Game reviews

Post Reply New Topic

I used to like this one video game magazine called EGM. The thing I read most in their mags was their reviews. Since they've gained new and inexperienced editors, though, things have gone downhill. Some of you may remember their 3-score-review method. Well, guess what happened to Perfect Dark Zero here:

6.5, 8, 9

Is that confusing or what? I mean, a general opinion from editors can't just range from mediocre to excellent like that. It's like an average gamer's review that varies dramatically. If you think that's my only form of evidence, Mario Tennis got an 8, 8, and <b>4</b> (un)respectively.

In the end though, should we really trust the media to buy games? My brother recently bought Final Fantasy IV, and even through playing it once I knew it was going to be good. Heck even better thanks to the new translation. I admit I'm a score freak, but from this point I just shouldn't care anymore. Why? Because I don't want to blow $5 on some mag that isn't even worth that much.

I never buy print mags anymore... I just use the Internet to find out how games are being scored nowadays.

www.gametab.com
www.gamerankings.com

those are two sites that compile and average games' ratings. Of course sometimes all the mags are way off base like with Deus Ex 2, which everyone gave a score of 8, but from playing the demo i could see it was quite obviously a horrible game.

I always read reviews first at Gamespot.com. the user reviews, not gamespots review. They are too optimistic. I'll pick out the ones with the most # of trusted users and read 3 good reviews and 3 bad reviews to help decide.

My basic feelings on the Gran Turismo series:



I'll never understand why everyone else in the known universe is so ga-ga over them, or racing games in general

http://www.pczone.co.uk/

havent read it in ages, but the reviews always used to be the best and most independant in the UK. Theres a LOT of back-handers in this industry.

I also highly recomend gamespot. I find that many magazines these days have disappointing reviews written by a certain crowd of gamers I simply don't relate to any more. I hate PC Gamer's editor, for instance, and think he spends too much time being full of himself. When PC Gamer gave Arcanum a percentage rating somewhere in the 90's and said it was "Arguably better than any game in the Baldur's Gate or Fallout series", and ended the review with "If you don't find something about this game you love than throw your PC in the trash right now", I pretty much disowned the magazine. That's basically the equivalent of a movie critic giving Pitch Black 4 stars and saying it's arguably better than Aliens. Arcanum, IMHO, was a horrid game that was ill-conceived, poorly executed, had terrible graphics, and on my computer at least, wouldn't stop crashing long enough to let me play it. Also, although they gave good RPGs good reviews Planescape: Torment got a 93% or somesuch), they are so hot on stupid hack n' slash RPGs that appeal to munchkins, like the Diablo series (the most overrated games in existence), Dungeon Seige, Neverwinter Nights, and the like, while failing to point out any of those game's shortcommings. Their excessively positive review of American McGee's Alice (one of the most overrated games of 1999) and indifferent review of Tomb Raider: The Last Revelation (one of hte most underrated games of 1999) also made me cringe.

So overall, I recomend reading online reviews (these are a mixed bag) of games you already know and love, find some of the most well-written and insightful reviews, remember who wrote them, and refer to them frequently.