Take game reviews with a grain of salt

[SleightRocket]

Hey guys, so I was at gamestop the other day when Days Gone was released and watched two people cancel their pre-order just because they saw that it was rated low, and this made me want to discuss game reviews. I want to start with this analogy: imagine you can't taste salt, and a brand of chips were known to be sub-par because they were not salty enough. Would it matter to you? This is similar to profiling games based just off of their reviews, and not really giving it any other thought. Personally, i'm not someone that gets too into characterization in video games, (I do like it, it's just not really make or break for me)  i'm more into the gameplay itself, so reviews stating that the game has poor character development is not much of an issue for me. Days Gone for example is a game i'm having a great time with, despite all the mediocre reviews. The point of this is that next time you see a game that's coming out that you are looking forward to and it gets bad reviews right out the gate, take the time to see specifically what they are knocking, it might still be the game for you!    

[TraumaticChain6]

I only read reviews as amusement and see how broken a game is. But I've never based a purchase off a review. I played games that got negative reviews across the whole internet and enjoyed them more then some games that got good reviews across the internet. I also watch some gameplay and if I don't like what I see I don't buy the game. At the end of the day it's you who makes the decision if you like a game or not.

[YTPerfectParadox]

I knew when i saw this title on the home screen it was going to bring up Days Gone. Absolutely loved that game, it's really sad to see it suffer because of the reviews. I'm paying less and less attention to all the big reviewers like IGN or GameSpot these days. Everything just feels so superficial when it comes to the business grade reviewers. It seems like an increasingly frequent occurrence that reviews from them are influenced by nonsense like maintaining developer-friendly relations, making a statement, or tanking a review based on their subjective opinion.

 

These days i just rely on the smaller youtube review channels. They can be rough around the edges but the love for games is there enough for them to make an accurate, confident explanation of their thoughts on the matter.

[Copanele]

10-20 years ago, reviews used to carry more weight. People told you straight : This game is good or sucks because x y z. Nowadays it's all about the sweet cash and " oh Mega Company X gave me a copy and a bag of money to say sweet things about this steaming pile of microtransactions ".

I take reviews with a whole bag of Himalayan Salt. If I want to make an idea about the game, I check a random gameplay vid on youtube and the OST. Gotta do my own review about the game  

Best example : I loved the first Nier more than Automata yet the reviews for that game were mediocre at best

And I didn't enjoy Sekiro at all even though it's considered to be a Miyazaki Miracle on earth.

So...never trusting reviews.

I see people kinda complain about Days Gone but if you enjoy that game then screwwww alll reviews and opinions. Fun is all that matters.

Edited May 15, 2019 by Copanele

[NaseemJohn]

I personally find them important, before buying a game the first thing I do is read a bunch of different reviews to see if the game is considered good, if it has an overwhelming amount of negative reviews then I don’t bother. Reason why is because there’s so many games coming out nowadays and I just can’t buy them all so i limit myself to the ones that I’m interested in that get overall good reviews. 

 

Majority of the time i agree with what critics say about a game but it’s very rare that i play a game that’s considered bad and find it good. I would rather spend my money on a “good” game and be disappointed than to spend it on a “bad” one just to be letdown despite being warned, if that makes any sense. 

 

As for critics, I think gamers give them shit for no reason most of the time. There’s a lot of credible gaming journalists and reviewers out there that know what makes a game good or bad. This idea that they’re somehow all incompetent or paid to give certain games positive reviews is quite foolish to be honest. “Critics are always wrong except when I agree with them” pretty much sums up how most gamers react to reviews. 

Edited May 15, 2019 by NaseemJohn

[Helyx]

It's almost like we should use our own opinions.

[DrBloodmoney]

2 hours ago, Copanele said:

Nowadays it's all about the sweet cash and " oh Mega Company X gave me a copy and a bag of money to say sweet things about this steaming pile of microtransactions "

 

Those are not reviews.

 

‘Reviews’ do not come from ‘influencers’ or youtube channels. They do not come from anyone who is in a position to be swayed by free copies or advertising revenue.

 

On the contrary, those are simply viral marketing on the part of the publishers - and those people you see on those videos are simply tools of a marketing campaign, so lost in their own unethical quagmire that the cannot see that they are being exploited, even as they exploit the trust of their (mostly young and impressionable) viewers.

