Reviews are just paid advertisements?

~Welcome to the Sonic Blast Community Forum~
Greetings stranger, it is an honor to have you as a visitor. Since we opened in 2006 our goal has been to offer the most authentic Sonic-themed community on the web for Sonic enthusiasts new and old. We do our best to provide the most unique features, best Sonic-themed designs, and have the latest news; always improving to cover all of your Sonic needs. Our community is full of friendly people and we hope you enjoy your brief stay but would be thrilled if you decided to join in on the fun. Being a part of our community is easy, quick, and absolutely free.

Click here to join our community and enter the land of Mobius as a =SB= citizen!
Citizens may log in to their account to participate in our land's conversations and access all of our features:

Reviews are just paid advertisements?
Tweet Topic Started: Nov 29 2009, 01:10 PM (302 Views)
Neo Metallix	Nov 29 2009, 01:10 PM Post #1
~Doomsday Overlord~ Posts: 15,568 Group: =SB= Emperor Member #1 Joined: April 8, 2006 Gender: Male Country: United States of America Playstation Network ID: Doc_Of_D Game Currently Playing: Tales of Xillia	We already have proof that Gamespot has used(and probably still does) cash from publishers to influence a review score. Do you ever get the feeling that most reviews are just paid for advertisements? With the inconsistencies of review standards (some docking points for one aspect, which goes unnoticed in a like game with similar attributes) and proof that major publications take cash for scores, I just can't help but see most reviews as a paid advertisement. How else do you explain when a majorly hyped game gets huge reviews but most gamers don't like it? I've always seen that, but I've never really seen a game yet that got poor reviews having the major population think it's good. Probably because if the company doesn't supply them with cash, they review it on its own merits? Gaming journalism seems so shady now days. Lets just have this as the general discussion for opinions on journalism related to gaming.
	Puncture the Porcupine, my fancharacter!


Zak	Nov 29 2009, 01:17 PM Post #2
For The Circle Posts: 4,002 Group: D Rank Legend Member #9,748 Joined: February 10, 2009 3DS Friend Code: 1118-0225-4062 Steam ID: zakth686	~~Sega needs to start paying them then~~ I wouldn't be surprised, concerning the amount of people who buy and play games based on their reviews, I really wouldn't doubt it.
	"Ati Ramar, In defeat we learn."


Neo Metallix	Nov 29 2009, 01:27 PM Post #3
~Doomsday Overlord~ Posts: 15,568 Group: =SB= Emperor Member #1 Joined: April 8, 2006 Gender: Male Country: United States of America Playstation Network ID: Doc_Of_D Game Currently Playing: Tales of Xillia	Zak Nov 29 2009, 01:17 PM ~~Sega needs to start paying them then~~ I wouldn't be surprised, concerning the amount of people who buy and play games based on their reviews, I really wouldn't doubt it. I doubt Sega has the money to pay most publications off. I also forgot to mention that the major review publication in Japan(Famitsu) has only given a handful of perfect scores in its entire history and most of them are from 2007 and beyond... If that doesn't proove that gaming journalism is a joke nowdays, I don't know what does. Games certainly haven't gotten significantly better in recent times, there have always been stellar games no matter the era.
	Puncture the Porcupine, my fancharacter!


Lady BlizShadow	Nov 29 2009, 02:33 PM Post #4
I still can't use this. Posts: 6,546 Group: Former Monarchs Member #6,722 Joined: March 16, 2008	I think there's two major issues with the reviewing industry that have easily rendered it a waste of time. For one thing, mainstream game criticism is almost non-existent. Although film, music, and literature involve specific and quantifiable elements that add to their quality, they are for the most part subjective and atmospheric experiences just like games are. However, there are years upon years of observation and subsequent solid areas of study that allow critics of these mediums to better detail a film's, album's, or book's merits and flaws. Games do not have this type of credability yet and won't until the industry and the general gaming populous grow up. Honestly, you'd be hardpressed to find a reviewer out there who was equivocal to Roger Ebert in terms of the sheer knowledge about the medium he was reviewing. Secondly, there's scores. Scores have essentially filled the aforementioned void. Ignoring the fact that quantifying one's three hour experience with a game is illogical, scores have little meaning because of the state of game criticism. Those random numbers essentially amount to a cheap summary of the reviewer's shallow opinion. But because a score is naturally a quantative element, they've become easy to misconstrue as the end-all-be-all of a game's quality and have subsequently gained an unpredecented amount of power in all circles of the gaming industry and culture-- Fanboys take no shame in mentioning how scores affect their purchasing decisions and define one's tastes, nor are they above fighting tooth and claw about it, publishers have taken notice and have resulted to bribing outlets for a high Metacritic score (unless your franchise or developer has a certain level of critical immunity, of course), and thus the outlets pander to both consumer and producer by slapping them in appropriate places and raking in the website hits and the dough. This system ultimately results in the firing of more honest people and continues to dilute the reliability of these outlets. The whole thing in general is just so immature and riddled with this type of apathy, pandering, and corruption that it's all bullshit to me. No use in paying attention to it anymore, especially since we're all going to buy whatever the hell we want to buy regardless of what a few of these clowns had to say about it.
	Because staff made me do it. =P Art Topic ~ Drawing Tutorial ~ The Seven Chaos Forum


