So, to what extent do you trust reviews and is there a certain place you feel is more reliable than the other? Do you let the reviews affect your opinion on the game and whether you buy it or do you just rust your instincts and see for yourself?
The only source I really trust anymore is a Finnish gaming magazine called Pelaaja (Gamer) as it seems I'm usually pretty much on level with their reviews. I used to really like this game review show called Tilt but when the staff changed and they said things like Rayman Origins and Sonic Generations being complete rubbish, Rayman because it was too hard and Sonic because it was too much the same old, I just stopped watching it. Reasons like that make me frustrated. I don't really like IGN either, the reason being... well, just look at their Double Dragon Neon review. They made a person who absolutely hates beat-em-ups review a beat-em-up. Sense, this makes. That one has even been used as an example on how not to write a review.
In the end, though, I still prefer to just try the gem out myself instead of relying on what other people say about them. RE6 got bad reviews but I enjoyed the game a whole lot.
You know, I could've added a poll but that would've been the easy way out. Out of what? I dunno, I live in a box, shut up.
I usually play a game before I ever see a review, and while watching or reading the review, compare my own issues with the game along with the author's issues. If I do see or read a review before buying a game, it's usually to see or hear if there are major issues with the game, like bad controls, bad gameplay in general, things like that. Most of the time, I still buy the game, as how can make a decision on if it is bad or good if I never play it?
All that being said, I usually watch Angry Joe or Yahtzee, mainly because they're entertaining.
If I'm on the fence about buying a game I would lightly skim through the gameplay section of a few reviews to find out if there's something wrong like a game breaking glitch. (Because I could care less if the reviewer like the story/art design/etc. or not since I can decide that for myself.)
I trust my own review of a game, I trust some bits from other reviewers but it normally comes down to if the gameplay impresses me enough for me to WANT to buy it.
I try not to read reviews before playing a game. I feel that it makes you concentrate too much on what was said.
I just play a game without previous influence and judge it on how much I enjoy it.
I'll read reviews, but I don't take them to heart unless I trust the reviewer. If there is a game I've never heard of and someone like Total Biscuit says "Buy it", chances are I will consider buying it. Same if he says "Don't buy it".
Sometimes reviews are nice. Especially for a game that I had zero interest in before (Halo 4). I got the game and I fell in love with it.
Heck, a joke review was the one that set me over the edge to get Minecraft.
Also if it is a game that I have extreme interest in (Ni No Kuni) then I will easily avoid reviewers because some are harsh and some are nice and I don't want their opinions mixed with mine.
Eh, I don't care much for them for the most part. Usually before I pick up a game i'll just find the average scores just to ensure that it's not terrible, but I try to refrain from watching or reading reviews before I get a game for the same reason as SERIOUSLY THOUGH® stated.
I ignore all scores and only look at the actual review. Those numbers really don't mean anything.
I trust reviews as reviewers from well known and respected publications around usually are, IMO, more trustworthy than the average internet gamer who praises or rants about an entire game just because of a single element.
But I only take reviews in consideration to some point, since it will always be my decision to say if a game is good for me or not.
I rarely trust reviews nowadays,sometimes they get a bit biased.
(02-09-2013 12:25 PM)Berry Wrote: [ -> ]I rarely trust reviews nowadays,sometimes they get a bit biased.
A bit ?
Real quotes from IGN
"ZOMFG CALL OF DUTY Modern Ops 21 with extra lens_flare *jizzfest*"
"Indie game made with less than $1.5T budget = cock."
I like to get a couple different reviews. It doesn't matter where they come from so long as they're varied. I used to try X-Play, Gametrailers, IGN, Escapist, and general reviews, but 1 of those is dead, another is IGN, I don't go on Escapist anymore, and Gametrailers constantly plays repeats and only airs at midnight.
No, I've stopped caring for Gaming Reviews for a long time. First off, money does a lot to effect the score, paid reviewers are everywhere, but there is a common trend of games, mostly from Microsoft and E.A, with Halo 4's IGN review (fucking 9.8 "best halo game ever"), and Dead Space 3 (9.75) and I've just noticed that it's now an all money based system, because if you don't give money to them sometimes, they may tell everyone the game is terrible, and not review it properly, out of spite.
Reviews have stopped becoming trustworthy, and because of this, my experience is all I go on, and from what I've seen and read. I could tell Halo 4 was going to be bad from a mile off, once I saw the first bit of Gameplay, and the months leading up, I knew it would be bad, and it was, yet IGN called it DA BEST GAME EVER 9.8/10. Reviews, and by extension Gaming Journalism is a joke.