TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 83

Thread: OVERWHELMINGLY NEGATIVE

  1. #51
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by catbarf View Post
    I don't see how the existence of regressive gamers refutes Eva's point about journalists not being immune to personal bias. Personally, I don't trust just Steam reviews, or just social media, or just critics. They each have their problems. Better to read into multiple viewpoints and draw your own conclusions.
    So, what, a "game journalist" writing about what they think of a new game should not say what they think, then?

    This supposed outrage is by large overblown and made up anyway. Just look at what happened with the Doom "controversy":


  2. #52
    Member
    Registered: Dec 2006
    Location: Washington DC
    Quote Originally Posted by Starker View Post
    So, what, a "game journalist" writing about what they think of a new game should not say what they think, then?
    I'm at a loss as to how you got that from my post. Anyone is free to say what they think, but nobody's perfectly objective, so consider reviews in aggregate to get a well-rounded impression. I'm not buying this false dichotomy where the choices are somehow either 'critics are never affected by personal bias' or 'critics shouldn't say what they think'.

    For what it's worth, I don't think moral outrage affecting reviews is a pervasive problem among game critics. I've seen plenty of reviews where the reviewer's commentary is informed by their personal leanings, but only a handful where it seemed to meaningfully factor into the final score, and the common perpetrators are easy to ignore. Still, with critics not all having the same skill levels, genre experience, or familiarity with a series, there are other reasons to seek non-traditional review sources as well. Sometimes those hyperbolic THIS IS THE WORST GAME EVAR user reviews can reflect legitimate issues that the critics don't mention, like unfair monetization schemes, ongoing post-release changes, or compatibility problems.
    Last edited by catbarf; 14th Jun 2019 at 13:37.

  3. #53
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Well, I wasn't getting it from your post, but that's the gist of the criticism aimed at the so called journalists (who in most cases are really just game reviewers, let's be honest). I was asking a rhetorical question. And nobody has claimed that critics are never affected by personal bias, so I'm not sure where you're getting that from. There is no false dichotomy like you describe, just the ridiculous moral outrage aimed at people who are talking about certain issues in games.

    The more important point, though, is that there is no moral panic such as Eva describes. It's all manufactured and made up by sites like One Angry Gamer and the cottage industry of anti-SJWs, as the video in my previous post shows.

    It's like the supposed free speech problem in American colleges. When you actually look at it, it's just a few isolated cases blown way out of proportion and it even affects liberals more than the conservatives who are making a big deal out of this (though with such small numbers that's likely just a fluke).
    Last edited by Starker; 14th Jun 2019 at 17:14.

  4. #54
    Member
    Registered: Dec 2006
    Location: Washington DC
    Quote Originally Posted by Starker View Post
    And nobody has claimed that critics are never affected by personal bias, so I'm not sure where you're getting that from.
    I was about to post Tomi's quote on the first page about game reviewers 'not letting emotions and zeal cloud their judgment', when I realized I had missed the key phrase 'this much'. Oops. That does rather characterize the conversation in a way I'd missed, so I apologize for that.

    I think you're right about the moral panic not being a real issue, although I would say that there are occasional actual controversies, not just manufactured ones. Right now there's one going on over Cyberpunk 2077, but I doubt by the time the game comes out it will have had any real impact.

    If anything I'm generally more skeptical of game journalists on account of many being journalists first and gamers second. If I'm looking to buy a modern retro-shooter, I'd rather read a review written by someone who knows Quake inside and out than by this guy. IMO the development of community-driven review platforms, first on Youtube and now on Steam, is one of the best things to happen to PC gaming in the last decade, as while there may be a lot of utter crap to wade through, it gives a voice to actual players, and in particular the ones who are real 'power users' in their genres.

  5. #55
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    You can certainly find poorly written reviews by professional reviewers (professional in the sense they are paid to do this, not in the sense they are good at this). It's generally a good idea to take anything by a gaming publication with a grain of salt. And as you say, these days it's not nearly as big of a problem as it was back in the gaming magazine days, because there is much more information about the game out there than before and you can see the game played on day one (often before that), without any bullshots or bias masking the game's problems.

