Don't trust the Reviews ( Writing competition )

[Deleted member 377734]

So that new game just came out, what's the first thing you do ? Run to the store and buy it, of course...or, if you have a brain in your head, watch a review by a big, over-paid site like IGN or Gamespot and see if said game is worth buying.......and , chances are, you're probably making a mistake. why ?

They screw up.
​

Those reviewing sites aren't perfect, far from it, in fact. they constantly make mistakes, leave out important details and add in false information, for instance, Disgaea 5's non-rotating camera, FF-Type 0's "confusing" story and many more. If a game you want is reviewed by a site and they make a bunch of mistakes in their review, who points it out ? they were the first to play the game, and since no one else has played it yet, you believe what they say, on the simple point, there is no one to prove them WRONG.
I laughed my ass off watching IGN's review of Disgaea 5, One minute he brags he could teach a master class on Disgaea, the next he states you cant rotate the camera ( something that each Disgaea game does by pressing the shoulder buttons ) and that is just one of the many blunders reviewers make.

They can either undersell or over-inflate a game.
Yet another thing I've noticed is that a lot of good games with terrible score, eg: Growlanser, God eater, Toukiden. were approached by reviewers with the completely wrong attitude, for instance, instead of looking at a game as its own unique experience, they see it as a clone of say, GOW or Monster Hunter, or some other prominent game, then compare it to the game they thinks it's a clone of, and see how it will do better than those games, and not as it's own unique game. this can greatly damage a game's score, by being stated as a type of game which it isn't.

On the other hand, they let their own personal preferences into their review, giving a game much higher marks than it deserves because it has a few feature they like, and turning a blind eye to it's faults.
I've also noticed that some don't fully play a game before rating it, For instance I read a review on an old PSP game called White Knight Chronicles : Origins, after which I was convinced the reviewer had played the game for all of 5 minutes before reviewing it.

They ignore games
Another reason I don't like reviewing sites is the fact that they go straight for games they like and will ignore many other games, gems that could be enjoyed by many people if they took the time to review them. big series like Mortal Kombat, Street Fighter, Mario. Pokemon and Zelda have a review as soon as the game hits the shelves, But where is BlazBlue, Meadow and many other games ? sinking into obscurity because nobody knows about them.

So, to end this article, I say, if you want to fully experience gaming, don't rely on reviews, try the game for yourself and judge what you find. I do it that way, and I've found hours upon hours of enjoyment I would have passed over otherwise, not even knowing what I was missing.​

 

[Taleweaver]

Hmm...I gotta say I don't really consider this an article. When writing an article, it's important to (at least attempt to) remain objective and look at things from different angles. You don't do this: you have one point to make, give three arguments for that opinion and don't nuance or even assume different stances on the subject. This is a pity, really.

For one: experiencing a game is a feeling, and therefore by definition something personal. It's not because reviewer A gives a game a high score and reviewer B a low one that either (or both) are wrong. You can't force someone to like a game, and when writing a review this end opinion absolutely has to weigh in on the result (which is obvious, as the opposite "I absolutely hate this game because it's a JRPG, but since it's good by JRPG standards I'll give it an 8/10" is way worse).
You make the mistake of assuming that all reviews are equal. They aren't. Reviewing sites and even individual reviewers have their specialties and audiences. As a gamer, it's key to learn what those are before you can judge this. Ideally, you want to know the preferences and style of the reviewer first and THEN check out reviews for games you might be interested in (heck...I'd even say it's a good idea to watch or read reviews on games that you have played, just to know whether you're on the right site to get info you want).

Do reviewers screw up? Of course. Some more than others, and some take more time with a game than others (also obvious: professional reviewers usually face a deadline straight from the start). Some may be personal screw ups, others may be because the game malfunctioned (reviewers usually play around launch time, and can be among the first to test out a game in the wild). What I want to know is why you continue watching/reading reviews from sources that apparently make multiple errors, yet draw the conclusion for ALL the reviewers.

Finally: do reviewers ignore games? This is hardly an argument, as it's simply put IMPOSSIBLE to review everything (let alone correctly). Games are made and released on such a huge scale that even attempting to keep up ends up failing (and I'm not even counting sometimes critical game updates or DLC, which further continue to make reviewing everythig impossible).

 

[Chary]

To refute some of these arguments, just to come from the other side of things, like Taleweaver did, let's go through your talking points.

1. You state that they make many mistakes, yet you only cited one. (Disgaea) More evidence would be nice. Yeah, reviewers aren't going to know every minute detail of the game, even after playing it, and usually, reviewers don't get guides for what they're reviewing either, (only time I recall getting a guide was for Broken Age and Dishonored 2) so sometimes, just like regular players, they manage to go through a game without noticing a major feature. It's not the end of the world, but it should push the writer to try to understand the game to the best of their ability. And, if an error is pointed out, a correction should be issued asap.

2. Everyone has preferences. A perfectly objective review does not exist. The goal is to strive to be as objective as possible. Comparisons give the reader a frame of reference for what type of genre the game is. The goal to get games out minutes after embargo is tough. Personally, I've beaten every game I've reviewed besides Star Ocean 5, which I still got fairly far into. Just, sometimes in the rush of trying to get the most clicks for your review, some publications wind up only playing a fraction of the game. Some sites desginate people to genres they're more well versed in. I'm more likely to get an RPG or open world game than I am a Football or puzzles.

3. Because non-AAA games aren't usually worth the time, to be honest. The amount of views from something like Blazblue just can't compare to Street Fighter, and in the mess of codes and review copies, other games get ignored. There's too much, and too few people to handle it. (Which is a shame, cuz Aksys Games' PR is really kind.)

I'd like to see a sequel-article one day, addressing the other side, and more talking points. (Side note: GBAtemp doesn't fall into the same traps that larger sites do, so we're better by default )

 

[spotanjo3]

Of course, I never trust the reviews. I judge the games on my own and my point of view only.