Somehow or other, it seems that the game that i'm always interested on is somehow bashed by the critics, it is not the kind of game like "Superman 64" or "Sonic 2006" which are widely considered among the worst games ever made, no, it seems that reviews have more against "niche" titles, what do i mean by that?, well, essentially nippon games that breaks the mark of something "normal" to add something new in the formula.
This is notorious for me with the Neptunia games and the Senran Kagura series, the whole community of those games love them, they are very solid titles, one is a series where the protagonists are personified consoles fighting against the evil "CFW", ridiculous yet funny, and charming at the same time, the other series was created to make tits using the 3DS capabilities while adding gameplay, story and characters, and it was very well done, both series have excellent soundtrack, colorful personalities for each character and yet, critics seem to hate these series?, no score is higher than a 50 or 60 in Metacritics (never trusted them though).
And well, after the scandal of the "7.8/10 for ORAS and 5/10 for Pokemon Explorers of Sky, but we will give 9.1/10 to COD Advanced Warfare" of IGN, people seemed to realize how little trust-worthy game reviews have become, specially those from IGN, Metacritic, or even Famitsu if we want to get in other parts.
Is normal that anyone who wants to ensure that the game they wanna spend cash is at the very least good or playable, they need to read about the game somewhere to explain by the point of view of a reviewer how the game works, how it plays, etc. this is further encouraged by buyers due to the lack of demos or good demos that actually shows how the game goes instead of "5 minutes, that's it, no return".
I do think that these review sites (specially the famous ones) works with "paid advancement", ie the site is paid by the company who made the game in order to guarantee a good note and attract more potential buyers, so those games that are not very well known receive random scores up their butts, either a ridiculously good note (rare cases) or a very bad score where the reviewer focus on something that appeared in only the 2% of the total game, or they exacerbate problems that are not exactly problems since they are an integral part of the game (Like the too much water, or tits in SK).
This is one of the things that i'm most grateful with piracy, regardless of your stance with pirate acts, having the possibility of playing a game and see how it goes, how it plays, and if you like it, you can buy it in the future without any problem gives you a far better opinion of a game you might not have played only because a random reviewer on Internet said that the game wasn't worthy, where in your stance, it could actually be a jewel.
This is notorious for me with the Neptunia games and the Senran Kagura series, the whole community of those games love them, they are very solid titles, one is a series where the protagonists are personified consoles fighting against the evil "CFW", ridiculous yet funny, and charming at the same time, the other series was created to make tits using the 3DS capabilities while adding gameplay, story and characters, and it was very well done, both series have excellent soundtrack, colorful personalities for each character and yet, critics seem to hate these series?, no score is higher than a 50 or 60 in Metacritics (never trusted them though).
And well, after the scandal of the "7.8/10 for ORAS and 5/10 for Pokemon Explorers of Sky, but we will give 9.1/10 to COD Advanced Warfare" of IGN, people seemed to realize how little trust-worthy game reviews have become, specially those from IGN, Metacritic, or even Famitsu if we want to get in other parts.
Is normal that anyone who wants to ensure that the game they wanna spend cash is at the very least good or playable, they need to read about the game somewhere to explain by the point of view of a reviewer how the game works, how it plays, etc. this is further encouraged by buyers due to the lack of demos or good demos that actually shows how the game goes instead of "5 minutes, that's it, no return".
I do think that these review sites (specially the famous ones) works with "paid advancement", ie the site is paid by the company who made the game in order to guarantee a good note and attract more potential buyers, so those games that are not very well known receive random scores up their butts, either a ridiculously good note (rare cases) or a very bad score where the reviewer focus on something that appeared in only the 2% of the total game, or they exacerbate problems that are not exactly problems since they are an integral part of the game (Like the too much water, or tits in SK).
This is one of the things that i'm most grateful with piracy, regardless of your stance with pirate acts, having the possibility of playing a game and see how it goes, how it plays, and if you like it, you can buy it in the future without any problem gives you a far better opinion of a game you might not have played only because a random reviewer on Internet said that the game wasn't worthy, where in your stance, it could actually be a jewel.