    But I don't think this state of affairs is without any issues either. You can have ideologically motivated gamers review bombing a game for whatever reason. An example of this is what happened to Battletech when they included an option (meaning you had to go out of your way to select this) to be able to select a gender neutral pronoun in the text in addition to "he" and "she". This was a choice that clearly added to the game, if you wanted to have a character whose gender was not clearly defined (for example, an android), and it was fitting of a sci-fi setting to boot. Yet the usual culprits made such a big deal out of this that it even overshadowed legitimate criticisms about the game.

    And of course it's all very subjective in the first place. I don't think Daikatana is one of the worst games out there and I don't think that Bioshock is one of the the best games out there, but there clearly is a sizeable majority that disagrees with me.

  6. #56
    Moderator
    Registered: Jan 2003
    Location: NeoTokyo
    That's why I don't trust the numbers. I'll just read user reviews on their own terms.

    And of those, I trust user reviews more than professional ones. First just for statistical reasons. Any single review can be clouded by some personal idisyncrasity. But when you have dozens or 100s of them, that kind of averages out, and user reviews are were you get that. But also for what catbarf said. Professional reviewers don't review as gamers for gamers; they review as journalists for readers. The users review as gamers for gamers.

    But back to why one shouldn't trust the numbers and should read reviews on their own terms, often it's clear when a reviewer just has an axe to grind versus when they're really trying to be objective about it... Well it might not be clear at first, but after looking at dozens of them the general picture starts the emerge. One reason you shouldn't go by the numbers is that, when a group of them have an axe to grind, they'll spam review more than the ones trying to be objective. Sometimes the axe they have to grind is the same axe you have to grind too though, like the trend to gut core gameplay out and stick it into DLC; even if you still buy it, a review is a valid way to complain about it.

  7. #57
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by demagogue View Post
    Professional reviewers don't review as gamers for gamers; they review as journalists for readers.
    I don't think this is a negative, though. Professional reviewers can often go deeper in their criticisms or approach the game from a different angle than the usual consumer point of view. In fact, I'd go as far as to say we need more professional critics and reviewers, not less. We need more people taking jabs at games like Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw and we need more people taking a more thoughtful look at games like Christopher "Errant Signal" Franklin.

  8. #58
    Moderator
    Registered: Jan 2003
    Location: NeoTokyo
    I'd put it this way. The reviews that are really useful IMO when you're debating whether or not to buy a game are often coming from other gamers. That's because they're usually boiling it right down to the core mechanics and is this a game you're going to have fun or get into playing or not. At that stage I actually want to avoid too much opinion that might bias me going into a game; I just want to know at that stage is it worth putting down $15 and 10 hours, and I trust the general trend of them to answer that question.

    Then there are reviews, at least for me, that I want to read after I've played a game when I want to think more deeply about what I've just gone through. For that, the good professional reviewers do a good job of putting things into that wider perspective. So I'd even agree with your point, but just to say different reviewers are better fits for different purposes.

  9. #59
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2004
    I look at the scores. When I'm debating whether to get a game, I already know I'm interested in the mechanics. I just want to know if they stuffed it up.

  10. #60
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    I sometimes want to play games for reasons that go beyond "is it fun to play" and "do the mechanics work properly", though. Like for example games that do something novel or have something interesting to say despite not being the most fun to play or not working properly. So even for purely consumerist purposes I see value in critics that look at the game in more depth and more critically. And it's not like gamers are free of bias either and it's not like initial impressions are necessarily the most accurate. I do want to know, for example, whether a game that looks pretty and is praised endlessly turns out to be an empty vacuous experience for me like it happened with Bioshock Infinite. But that's not something I can find out from user reviews. If I go to Steam right now, what I see is:

    The game is pretty short ( finished it in 6h playing normaly ) but worth every minute of it. A real masterpiece. The graphics are really good and the story outsounding.
    Bioshock Infinite is an excellent game and is worthy of multiple playthroughs.
    The game is definitely a masterpiece. One of the best games I've played.
    and even negative reviews don't tell me what I want to know:

    This is not a Bioshock game. Bioshock is underwater, this is not. Its a disgrace against the franchise... Get the first 2 games, this one is really confusing with time travel and garbage. If you want simplicity dont get this game.
    ...so you have endless praise on one hand and people who don't like the game because it's different on the other.

    On the other hand, this single video told me more about the games problems (and even its strong points) than I could have found out even browsing hundreds of suggestions from regular gamers:

    Last edited by Starker; 15th Jun 2019 at 01:00.

