Video Game Reviews...

[The Summoner of Leviathan]

I tend not to read reviews often. If there is a game I want, I will buy it. Like KH II or FF XII, regardless what the reviews said (though they were good in both cases), I bought both games without a second thought. Sometimes, on long trips I will buy a gaming magazine and have fun reading the reviews and looking at the screen caps. If something catches my attention then, I might look up the game a bit more before considering buying it.

I think probably the best source is from friends who share your taste. In things. When I am looking for a new fantasy novel, if I ask for suggestions I take those of people who I value their opinions (i.e. like similar stuff as I) than some random person. The same is with video games. Sometimes a friend will be like "Hey, I played this cool game, that I think you'll enjoy" thus I get interested and wanna buy it. Which reminds me, what was that name of the game my friend recommended a month ago? x-x;

[The Fat Bioware Nerd]

Take a look at your own video game collection and see how many games you have that are pure crap.

I have only one video game right now (Mass Effect) and it's a very solid title in my opinion...Also the reviews for Mass Effect are positive.

[Ashley Schovitz]

I think there's a LOT more bias from amateur reviewers because they're more likely to play games they think they'll like. Take a look at your own video game collection and see how many games you have that are pure crap.

I only see one in my collection Roto and that's Shaq Fu not that I intentionally got it though., actually I can't even remember. What was the point of your post/ I'm not trying to be rude or sarcastic if you think so.

[NeoCracker]

I read them to get an Idea of what the game is like. If it tends to only point out either good or bad things, I tend to ignore it.

Though I buy a lot of games regardless of the revies.

Like Harvest Moon Wii, the current Review on IGN isn't exactly a good one, but I'm a HM fanatic, so I'm so getting it.

Same with Xenosaga, though I got the game first. I find that the majority of the reviews on it are trash, claiming the story is a mess and confusing. I saw that review a lot.

But overall, reviews can be a good way to get an Idea of what kind of game it is.

[Ouch!]

I look at reviews, but they're rarely the deciding factor. Usually I buy a game if I hear good things about it from people who I know have similar interests. Sometimes that's friends, sometimes it's reviewers I tend to agree with regularly (although I can't think of many of the top of my head).

[Odaisé Gaelach]

I think there's a LOT more bias from amateur reviewers because they're more likely to play games they think they'll like. Take a look at your own video game collection and see how many games you have that are pure crap.

Come to think of it, when I read a review of You Are Empty, I was really tempted to get a copy...

[Rase]

Yes. I would have bought Empire Earth III without a second's hesitation until I saw the reviews. It's universally acclaimed as dire, why would I spend the money? Yes, they MIGHT all be wrong, but it's not terribly likely, and it makes sense to put the money into a game which is widely lauded. If just one person says something's good, I'm not terribly likely to listen. If thirty different reviewers say it, I'll probably pay attention.

Is it the only factor? Absolutely not. For example I'm unlikely to ever buy a soccer game on release day, no matter how universal the accolades. And I know they don't always say things I agree with, nor do games always get the scores I agree with. But to suggest that I am in no way influenced by reviews would be silly and untrue.

Hey look, someone posted my thoughts already, only in a better worded fashion. That sure makes things easier.

[Zora]

No to press reviews. I tend to take reader reviews (or unofficial reviews, or whatever you call them) with a grain of salt.

The problem with press reviewers is that they are very biased. Some sites, such as 1UP and Gamespot, are known for a bias against Nintendo. Nintendo generally gets lower scores, except for games like SMG and SSBB which will get praised regardless of their actual quality, which brings me to my next point.

The reason I do not trust press reviews, and why I am not influence that greatly by reader reviews is hype. Now obviously, if a game is as under-hyped as let us say Disgaea, I will trust the reviews greatly. But I do not trust reviews for games like Halo 3 or Galaxy, they are so much based on hype they never match (nor close) to my opinion.


As someone also mentioned, they get their games for free. Aside from the intial flaws he pointed out (such as having a poor idea on how much value you get from the game), it also leads to an overflow of Video Games. Underhyped games are generally ignored, unless they are top-tier quality (even then, top-tier quality comes around once in a lifetime, even underhyped good games like Radiant Dawn and Phoenix Wright come acroos this) is that they simply don't play a substantial amount of the game. Maybe they play from seven hours (and make it so obvious half of the time it isn't funny), that it really makes you doubt a review. This is especially problamatic for story-based games. They can get a bad score for a poor story (Radiant Dawn anyway) even though they have an amazing story but it doesn't come up IN the first ten hours.

