"Passable Story! Decent Gameplay! Shoddy Characters!
~9 out of 10~"
I understand that a lot of gamers these days don't bother with reviews, or they have their own very specific sources for which ones they trust. But still, whenever another lineup of games hits, we're assailed by waves of 7, 8, and 9 out of 10 games. Four stars! 86/100! Sure, the people who are reviewing these games are gamers, too, bound to get something good out of them, but between accusations of "paid reviews" and the more or less constant stream of them, it kinda feels like the ratings lose their weight. Anyone else feel that way?
Perhaps a more helpful question: What reviews/reviewers, if any, do you trust?
I trust Angry Joe or Zero Punctuation for reviews. I used to read Gameinformer a few years ago though. Despite Joe giving a score, his reviews tend to be so thorough that one really isn't necessary. I'd rather get the whole story and read or listen to a long review than get a number.
Yeah, review scores are weird. I tend to just ignore them entirely otherwise I start thinking, "Wait, you said it had great gameplay, a good story, and really great level design. Shouldn't it be 9 or 10, not 7 and a half?" Opinions on video games, books, and movies can't just be summed up in numbers.
I typically don't, actually. I'm a pretty picky gamer, and a lot of my gaming choices are based on past experiences; usually I'll buy the first game in a series used, and if it's good, I stick with it. So I got Borderlands 2, ACIII, and New Vegas because I had played and loved their predecessors. I just commit to them. There's only been one time I recall being truly disappointed by a game I payed full price for, and that was Army of Two: Devil's Cartel.
Right now, it's the approaching release of Star Wars: Battlefront that has me considering reviews and reviewers. Based on what's been released so far, it's not really the Battlefront game I was hoping for, so in this case I think I'll hold off on it until I see how some more prolific gamers find it. Plus, it comes out the week after Fallout 4, and there's no way I'm leaving the Commonwealth to play it!
What I like to do is go to Metacritic, then go to the user review section and then read only the orange (mixed) reviews. They tend to be the most objective.
But in general I don't trust reviews, I've found that the modern day mass taste, including the reviewers', does not match mine much. So I'd rather check the game for myself.
(and of course for us hailing from Tortuga the latter is less of a problem )
I can imagine them being helpful for PC players, certainly. I stumbled across one of their articles on the current build of Star Wars Battlefront, and between the comments and article itself, it rather turned me off to associating with that community. Come to think of it, I've given a lot more weight to reviews here from people like you and Neb than anywhere else on the web.
It could be argued that that's what reviews are for. I mean, it's not really common that they close with "Take my word on it, go buy this game!" but often in scoring the way they do, it's not any clearer what aspects of the games will or won't appeal to you. It's easy to say, "I'm only interested in the shooters," so you don't waste time looking at other genres, but even when you get to the shooters, they're still unhelpfully ambiguous.
For a lot of people these days, it's the dodgy quality of some AAA games coming out that cause them to stop buying on day one. For me, its just as relevant that you can't trust reviews for a good picture; a lot of times you're just way better off trying it yourself with a rental, or borrowing, or the High Seas, a la Overhate.
I know, right? I run a D&D campaign every Sunday, and after each session I give my players post-it-notes to write their reviews of the session; what they liked, disliked, wanted more or less of, etc.
Here's some of my reviews:
And my all time favorite. For context, I'm a larger, bearded guy who wears a style of flat-cap. I'm told I resemble George R.R. Martin when I'm wearing it, so my players have begun calling it my GRRM Hat, and to beware when I'm wearing it.
"FUCK YOU AND THE HAT THAT RODE IN ON YOU.
P.S. [PC Name] LIVES!"
For my players: I like my reviews. They make me laugh.
I check Metacritic as well. Sometimes I'll go to Gamestop for one thing and find a really good deal, like 4 used games for $10, so I'll end up walking around the store reading Metacritic reviews on my phone. And that right there shows exactly what review scores are for - a synopsis of the positives and negatives of a game that let someone decide very quickly whether it's something worth picking up.
That's the only time I'll really put any faith in scored reviews; when the loss I'll suffer for buying a game in minimal. Otherwise, I'll watch an extensive review and look at gameplay.
Reviews can sometimes be very insightful or fun commentaries on a game, but I find that they rarely determine how much I enjoy a game. Reviews are just opinions. I never trust only one or two to justify a purchase. If I'm in the market I'll look at several - not the numbers, but rather what the people have to say.
YOU SAID DIAMOND MERCENARIES 2 SUCKED BUT YOU GAVE IT A SIX OUT OF TEN WHICH IMPLIES IT IS ABOVE AVERAGE!