  11. #61
    Chakat sex pillow
    Registered: Sep 2006
    Location: not here
    I find user reviews aren't useful beyond talking about objective things like how buggy a game is, if there's bugs in that break the game, or topiques du jour like microtransactions - and even then, Steam's thumbs up/down dichotomy doesn't allow for a review to specify that the opinion's actually mixed. Beyond that, user reviews just aren't reliable (as Starker outlined) unless you have a few trusted sources - like, say, on a forum somewhere on the internet. The same goes for press reviews, to be fair. There's always a skew even if you trust a certain reviewer, so it takes aggregating points from multiple sources to get a decent, more or less accurate take on whether a game's going to be your kind of thing.

  12. #62
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Come to think of it, even on the purely objective side your average user won't necessary care about or be able to correctly identify issues with the game. I think that even there a professional reviewer can potentially give you a far better idea. Like those "WTF is..." videos that John "Totalbiscuit" Bain used to do, for example.

  13. #63
    Moderator
    Registered: Jan 2003
    Location: NeoTokyo
    Ok, there are different reviewers of different quality & usefulness from different sources. That's probably the best answer. Some user reviews boil things down to check-boxes (visual, gameplay, story) and some will go into detail about gameplay, and those can be useful. Those are the ones I look for. I agree the bulk of those kinds of reviews aren't very helpful or are even misleading. So I just look for the ones that appear useful. Professional reviewers can boil things down like that too, but they can also add in a lot of other things not necessarily about playing the game too. It all depends on too many factors to summarize neatly probably.

    As for scores, I think they aren't as useful for negatively reviewed games, because there have been a number of negatively reviewed games I've still liked, and they could have been downvoted for several reasons like they don't like the company or political signaling, etc. Actually the category I was thinking about was artistic downer games, which I typically like, but they'll often get negative reviews just because people are alienated by that kind of thing and will downvote it just on principle. (On the other hand, there are some "artistic" stylish games that get upvoted on that basis alone but end up being shallow & I won't like that. So that also cuts both ways.)

    But if it's a consistently up-voted game, Very or Overwhelmingly Positive, that probably has to be a good game because it couldn't sustain that kind of voting unless all kinds of different people are consistently up-voting it. (Whereas a mixed vote could be really good but idiosyncratic, bad but has fanservice, or just honestly a blah but not awful game. It's much harder to predict.) Oh, the one exception for Overwhelmingly Positive games is something like JRPGs, where there's a rabid fanbase. If you're part of that fanbase you're going to be a rabid fan, but if you aren't, that score doesn't mean you'll like it. But then you probably wouldn't be playing it to begin with.

  14. #64
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Melbourne, Australia
    End of the day. Find a source of reviews that suits you, and stick with it.

    For me I go by RPS and Kotaku. Used to like IGN, but they were a bit too biased and tendency to give high scores to bad games, so I stopped going there a long time ago. They had some good podcasts going for a long time that I thoroughly enjoyed.

  15. #65
    Member
    Registered: Aug 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by icemann View Post
    Find a source of reviews that suits you, and stick with it.
    My number one source for game opinions is... TTLG. I wuv you guys.

  16. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by icemann View Post
    End of the day. Find a source of reviews that suits you, and stick with it.
    And sometimes that means find a source that likes something you don't and avoid the games that source praises for those aspects.

    TTLG is one of my sources for game information and some of the games that others here enjoy I don't. So I take note of that and act apropriately.

  17. #67
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Ireland
    One thing which I regularly watch is Zero Punctuation's reviews. The thing is, while him taking pains to point out all the bad things in games can be useful, I often don't agree with his reviews.
    I usually agree with him on the games he really likes (Thief, Obra Dinn, etc.), but he often criticises games for things that I have no problem with (like his dislike for RPGs, strategy, and anything very complicated.)

    I do agree that someone playing games as a gamer tends to be more relevant at reviewing than someone who plays games as a critic. The other series of reviews that I watch are by Lord Mandalore, who is *not* a professional reviewer, he does it in his spare time because he loves to play strange games, and review them.


    For actually deciding to buy some random game I came across, I do find the user reviews really useful. Looking at games on Epic Game Stores is really weird because the store pages tend to be more like back-of-box hype and are really low on useful information (some don't even have gameplay videos!), combined with no reviews - it makes me not really have a clue what the game is about and forces me to search elsewhere to find out (or, let's face it, probably just not bother and never buy it.)

