Who are your trusted reviewers?

johnny_ultimate

tok9 wrote: »

I never said it was a Sony issue. I have no issue with Polygon's reviews of Xbox or PlayStation titles.

My issue is with the reviewer clearly stating he did not want to review that game. If he said the same for Forza or Ryse I would have the same issue.

You don't have to be a fan of the series to review it but at least have an open mind.

For example, If Retro told me K:SF was rubbish I wouldn't take much notice of that as he has already stated he thinks they are dire games. There are other games that I would listen to Retro's opinion but not this one.

In the same way if someone like Grayditch said K:SF was rubbish I'd be a lot more worried as he has enjoyed the other games in the series.

Now I know the latter may not be completely open minded either but I would take his criticisms far more seriously.

That's not what he said, though. He said, at the PS4 launch event, when they were unveiling games "please don't be killzone. please don't be killzone". If he said "I don't want to review the game" elsewhere, that's different.

I certainly wouldn't agree publicly expressing a distaste for a game negates one's ability to comment, the way someone tweeting 'Please be Killzone, please be Killzone' wouldn't.

tok9

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

That's not what he said, though. He said, at the PS4 launch event, when they were unveiling games "please don't be killzone. please don't be killzone". If he said "I don't want to review the game" elsewhere, that's different.

I certainly wouldn't agree publicly expressing a distaste for a game negates one's ability to comment, the way someone tweeting 'Please be Killzone, please be Killzone' wouldn't.

It's still practically the same thing and if he had tweeted the opposite and gave it the same review score I would be a bit more interested to hear what he had to say.

As I've said already, I would be far more interested in a review from someone with an open mind to a game.

jones

I find eurogamer very good. I think particularly lately i'm noticing the reviews and the scores dont really match. The PS4 and XBONE reviews are a perfect example i've read a lot in the last few weeks and PS4 "reads" like an 8/9 out of 10 score but then scores lower although maybe thats just my internal bias ha

Magill

IGN are the best.

Robert ninja

Magill wrote: »

IGN are the best.

Varik

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Any examples of this? Considering they have the likes of Kevin Gifford working for them I find this very hard to believe.

Every review seems to be built around whether a negative or positive judgement of the game will give them more views, and while I doubt they're being paid for good MS review they're not about to bite the hand that feeds without a good reason.

New TOS for Xbox as well as Playstation
IR and HDMI-CEC
Kojima

ScumLord

I lost faith in reviews a long time ago so I don't know anyone outside of the big names when I search on youtube. I tend to preference youtube reviews just out of ease and go through a few as I think the likes of the big guys like IGN are probably taking some form of payment because they never have anything bad to say about any game.

I have some experience in advertising and just about everything in print is paid for, even editorials. The fact that most there content seems to focus on big budget games for consoles just confirms the fact there on retainer.

Retr0gamer

I find youtube 'personalities' absolutely hopeless. Games companies know they are very impressionable and shower them with free stuff to get good reviews. A lot of them are hopeless fanboys and shower their favourite series with praise while others are the 'angry' type personalities like angry joe who I just can't stand. There's a few good ones, Total Biscuits analysis of the gameplay as he plays games is in depth and informative, but for the most part these people are only getting views because the barrier for entry is far less than for proper journalism.

I've heard quite a few games journalists lamenting how amateur and terrible youtube analysis is for the majority but they also recognise that it's huge, probably big than real journalism and most publishers are now concentrating on these reviewers by giving them free swag because they know they are impressionable for the most part.

NTMK

Varik wrote: »

Every review seems to be built around whether a negative or positive judgement of the game will give them more views, and while I doubt they're being paid for good MS review they're not about to bite the hand that feeds without a good reason.

New TOS for Xbox as well as Playstation
IR and HDMI-CEC
Kojima

MS Xbox and MS IE are two completely seperate divisions that dont give two ****s about each other (each division of MS is like this to the point it will destroy MS in the long run imo)

Ive never read a polygon review that was deceitful in any way. you get the feeling of the reviewers approch to the game but id much rather honest subjective reviews than the "objective" wankery that goes on with the likes of ign where every review reads like a promo piece.

Find the reviewers that have similar tastes and follow them anyone claiming to do objective reviews is taking out their arse

FRanboys need to stop thinking every site needs to **** about their purchasing decisions

the whinning of PS4 fanboys about their console getting a lower review than the xbone because of a lack of software (which is true tbh the xbone has better launch window games) or giving Killzone or TLOU a lower than 9 score is quite pathetic tbh

COYVB

Valentine1 wrote: »

Doesn't sound like them, when did this happen?

They were given £750,000 from Microsoft to help get the site up and running

Retr0gamer

COYVB wrote: »

They were given £750,000 from Microsoft to help get the site up and running

They didn't. They gave them money to make a documentary and advertise Internet Explorer. The internet explorer division is completely seperate to the XBox division. It would be like complaining IGN are biased towards Sony games because they took advertising money to advertise a Sony Pictures film. Look at the facts, not the tin foil wearing forums trolls assumptions.

COYVB

Retr0gamer wrote: »

The internet explorer division is completely seperate to the XBox division.

Microsoft are, at least over here anyway, one of the few big companies where the divisions are handled cohesively. We've got the same reps for Surface, Xbox, IE, WP8 and Windows,for example

Retr0gamer

COYVB wrote: »

Microsoft are, at least over here anyway, one of the few big companies where the divisions are handled cohesively. We've got the same reps for Surface, Xbox, IE, WP8 and Windows,for example

Well we're talking about America where they are handled completely differently. Also again even if they are from the same division, which they aren't what does it matter that they took advertising money? Every website does, it's how they make money and survive. They didn't take $750,000 as a bribe, they took it to advertise IE. Eurogamer, IGN, Gamespot etc., take advertising money all the time does that make them biased? Where's the difference? Youtube people get sent free swag and games and have no code of ethics to work with, I'd be more worried about them.