It is a bit ironic how games like Final Fantasy get praised for a good story, even though they "suffer" from the same fact the story is not in a substantial form until ten hours. Heck, even some titles like Final Fantasy IX don't even have the bulk of the plot happen until 30 hours in (for FFIX, I was referring to the introduction of Terra). I am not saying it is a bad thing, no it is a good thing. But the press are prone to ignoring simply becasue of the overflow of video games.

Nationality and genre bias has an effect. If the game is Western, it will get a better score. It is difficult to explain, but it just look at Western games, they get higher scores. This is of course because they made in the Western world. Not only are they developed to better fit our culture (IE, almost every Western game is realtime, because most of us honestly lack patience), but they know how to market too.

As for genre, a shooter will get a higher score than an RPG. Halo, which I would personally consider to be a average shooter (though I will admit it can be fun online) got near-perfect reviews. A game like Blue Dragon (an average RPG IMO) got average to mediocre reviews.

The problem is that the hype has so much ponetial that it isn't a mere factor in reviews, it dominates reviews.

Aside from the hype and the biases don't effect the review to begin with, the press are utter hypocrites.

Okay, let us go to Fire Emblem Radiant Dawn Gamespot review. They utterly complained that the game was too difficult, even on easy, and praised PoR way too much. Now for those of you who played RD on easy, it isn't any harder than PoR normal or hard from what I heard (all of PoR's difficulties were laughable BTW). Recently I picked up FFTtWotL. The game isn't hard per se, but I am having more challenge with it than Radiant Dawn. Yet.... Final Fantasy Tactics: The War of the Lions for PSP Review - PSP Final Fantasy Tactics: The War of the Lions Review

Also, FFT has issues that FERD lacks, such as a poor camera.

Or another example I gave above was Blue Dragon and Halo 3. Both of them were recycled material, yet the difference in reviews was ridicolious. Hype, nationality, and genre bias obviously played a factor, but seriously. I am not saying either game is bad, but the fact that Halo 3 got away with being recycled and Blue Dragon was held back to it is really unfair.


Another small factor which both press and reader reviews share is series formual expectations. We all know that a review is a contrast between quality and expectations (which, as ironic as is, but they are written like that nonetheless). A great example would be Final Fantasy XII, as I am sure most of you here played it. FFXII was generally attacked for one thing-it was different from most FF games.

FFXII lacked was an epic storyline (and instead a political storyline), a revamped gameplay style, among other things. Had FFXII been called something different and wasn't part of the FF series (but a enw series entirely), I highly doubt people would complain to the extent they did. A title is just a title, the fact it should have that much influence in reviews is just sad.

Now a more presonal reason I never trust the press reviews is because they never matched my opinion. Never. I feel this is enough reason to ignore them. If I never agreed with them a million times before, what will make this time any different?


So in short, I ignore the press reviews (except for laughs). I am not overly fond of reader reviews, but I am not going to base a purchase off a game based on that.

So in short, I don't trust the review because of:

-General bias towards stuff
-Hyped games are played more, so more "apt" to get fair reviews
-Hype dominates reviews in general
-Nationality bias (Western games get better reviews moreso than Japanese games)
-Console bias
-Hypocrites
-Sometimes base a review more on what they expect from the series, not how good the game is
-I never agree with press reviews.

Among the things that determine reviews, the quality and value seem to only be a wave in a sea of factors, when they themselves should be the sea itself (okay, over-poetic?)

The only time I find it safe to get an opinion is sometime after the hype has died and go to a forum and ask for people's opinions. I rent game too, which also helps. I determine my own opinion. There are also a few people who I can trust more than others, such as a person named BattleFranky40 on SPPf (he is arrogant, but he is also gives accurate opinions most of the time). I also buy a lot of games that look interesting to me, and once done with them often sell them to get more games that interest me.

Dear god I type a lot.

[Markus. D]

Maybe I should in the future.

The last two games I got for Wii were crap.