far too many games receive 8+/10, thereby diminishing the relevance of reviews. Halo doesn't deserve an almost perfect score; it's a competent but resoundingly unoriginal and uninspired shooter. It deserves a 7, which isn't a bad score if reviewers opened up the 10 scale instead of clustering everything around 8, 9, and 10.

Also keep in mind that many videogame publications can't afford to piss off game companies. If the game publishers stop buying ads, who're you gonna get to take up the space instead?

[Thorlief]

that's why I made myself a list with a two different categories: Reviewers who sometimes can be trusted and Reviewers I don't give a Rat's arse about

[Karl H]

Magazines are dependent upon exclusive content to up their sales, be it screenshots, early review copies whatever. Now if you're promoting a game, are you gonna give it to a magazine that writes favourable reviews which you can then use in your own promotion or someone who tells it like it is?

It's that simple.

[Jabuka]

So, im reading game informer, who i usualy feel are pretty honest, and i come to two pages, halo 3 on the left, mass effect on the right.
They both got 9.75, almost perfect scores, but in the text of the review, i noticed something.
Mass Effect is sucked off hardcore, they stop right before saying it's the most important game ever made.
Halo 3, they point out the graphics aren't really better then halo 2, the gameplay hasn't changed much, the campaign is boring, and pretty much the only good thing is multiplayer.
So...why is it getting the same score when they talk down about it so much?

And then Halo3 got the game of the months which to me made it more confusing

[Black Atom]

I don't even bother with any reviewer with a rating system that goes past 5. Honestly, a 9.75 rating seems so stupidly arbitrary, that it's a waste of anyone's time. Jesus, this isn't Cannes. There's only 3 things you need to consider when reviewing a game: Avoid, rent or buy.

[EmeraldOutlaw]

that's why I made myself a list with a two different categories: Reviewers who sometimes can be trusted and Reviewers I don't give a Rat's arse about

Same goes for me, man. The list also includes which reviewers I can (to the best of my knowledge) consider impartial. Just seems to make more sense to me to get your reviews from a site like IGN or Gamespot than from, for example, Xbox Magazine or Playstation Magazine. Maybe it's just me.

[Thorlief]

Same goes for me, man. The list also includes which reviewers I can (to the best of my knowledge) consider impartial. Just seems to make more sense to me to get your reviews from a site like IGN or Gamespot than from, for example, Xbox Magazine or Playstation Magazine. Maybe it's just me.

definitely. I'd also like to point out that my list of Truster reviewers is like two names, and the other is as long as the Code of Hammurabi

[Serik]

There's always Metacritic

I also like Yahtzee's "reviews"
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/arti...eropunctuation

[Astonishing X-Fan]

Videogame "journalism" is a crock. Far too many games receive 8+/10, thereby diminishing the relevance of reviews. Halo doesn't deserve an almost perfect score; it's a competent but resoundingly unoriginal and uninspired shooter. It deserves a 7, which isn't a bad score if reviewers opened up the 10 scale instead of clustering everything around 8, 9, and 10.

But that's YOUR opinion. A lot of people, including me and many reviewers, disagree with you, and believe it deserves a high score.

Just because you say it doesn't deserve it doesn't mean the reviewer feels the same way.

[Alex]

And then Halo3 got the game of the months which to me made it more confusing

Heres the real test.
They probably do a year end thing, Bioshock got a perfect score, so, its the perfect game according to them.
Will Halo 3 get the fake award though?

[Alex]

But that's YOUR opinion. A lot of people, including me and many reviewers, disagree with you, and believe it deserves a high score.

Just because you say it doesn't deserve it doesn't mean the reviewer feels the same way.

Thats my thing though.
The text of the review says 7, the score says 9.75.

[Astonishing X-Fan]

Heres the real test.
They probably do a year end thing, Bioshock got a perfect score, so, its the perfect game according to them.
Will Halo 3 get the fake award though?

The don't base year-end rewards around one reviewer, I doubt it. Most likely it's the collective opinion of everyone relevant on the staff. It's usually not the exact same reviewer doing EVERY review.