Neo Metallix	Nov 29 2009, 03:30 PM Post #5
~Doomsday Overlord~ Posts: 15,568 Group: =SB= Emperor Member #1 Joined: April 8, 2006 Gender: Male Country: United States of America Playstation Network ID: Doc_Of_D Game Currently Playing: Tales of Xillia	I agree with everything you said Bliz. I wish people didn't really take Metacritic so seriously. I mean... Metacritic allows and omits the same site differently everytime. Sometimes G4TV(for example) is included in one game's overall list and next it is not. It's flawed. The highest score list is flawed too. Zelda is #1 at 99%, but it only has a few reviews. Now days there are nearly 100s of reviews. If Zelda had had tons of review scores I doubt it would equal out to 99%. In the high 90s, but not 99%. Also GTA4 is no where close to 98%, most gamers agreed that it was disappointing or just above average in the 80% range. Considering that Gamespot's original score for GTA4 was 9.5 out of 10 then after a few minutes went to 10 out of 10 is proof enough that no score has any real merit. I tend to look at gamer reviews and see what real gamers like. It's not too hard to pick out fanboy reviews from honest ones. Usually ones that say "this is an honest review" are fanboys, but not always. I've been able to sniff them out. lol I tend to go with word of mouth rather than media hype scores.
	Puncture the Porcupine, my fancharacter!


Nail Strafer	Nov 30 2009, 05:22 AM Post #6
Flying Battery Act 2 Posts: 1,218 Group: A Rank Hero Member #8,106 Joined: May 5, 2008	Professional reviews aren't a total waste of time. You want to ignore the score, and instead pay attention to what opinions seem to be consistent across all of the reviews you see. Like if everyone says the controls are horrible, it's a pretty good bet the controls are going to be horrible when you play it too. With this approach, you can still get plenty of good information about games you're thinking of buying, even from biased sites like Gamespot. Edited by Nail Strafer, Nov 30 2009, 07:40 AM.



Lady BlizShadow	Nov 30 2009, 10:39 AM Post #7
I still can't use this. Posts: 6,546 Group: Former Monarchs Member #6,722 Joined: March 16, 2008	But the problem with that is reviews thrive on exaggeration for my aforementioned reasons, and you really can't be all that sure how accurate they are until you play the game yourself. I agree it's easy to reach a conclusion on how the game will measure up to your standards by looking at the written consensus on a site like Metacritic (although Metacritic is also a problem as their compilation process is too ambiguous), but it's not uncommon for seasoned players of particular games to look back on the reviews and find them rather unreasonable, especially for games that receive enormous hype.
	Because staff made me do it. =P Art Topic ~ Drawing Tutorial ~ The Seven Chaos Forum


Nail Strafer	Nov 30 2009, 11:29 AM Post #8
Flying Battery Act 2 Posts: 1,218 Group: A Rank Hero Member #8,106 Joined: May 5, 2008	I'm not talking about reading Metacritic's written consensus. To be honest I've never even been to their site. I'm talking about actually reading multiple reviews, noting what facts and opinions are consistent among most or all of them, and then coming to a conclusion based on that. Ignore the scores, of course. One person's exaggerations and biases are mitigated by the calmer opinions of others. It's a bit of work but it's certainly better than going in blind when thinking about buying games. This approach has definitely served me well when I'm thinking of buying a game but not 100% sure I want it. I pretty much swear by it. Admittedly though, I think there are better options than going in blind or listening to reviewers. I've often found that watching gameplay videos tends to give me a really good idea of whether or not I'll enjoy playing a particular game. Much easier to visualize myself playing the game this way versus having a middle man typing out an explanation of it for me. There's demos and rentals too, of course, but I'm too lazy to download or run to the rental store and then back to return it :p (Oh, and did you see Fantastic Mr. Fox too? I really liked it ^^. We should make a topic in the Entertainment Cafe) Edited by Nail Strafer, Nov 30 2009, 11:34 AM.



Lady BlizShadow	Nov 30 2009, 11:59 AM Post #9
I still can't use this. Posts: 6,546 Group: Former Monarchs Member #6,722 Joined: March 16, 2008	Perhaps I'm just excessively jaded then. Too many horror stories have made me wary, so I tend to resort to your third option and fourth option-- Learning about the game through gameplay videos and interviews to develop my own picture of what the game might be like as well as playing demos to better solidify my thoughts. I figured I'm gonna be more or less on the money about what I'd like than anyone else could possibly be. Plus, I have very simple gaming tastes anyways. xP (And yeah, Fantastic Mr. Fox was an excellent film. I should get started on a topic then. x3 <3)
	Because staff made me do it. =P Art Topic ~ Drawing Tutorial ~ The Seven Chaos Forum