COYVB

I'm in North America

And I'm not saying it was a bribe, far from it. Bribes tend to be done under the table, not out in the open. However, there does seem to be a bit of skewing towards MS on most fronts from Polygon. Obviously they make a few bob from Microsoft, and I doubt that there's anyone being forced at gunpoint to write positive stuff about them, or negative stuff about Sony, however I do think that there are specific decisions being made at EIC level in terms of strategic writer assignment. Got someone who hates KZ? Stick them on the KZ review. Have someone who isn't a fan of horror or Naughty Dog's TPS style? Bang them onto the TLOU review. Stuff like that.

I don't for one second buy that anyone is fudging their opinions on the site, but I do believe that people are being given assignments based on a perceived advance likelihood to underscore something.

For the record, had I reviewed TLOU myself, I'd have scored it lower than Polygon did - so I absolutely get where that review came from, as I get where all reviews come from.

YouTube stuff, absolutely, is not worth putting any major weight in. Lots of these guys are really new to the industry and the free stuff shtick is still new and exciting making them a bit more malleable

tok9

Please stop saying swag

Not The Real Scarecrow

@coyvb, who do you work for ,out of curiosity? After reading a few of your posts on here, I'd be interested in checking out some of your stuff(in a good way)

Retr0gamer

The reviewer didn't have issues with last of us though. It was a perfectly fair review and it got a decent score. Any negativity wasn't unjustified either. Also anyone that doesn't like kill zone is someone with taste in my books.

It's not like they have been giving favourable reviews to Microsoft either. Ms games have gotten equally harsh reviews. I'm sorry but it's just conspiracy theory nonsense.

COYVB

6.5 for Ni no Kuni doesn't strike you as a bit... odd... no?

Retr0gamer

COYVB wrote: »

6.5 for Ni no Kuni doesn't strike you as a bit... odd... no?

Definitely not. It was a gorgeous looking game but the story was absolute bottom barrel even by the usual low Level 5 standards and the combat was really poor. It's a pretty dull and average jrpg that only got attention due to the involvement of studio glibly who only did the visuals. In fact all the reviewers I trust said it was average at best.

Polygon where one of the few brave enough/knowledgable enough to recognise it as a very poor RPG considering there's far better examples available t the moment they just get ignored by lesser journalists that only cover big games.

mystic86

NTMK wrote: »

the whinning of PS4 fanboys about their console getting a lower review than the xbone because of a lack of software (which is true tbh the xbone has better launch window games) or giving Killzone or TLOU a lower than 9 score is quite pathetic tbh

The software launch line-up for PS4 is crap!

But it's a console/hardware review!

I saw their review of Xbox One and saw the score of 8/10, and I then went to check their review score of the PS4 and as I was navigating I just KNEW it was gonna be a 7.5... and sure enough, it was..

NTMK

mystic86 wrote: »

The software launch line-up for PS4 is crap!

But it's a console/hardware review!

I saw their review of Xbox One and saw the score of 8/10, and I then went to check their review score of the PS4 and as I was navigating I just KNEW it was gonna be a 7.5... and sure enough, it was..

Consoles are only as good as their software and atm the xbone is more fleshed out sony will have the better console in the long run but atm (in the states anyway) the one is the better console.

what would you argue was the better hardware between the xb1,gc and ps2? the ps2 was the worst of the three hardware wise but it was the best console of that gen

COYVB

NTMK wrote: »

Consoles are only as good as their software and atm the xbone is more fleshed out sony will have the better console in the long run but atm (in the states anyway) the one is the better console.

what would you argue was the better hardware between the xb1,gc and ps2? the ps2 was the worst of the three hardware wise but it was the best console of that gen

a hardware review is a review of the hardware. game reviews are for the games

mystic86

COYVB wrote: »

a hardware review is a review of the hardware. game reviews are for the games

exactly.

Also, what's so great about this?

http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/score/metascore/90day/xboxone?view=condensed&sort=desc

NTMK

mystic86 wrote: »

exactly.

Also, what's so great about this?

http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/score/metascore/90day/xboxone?view=condensed&sort=desc

the ps4 exclusives ratings arent much better when you see that its a remake of an indie and a new indie that are beating that list and atm in the US (where all reviewers for the most part are based) the one simply does more on day one because of its tv functionality. sonys focus on games does hurt the console initially due to the limited selection but is better long term and a year down the line everyone will see it

mystic86

NTMK wrote: »

the ps4 exclusives ratings arent much better when you see that its a remake of an indie and a new indie that are beating that list and atm in the US (where all reviewers for the most part are based) the one simply does more on day one because of its tv functionality. sonys focus on games does hurt the console initially due to the limited selection but is better long term and a year down the line everyone will see it

I know the PS4 games have low scores, my point is so has the XboxOne - people keep talking about the better games on XboxOne at launch..

regarding the TV hub business, you should read the Kotaku review of XboxOne

Retr0gamer

There's a bang of Sony defence force off this thread.

tok9

I've no Sony or xbox agenda, only what I said previously about that review.

This thread has been derailed a bit.

K.O.Kiki

Reekwind

Retr0gamer wrote: »

There's a bang of Sony defence force off this thread.

Clearly Sony has paid some posters here to be positive about its products

mystic86

Reekwind wrote: »

Clearly Sony has paid some posters here to be positive about its products

lol, nice