 

‘Reviews’ come from reputable sites / magazines/ sources.

Generally, those outlets have strict policies on ethics, standards etc, (often visible to their readers in the small print) as they require a certain level of trust on the part of their consumers, and know that losing that trust is the worst thing that can happen to them and the fastest way to doom their own future.

 

There have certainly been incidents here and there involving seemingly reputable outlets where money/ goods/ ad-revenue has played a factor in review bias (the whole Gamespot/Jeff Guerstmann/Kane and Lynch debacle, for example), but those instances are almost always reported, and have been scandals. 

I take comfort in that. Knowing that unethical behaviour will be called out when it is found is what allows general trust in the review industry to be maintained.

 

I’d also add that the more reputable sites also take great care to identify where potential conflicts of interest exist (previous employment at a dev for example), and are clear with their users when they might crop up, allowing the end reader to decide if they feel the conflict taints that review or not.

 

I think the real problem nowadays is that people don’t understand the difference between a professional reviewer, and some muppet in his basement with a few thousand followers on YouTube.

 

That, plus, the problem of people taking a middling review of a game they personally like as some kind of slight, or evidence of bias that simply doesn’t exist.

 

Reviews are a matter of taste. They are always subjective. That’s how it works in all media.

We all have different tastes.

I loved the new Tomb Raider, but the reviews were generally mediocre.  Metal Gear Solid games review very well across the board, but I think they are all stinking piles of garbage.

 

The trick with reviews is not to look at a score set by someone who’s name you don’t know, and agree or disagree with it - that is just as useless as asking some guy off the street whether you will like something.

What you are meant to do is find a few specific reviewers (or an outlet) that you stick with. Understand their tastes. Get to know what they like and dislike. Over time, you become familiar enough to recognise where your own taste aligns with theirs, and where it differs.

 

For example, I get most reviews from one site, with 7 or 8 reviewers working on it.

 

I know 2 of them have similar tastes to me in all games, 4 or 5 have similar tastes for certain specific genres, and 1 is completely opposite to mine. Knowing that means I can make an informed decision based on who specifically is reviewing.

 

So - in concluding this overlong post ?) I agree with the OP - sort of.

 

You do need a pinch of something, but it isn’t alway salt. If everyone does that, then this industry is going to get, well... salty.

 

Sometimes the condiment you need is just... well... a dash of common sense. 

[AffectatiousDonk]

Just don't use reviews, would you want all your experiences in life be clouded by someone else's judgment. 

[DrBloodmoney]

7 minutes ago, cjshaitan said:

Just don't use reviews, would you want all your experiences in life be clouded by someone else's judgment. 

 

Absolutely. ? I mean, we live in the age of stupidity, so why make an informed decision when you could just throw your money around like a chimp throwing faeces, hoping that you manage to hit a good game before you run out of cash? ?‍♂️

Edited May 15, 2019 by DrBloodmoney

[MorbidMercenary]

Totallyyyyyy im so glad you said this alotta reviews are complete hogwash all for the hype train...bad games getting praise good games being underrated .... if a mess really hard for me to get hyped anymore because they really mess with your perception before buying

[Happy]

3 hours ago, Terarded said:

I knew when i saw this title on the home screen it was going to bring up Days Gone. Absolutely loved that game, it's really sad to see it suffer because of the reviews.

 

It’s hardly suffering, the game has been a massive success financially speaking. 

 

Personally i’m not on the front that thinks reading reviews is entirely pointless. I believe that the industry in its current state really needs customers to be as informed as they can be. This can be because a game might be broken at launch or includes business practices that you dislike. Reading reviews is as good of a way as any to inform yourself. 

Of course it’s hard to deny that critics often end up having opinions that might differ from your personal opinions or are even generally considered false in retrospect. Most people on this site should have been playing videogames for long enough to have an idea of what they’re personally looking for in a videogame. You should also probably be experienced enough to make educated purchases.

The whole angle that reading others opinions beforehand might change the way you subjectively experience a game does have some truth to it. Somebody pointing out flaws or personal grievances to you might lead to you noticing things that you wouldn’t have otherwise, negatively impacting your experience. But the same can also be true the other way around. You might find yourself appreciating a mechanic more than if you’d gone in blind.

 

tldr: Nobody’s opinion is worthless and being informed is super important but only you know what you like.