  18. #68
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Melbourne, Australia
    I generally like watching reviews from Youtuber's who have similar views to me on the genre of the game in question and/or ones who just have similar views in general. For some games it's good to hear a hardcore fanatic of that specific genre's take on it. At the same time I don't mind at all hearing views from others with different views as that's often a good way of seeing games from a different perspective, whether I personally agree with their views or not.

    But say I felt like playing a JRPG I'd not played before, then The Happy Console Gamer would be my preference. As he's HARDCORE into them. Where as if it was a FPS, RTS or turn based squad game, then Angry Joe would be a good source. Or if it's something old school retro DOS / early Windows days, then either LGR or Pixelmusement would be my preference.

  19. #69
    Chakat sex pillow
    Registered: Sep 2006
    Location: not here
    Quote Originally Posted by Nameless Voice View Post
    One thing which I regularly watch is Zero Punctuation's reviews. The thing is, while him taking pains to point out all the bad things in games can be useful, I often don't agree with his reviews.
    I usually agree with him on the games he really likes (Thief, Obra Dinn, etc.), but he often criticises games for things that I have no problem with (like his dislike for RPGs, strategy, and anything very complicated.)
    Given that Yahtzee's videos are for exaggerated comedic effect first and foremost, relying on them for useful insight seems a bit rash.

  20. #70
    Level 10,000 achieved
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Finland
    I decided to take a look at the other end of my Steam library.

    My Top 5:
    100% Rats, Bats, and Bones - Well how ya like that? Good job, smallfry, on creating THE BEST GAME ON STEAM!
    100% The Majesty Of Colors Remastered - This is a game where you play an underwater monster who comes in contact with the surface world for the first time. It is quite something.
    100% Thy Sword - a solid retro hack n' slash platformer. Made by some local Vaasa devs!
    98% Portal 2 - Yeah this is a pretty good one. Best enjoyed in co-op, with Sulphur.
    97% BattleBlock Theater® - It's alright, though I couldn't be bothered sticking with it very far.

  21. #71
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Sometimes Yahtzee voices an issue in a way that somehow perfectly captures it. Not necessarily in the way of great insights, but more in the way of observational comedy, and you go, "Oh yeah, that is annoying," or something like that.

  22. #72
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Melbourne, Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by henke View Post
    My top 5
    Henke its easy to talk about our 5 favorite games in our Steam library, but the challenge is listing the worst ones. Give your worst 5. You have been challenged.

  23. #73
    Level 10,000 achieved
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Finland

  24. #74
    Member
    Registered: Mar 2001
    Location: Melbourne, Australia
    Good

  25. #75
    PC Gamering Smartey Man
    I <3 consoles and gamepads

    Registered: Aug 2007
    Location: New Zealand
    Quote Originally Posted by Starker View Post
    So, what, a "game journalist" writing about what they think of a new game should not say what they think, then?

    This supposed outrage is by large overblown and made up anyway. Just look at what happened with the Doom "controversy":

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l63nY0AYebI
    Almost every single political "controversy" on social media relating to the actual products made by entertaiment industries are a vocal minority. Maybe two or three dozen people on Twitter getting a few hundred likes. This goes for stuff on both sides of the aisle, including the trad cons/Christian JWs who got outraged at some pedo jokes that Guardians of the Galaxy director James Gunn made ~5-10 years ago. Company execs are usually older people who aren't internet savvy and usually think that said vocal minorities are the voice of the majority, so they panic and end up censoring and/or changing their products rather than waiting a few days and letting it blow over.

    As for journalists, their medium is slowly dying but at the moment they still hold influence through their cronyist cliques, concern trolling of boomer executives, etc. Here's an example, Gamer Maker's Toolkit Youtuber, Mark Brown, wrote a pearl clutching outrage article for Polygon about the "gore porn" violence against female protagonist Lara Croft in the current Tomb Raider reboot trilogy. Nekminnit: the gore gets patched out of Shadow of the Tomb Raider. ONE article is all it took for censorship.

    I believe that these people shouldn't be censored and de-platformed for just words, but I'm not going to lift a finger to fight for them either. SJWs are often go out to ruin people's livelihoods via their social media mobs, back room influence, doxing, etc - when their opposition uses their own weapons against them and see success I'm not going to shed any tears.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •