What it all boils down to...(concerning the reviews)

Slainchild

Newbie
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
380
Reaction score
0
...Console gamers vs. PC gamers.


GS - 9.2
IGN - 9.7


Just by reading the reviews by both of these sites, I can tell that GS is very console-biased when it comes to review games, while IGN's reviewer on the other hand was more appreciative of HL2, because he is obviously a PC gamer. Same is true with a lot of multi-format games magazines.

I say: Don't trust PC game reviews when they arent being reviewed by a PC gamer, and don't get the wrong impression from someone who doesn't know what they are talking about.

(yes, I am a bit pissed about the GS review :borg: )
 
Excellent point. It's a lot like media bias in politics. You need to remember the background/angle that the people are coming from. If you take a compilation of all the HL2 reviews you still get an average of about 96-97% which is amazing. Only 8 more hours and then we'll see who was right.
 
Maybe, but if you look, gamespot gave Halo 2 a 9.4, and IGN gave Halo 2 a 9.8. In both cases they rated Halo 2 higher, just on different scales.
 
flashfx2 said:
Maybe, but if you look, gamespot gave Halo 2 a 9.4, and IGN gave Halo 2 a 9.8. In both cases they rated Halo 2 higher, just on different scales.
True, but the proof is in the words.
 
i think some people just need to face the reality that Gamespot hasn't got overly hyped like most mags and that HL 2 really isnt as amazing as some of you think. 9.2 isnt even a bad score anyway.
 
PC Games != Console Games

They are reviewed differently...by different people.
 
Does a review score really affect how you will feel playing the game or your impressions of the game or you general overall experience?

...No? Ok, then we all said what we wanted about GS, it is not relevent anymore.
 
One thing that bothers me.. Is this fact. Half life 2 was KNOCKED for no contributing anything new to genre... for not revolutionizing it or whatever... but never in the Halo 2 review was anything of the sort mentioned... Halo 2 was even LESS groundbreaking that half life 2 is.. and yet it isn't docked at all for it. One game is seen as a wonderful execution of a tried and true formula.. while another is seen as an old concept that brings nothing new to the table... Its just a ridiculous double standard... This is really making me want to stop reading reviews anymore. I have no problem with bad reviews, but it really does seem like publications(online in particular) are losing any sense of consitency or level headedness in their reviews.
 
Slainchild said:
...Console gamers vs. PC gamers.


GS - 9.2
IGN - 9.7


Just by reading the reviews by both of these sites, I can tell that GS is very console-biased when it comes to review games, while IGN's reviewer on the other hand was more appreciative of HL2, because he is obviously a PC gamer. Same is true with a lot of multi-format games magazines.

I say: Don't trust PC game reviews when they arent being reviewed by a PC gamer, and don't get the wrong impression from someone who doesn't know what they are talking about.

(yes, I am a bit pissed about the GS review :borg: )


Bollox :) (don't take it to heart - but that's complete bollox)
 
I'm insanely pissed.

IGN.com said:
Half-Life 2 doesn't do anything particularly new; it doesn't really innovate in many ways.

HELLO?! ONE WORD. "Manipulator" :frown:

Gamespot said:
With that said, many of those tricks feel more than a bit familiar now, and the game itself is saddled with a disappointing story.

Why? Because you couldn't follow it, dumbass? :rolleyes: Wanna read a confusing story? Read 1984. Amazing book; spectacular. If I can follow that, I can follow any story.

Alas, none of the reviews will change my mind anyways, so it doesn't really matter. It also depends who's reviewing, what mood they were in, what they already knew about the game, how MUCH they knew about the game, many many factors.

All in all, I will play the damn game anyways...
 
These sorts of posts really annoy me. It doesn't matter who gives HL2 a low score, you'll still have try to discredit them. Some people just can't except that review scores are subjective judgements.
 
objective, my friend.

Seriously, what do you guys care about a bad review for? Does it make the game any less good?
 
subtlesnake said:
These sorts of posts really annoy me. It doesn't matter who gives HL2 a low score, you'll still have try to discredit them. Some people just can't except that review scores are subjective judgements.

But if they disagree with the review it must be wrong!!!!111

And as for the:

'Half-Life 2 doesn't do anything particularly new; it doesn't really innovate in many ways.'

That's exactly what Edge said - but they gave HL2 a 'revolutionary' 10/10, so I guess that makes it alright ;)

(personally I don't expect HL2 to innovate - just to combine many cool gameplay features together, and do each bit better than any game before)
 
< rant mode >

You know what gets me is the fact that I knew Halo 2 in my eyes would JUST be Halo with something a little bit more, but nothing to impress ME (note, "me" meaning "not you").

It also annoyed me that I had to complete Halo2 at my mates before he would accept my opinion that it sucked.

It also annoyed me that it indeed sucked after so many reviews gave it such a high score.

It also annoyed me that reviews stated that Halo2 was crap but then mentioned it was Halo... so it gets 90%

It also annoyed me that I avoided Half Life 2 reviews so I could make my own opinions only for my mate to quote afore mentioned Half Life 2 reviews with lines like "The story is crap"..... "The AI is worse than the first"

It also annoyed me that the same review then gave it 9.7 outa 10.....

See if Half Life 2 turns out like Halo 2...... "One WILL be pissed"

< / rant mode >
 
Back
Top