Edited May 15, 2019 by Happy

[YROSHIKU]

I mean shouldn't be that obvious? Just because a reviewer doesn't like something in particular that doesn't mean you won't like it either, despite that we all agree on some things and like similar things we're all different and our tastes are different. What's most important it's okay to have your own opinion. I personally watch a bunch of reviews before buying anything, but it's not something that I use to decide either or not I'll get a game, but just to find out more about it, learn about the game mechanics, a little bit about setting along with story and characters and of course to see some gameplay. Then based on my prior experience with the games from this studio and knowledge about its publisher (mostly the tendencies of inserting microtransactions or not, releasing additional DLC along with special editions of the game down the line) I make the final decision if I'll get it on its release, wait and get a used copy or just don't bother with it at all.

[AffectatiousDonk]

45 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

 

Absolutely. I mean, we live in the age of stupidity, so why make an informed decision when you could just throw your money around like a chimp throwing faeces, hoping that you manage to hit a good game before you run out of cash? ?‍♂️

 

Why would you run out of cash. 

[Asvinia]

I've never been one for reviews, but when I was a kid I remember magazines would have 'proper' reviews where they would talk about what the game contained, how it functions and whether the story was interesting (according to the reviewer). The reviews just seemed a lot more honest. Now you have reviewers trying to make a scandal out of anything 'I hope you ride me as much as you ride your bike'? Really? God forbid a woman wants to have sex with her husband, even if the line is kind of cheesy. And after seeing the attempt at playing Cuphead and that other reviewer trying to play Doom, reviewers have gone way down in my estimations.

The smaller youtube channels are best, where you know they're people who love the games. A lot of 'mainstream' reviewers I suspect don't play games as a hobby, it's just a job to them.

[Feral]

Reviews are much like critics' opinions of movies. You don't always know what they think of a series, genre, company etc which could cloud their judgment of a game.

 

So while reading or watching a review is ok and can be interesting. Always find it best to watch a bit of gameplay or if you can rent it and see what you really think before shelling out the money for it.

[Fr_0zt]

Always.

 

If it's got R*, Nintendo, etc on the box it'll be overrated as hell.  If it's an Indie, it'll be heavily shitted on.

[Folkenio]

I remember seeing a meme that said something like "Reading reviews to validate your reasons to buy a game" a while back. It got me thinking, mostly because of how skewed the system is towards a more uninformed consumer. Yes, some people are just getting into videogames, so having a sort of rating helps those users kind of understand what they are getting, but as time goes on, it ends up being the only way those people consider a purchase. To me, it also feels like those are the people who get overhyped on everything, and then end up being in "the disappointed fanbase" that received a product that never lived up to their expectations.

 

Reviews should be useful only for a set amount of people, but sadly, those are the ones that make the more noise about it. Not everything should be perfect for everybody, as not every bad reviewed game should be a failure to everyone as stated in said reviews. People have different tastes, thankfully, so while I may not enjoy some sports title, others will. It's all subjective, and that's what it's sometimes forgotten.

[g-bake_1986]

Isn't the point with Days Gone that the game was in bad shape pre-release and that could have contributed to certain low scores?

 

Anyway, reviews are just someone elses's opinion and should only be used as such. The context is also more important than the score at the bottom. I would much rather pop some gameplay on Youtube than read a review. I also cynically feel that, in this digital age where certain companies are fighting to stay relevant, there is an aspect of clickbaity extreme scores. If you are commited to reading reviews, find a reviewer you trust but still research the gsme yourself first.

[RevengeancePrime]

There are reviewers that will lower their score if the game offends them in some way, such was the case with Gamespot's Days Gone review. I'm sure sites like Gamespot and IGN do have some credible reviewers that are actually looking to review a game based on its merits, but they're few and far between. In terms of actually credible reviews like those by ACG, I do agree that you should look at the positives and negatives laid out and determine if the positives outweigh the negatives and if the game is something you're interested in. For ACG's Days Gone review, he rated the game as a wait for a sale, which I do agree with from a reviewers standpoint due to technical issues at the time. However, it was a buy for me personally because I found that other aspects of the game such as gameplay elements and story appealed enough to me to overlook the technical issues I encountered.

 

Generally, I find myself looking at reviews less and less because I've gotten to a point where I feel like I know if I'll enjoy a game or not. The only department that reviews tend to help with is determining if the game has too many bugs or glitches. 