infamousDee	Nov 30 2009, 12:23 PM Post #10
Flying Battery Act 2 Posts: 1,023 Group: B Rank Hero Member #9,807 Joined: March 1, 2009	Nail Strafer Nov 30 2009, 05:22 AM Professional reviews aren't a total waste of time. You want to ignore the score, and instead pay attention to what opinions seem to be consistent across all of the reviews you see. Like if everyone says the controls are horrible, it's a pretty good bet the controls are going to be horrible when you play it too. With this approach, you can still get plenty of good information about games you're thinking of buying, even from biased sites like Gamespot. Agreed. Ignore the score, but read and analyse for truthfulness the points made in the actual written review. That's the way to buy games you'll enjoy. Also, watch GAMEPLAY VIDEOS; my primary resource in judging whether to buy games or not recently. And of course, read only reputable and non-notorious review sites; so you'll never buy a pap game because of an IGNorant review giving it 10/10.



Lord Tails Fanatic	Dec 1 2009, 06:50 AM Post #11
Posts: 4,340 Group: Former Monarchs Member #4,694 Joined: December 31, 2007	Hmmm, a topic about IGN this seems like if I ever saw it! Everyone I know knows they suck! They are a bunch of biased fools they are so prejudiced against so many gaming series that its not funny. I've heard many many times of them accepting bribes and money from companies for good scores. I heard, though not sure if it was then, that a reviewer was to be paid to write a good review of a game they were paid for and refused and wrote his honest opinion. The site fired him. IGN has such a huge bias on sonic it's not even funny. You don't have to spend long on there to figure out they are a bunch of 2D nazi's that want the current gen Sonic games to die. They act like they would have a smiling heart attack if Sonic ever went back to 2D and would automatically give it a good score just because its in 2D again. You can look at their Sonic scores and then go look at some of those subpar Mario games and notice the trend very easily. You can look and see them giving most of the 3D games, EVEN SONIC ADVENTURE 2 BATTLE! like 6's and lower and such. Yet they then turn around and rate like Sonic rush and such games like that 8's and 9's just because they are in 2Dish graphics. They then rate a Mario game or Halo game super high just because they are Mario or something like that. Just because there is a huge following like that for a game, doesn't mean its automatically good, which is what they do. I read their review on Mario and Sonic at the Winter Games and they kept saying how you should go buy WiiFit instead like three or four times in the review. They are telling you to go buy another game instead of reviewing this game they are suppose to be telling you about. I just give up on them. I just go by what the actually players think, though thats after I have gotten the game since I hate gameplay videos and or any information about a game before I buy it. I want my opinion of a game to come from my experience, not what some video or person on a message board told me it should be about. That's what I think at least.
	I'm a gamer and always will be a gamer. If you don't believe me. I have 430 Video Games and 19 Consoles. I doubt you could beat that unless you are a gamer as well! =P So, let's see if you can outdo "The Jet Gamer"


infamousDee	Dec 1 2009, 10:57 AM Post #12
Flying Battery Act 2 Posts: 1,023 Group: B Rank Hero Member #9,807 Joined: March 1, 2009	Tails Fanatic Dec 1 2009, 06:50 AM Hmmm, a topic about IGN this seems like if I ever saw it! Everyone I know knows they suck! They are a bunch of biased fools they are so prejudiced against so many gaming series that its not funny. I've heard many many times of them accepting bribes and money from companies for good scores. I heard, though not sure if it was then, that a reviewer was to be paid to write a good review of a game they were paid for and refused and wrote his honest opinion. The site fired him. IGN has such a huge bias on sonic it's not even funny. You don't have to spend long on there to figure out they are a bunch of 2D nazi's that want the current gen Sonic games to die. They act like they would have a smiling heart attack if Sonic ever went back to 2D and would automatically give it a good score just because its in 2D again. You can look at their Sonic scores and then go look at some of those subpar Mario games and notice the trend very easily. You can look and see them giving most of the 3D games, EVEN SONIC ADVENTURE 2 BATTLE! like 6's and lower and such. Yet they then turn around and rate like Sonic rush and such games like that 8's and 9's just because they are in 2Dish graphics. They then rate a Mario game or Halo game super high just because they are Mario or something like that. Just because there is a huge following like that for a game, doesn't mean its automatically good, which is what they do. I read their review on Mario and Sonic at the Winter Games and they kept saying how you should go buy WiiFit instead like three or four times in the review. They are telling you to go buy another game instead of reviewing this game they are suppose to be telling you about. I just give up on them. I just go by what the actually players think, though thats after I have gotten the game since I hate gameplay videos and or any information about a game before I buy it. I want my opinion of a game to come from my experience, not what some video or person on a message board told me it should be about. That's what I think at least. Wow. I just agreed with every syllable of what you just said. We seem to have very similar opinions; when I read an IGN review, I see blatant lie after blatant lie, coupled with shameless bashing of certain game series, and advertising of the games they happen to like the concept of.



1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)

ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community. Learn More · Register Now
« Previous Topic · Act II: Video Game Station · Next Topic »