[Zenpai]

I do look at reviews, but I never take them at their word by themselves. I do have some sites that I generally go to to watch reviews, but there are two more things that help me make an informed purchase:

 

• General community hype: generally, if there's a lot of buzz, memes, fanart and the like surrounding a game, especially if that buzz lingers on long after the game's been released, that means that there was something there that resonated with a lot of people, so the chances that it'll also resonate with me will be significantly higher. Now, does this mean that I rarely buy games on release date and join the hype? Well, yes, but... is it that important? What it matters is that you play the game and you like it. If the community is buying and enjoying the game around release date... well, good for them. But I'll buy and play the game when and how I want to. (P.S: yes, I do on rare occasion buy games on release date, but those are almost always either sequels to games I already loved and that come from studios with a proven pedigree or that I've thoroughly researched about beforehand and there's therefore very little chance that I'll end up disappointed by them).

 

• Gameplay videos: No matter how much reviews and the general community might sing a game's praises, if I look at the game and it just doesn't appeal to me, I'm not going to get it - which is the reason I still have zero interest in playing, for instance, The Last of Us. It just doesn't appeal to me. The same might apply in the reverse direction, although it is rarer. Sometimes, people might say that a game isn't that good or that it's a rent at best, but from everything that I've seen, it seems to be just my cup of tea (this generally only happens with games licensed from properties I love, though). Video reviews are great in this regard. I can both watch a review and gameplay at the same time.

 

Reviews should never be your make or break decision when you purchase a game. They should be an arrow in your quiver, not your entire quiver. In the end, what matters the most is that you like what you see and hear about the game.

[Eremoto]

My advice is to never listen to reviews in general: they tend to be very hyperbolic and only have value for a viewer if said viewer tends to agree with the reviewer in question.

 

Even those that make good points for or against a game may tarnish it for you, making the game look far better or far worse than it would be for you if you played it. Just look for differing views of said game, look for people who like it and people who dislike it and then take a calculated risk.

 

For years I only heard blind praise for OoT and Portal only to end up not enjoying them as much as other people would, and I'm guilty of enjoying my share of bad games like Sonic Adventure's Big the Cat sections, which aren't as bad as everyone says in my opinion.

 

In conclusion: take every single review with a grain of salt. Maybe more than just a grain of salt, maybe an entire spoon.

[HellcoreFire]

Also water is wet. I don't read reviews. I know what I like and don't like so well, I only need to see a couple of seconds of gameplay to know if a game will suit my taste.

[AJ_Radio]

I used to take reviews a lot more seriously when I was a kid in high school. Something like Metal Gear Solid 2 I would read a review on and generally I would determine whether or not I would get it eventually. 

 

The mainstream websites have someone paying somebody else money to review a game. I listen to the smaller YouTubers and websites that review games because I find them a lot more honest and to the point. 

 

Reviews used to hold merit back in the 1990s and early 2000s. Nowadays it’s just easier for me to judge a game because I will know whether I like it or not more than anyone else. 

 

I barely find anybody credible on the big websites. It’s just getting paid the bucks to make a skewed opinion and then pass it off as a review. 

[Nightstream88]

Most of the time I usually can tell whether or not I am going to like a game based on gameplay videos.
Although some games might be kind of hard to find out that like Animal Crossing and probably some role-playing games.
 Can't say I ever bought a game based on someone else's opinion and if it does have any influence the worst it may do is delay on whether or not I may buy the game and wait for a price drop, but quite often I usually can tell based on gameplay videos though.
 Plus some game reviewers docked points for a game being too difficult(like Crash Bandicoot apparently is too difficult), and a game got docked for too much water and taking points because they find the story boring(Which in itself can be a bit subjective) which would probably be about reasons I don't buy games based on reviews.

[Arcesius]

Reviews are part of my decision making process, but good or bad scores alone ain't enough for me to make a decision. Gameplay footage is most often more important.

I played Oxenfree and Persona 5 mostly because everybody was recommending both those games, with Persona 5 being in the top 5 all-time games on Metacritic with both incredible journalist and user reviews. I was bored to death after 1 hour into Oxenfree and after about 40 hours with P5, with 80 more hours to go. The thing is, looking at the gameplay and knowing about the socializing aspect of the game, my gut told me that P5 just isn't for me, but I was blinded by the high scores and praising reviews.