Why would you ever trust Gamespot?

Cons Himself

Cons Himself

Newbie
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
660
Reaction score
2
I see a lot of posts flying about with people claiming that Gamespot's review is 'the only one that matters' and, 'im waiting to see what Gamespot say'.

Well, from what I can see Gamespot have a hugely embarrassing problem - their reviews are simply inconsistent.

The Gamespot rating system is a percentage one, eg, - 9.9 = 99%.

Now Gamespot have only ever awarded 4 games 100%. Note that this is a score most magazines never EVER give, quoting 'no game can ever be perfect'. Which is fair enough because as soon as someone makes the perfect game(tm), no one else would bother developing again.

These 4 games are:

Zelda: OOT
About as close to perfect as you can get in a game, so if youre going to give out a 100% review, may as well be for this.

Chrono Cross
I would have said BG2 or FF7 but thats just me....still, a brilliant game.

OK, not 100% games in everyone's eyes, but still damm good games - games that added to interactive entertainment in a meaningful way.

Now a slightly less convincing choice:
Soul Calibur
Call me elitist but I dont really think beat-em-ups are contenders for 'best-game-ever' awards, like a 100% review.

Ready for it, the game equal to the above 3 and better than all other games ever released (for it's day).....Drumroll please:

Tony Hawks Pro Skater 3...


errr....ummmmm....does not compute ??!111!1eleven

Just take a look at Gamespot's best of all time list ( takes a while to load! ) and tell me they ARENT console biased?

http://www.gamespot.com/reviews.html?type=byscore&platform=all&order=desc&time=alltime
 
I could care less about reviews. My opinion is the only one that matters to me.
 
I trust Pc gamer US. Everytime they score a game its exactly how i feel about it.
 
Well, Gamespot's been around for a long time, and its reviews traditionally matter. It's sort of like the Oscar. Though I like Gamespot less lately, I still read their reviews with interest.
 
Fair enough, for HL2 the only thing that matters to me is my opinion too.

But im just pointing out this Tony Hawk thing. Doesnt this seem a bit strange to anyone else?
 
In my experience over the years, if gamespot gives something 9.0 or higher, I have to play it. Games rated above 9 are always 'must play' games for me.

There have been a few games that the rated much lower than my enjoyment would have rated it.
 
For my reviews I go to IGN and Gamespy. I found Gamespots reviews to be either really biased or unfair (based on the fact that I played the games they rated lower and actually found them to be excellent). SO I dunno, to each his own.

Any of you read PC Gamer's HL2 review? 98%. Highest they have ever awarded a game.
 
You cannot trust a review from ANY pulication who which makes money from advertisements from companies selling the reviewed product or it's rival products.

You cannot trust "official" magazines and you certainly can't trust any site that is linked with the workings of a game such as gamespy.

Bring back Digitiser, the only ever truely independant reviewing platform. Mr Biffo was a genius. UK channel 4 teletext page for those who never witnessed it, I cuss you bad for not seeing it.

In this day and age the closest you'll get to a fair and unbiased review from a meanigful source who has a clue about anything is Edge magazine. And for what it's worth they gave HL2 10/10 last month
 
I'd just like to congratulate myself on an appallingly compiled post above this one. I put it down to release night jitters and the the menopaus.
 
mr.T says stay out of his dustbins

:( i miss digitiser

perfect dark is their highest rated FPS game with 9.9, it sure as hell was better then the halo series... but will hl2 beat it? thats the question.
 
I trust in G-Spot. I have played games based on their reviews that turned out to be brilliant, had I followed the reviews from PC Gamer, I would have never touched those games e.g. Rayman 2 on PC, for me it was the best platform game, I played it after reading G-Spot review 9.3, PC Gamer 66%. Trust me Rayman 2 is an amazing game. Another example, read the review of Doom 3, PC Gamer US 94 % (WTF), G-Spot 8.5 (got it right).
 
i think gamespot were one of the few reviewers that werent blinded by doom 3 hype when they reviewed it early on
 
I think they are one of the most honest, and tend to look towards there reviews more than i ever would with ign or gamespy
 
ok on the whole i probably agree with you...

but why the console bias...? and why the 10/10 to tony hawks pro noob 3?
 
MoJo|Night said:
Bring back Digitiser, the only ever truely independant reviewing platform. Mr Biffo was a genius. UK channel 4 teletext page for those who never witnessed it, I cuss you bad for not seeing it.

In this day and age the closest you'll get to a fair and unbiased review from a meanigful source who has a clue about anything is Edge magazine. And for what it's worth they gave HL2 10/10 last month
Click to expand...

Yer, bang on about Digitiser. The new guys aren't that bad. Recently recommended Fable over Halo 2 for Xbox peeps without Live!.

And Edge. They're elitist bastards when it comes to review scores, so 10/10 is a quality result for HL2.
 
I don't trust any review. They play the game way too fast to get a good grip on whats going on in the game. If I'm not sure I'll like the game I'll read as many reviews as I can to get a general idea of what he game is like, but I don't go by scores.
 
I never trust just ONE review source. It's getting a gamut of perspectives that shows a game's (or movie's) true colors. As far as HL2 is concerned, the thing that is heartening is that several reviews have been overwhelmingly positive and none have been negative. The chance that they ALL are involved in some sort of Valve fostered conspiracy to trick us is really, really low.

I'm sure that SOME review will be lukewarm. That's fine. Most aren't. I doubt any will be negative.
 
Cons Himself said:
ok on the whole i probably agree with you...

but why the console bias...? and why the 10/10 to tony hawks pro noob 3?
Click to expand...

One very important thing to note about Gamespot's reviews. You'll notice that all of those 10/10 reviews are pre-2002. You'll also notice that, in 2002, they started giving out editor's choice awards to games that scored higher than 9.0/10. When they made that change, they also revamped their reviewing system to prevent rating games so highly.

In the time since then, the highest rating they've given a game was 9.7/10 to Metroid Prime which was highly deserved! In my opinion, they are one of the better review sites out there. They tend to be as unbiased as possible and their reviews are very in depth and give a great feel for what's good and bad about a game.

They shared your sentiment that 10/10 should be pretty much impossible for a game to get and that's why they've fixed their system and done a damn good job of it.
 
ahhh i see, thanks trantjd

still, kind of weird seeing what was essentially a mass market, endorsement game get a 10/10 from such a notoriously tough reviewer....Zelda I can understand but not TH's.

and definitely not enough PC games in the mix on that list...
 
Dude. I agree. I've NEVER liked gamespot. They give the best games low scores.

I always thought of gamespot as like the crummy playground where the dirty poor kids go because they don't know any better.

Us elite people go to IGN.

No seriously though, IGN is the best network out there; they're still sort of a homebrew thing but with good resources. They tell the truth.
 
i'd also recommend reading their "how do we score" section. It's very interesting, and actually worth reading. I'm a GS Complete member, and I find their reviews to be far more reliable than almost any american gaming media.

THPS3 was a great game that scored a bit too high, but as mentioned, their score system has been honed recently. Their reviews of recent games like Men of Valor, Tribes: Vengeance, and Burnout 3 have been dead on with my opinions.

Also, Greg Kasavin is a hot bitch.
 
SixThree said:
I could care less about reviews. My opinion is the only one that matters to me.
Click to expand...

Well said man, only your own opinion is what matters. I mean hell, I've played games that have gotten below a 7.0 or eve 5.0.

Remember that little budget shooter Gore? Yea, well my friends and I still have a blast with it at LAN parites, as well as with Devastation.
 
Freedom Fighters got a 9.3. I mean, great game, but a 9.3 implies it's better than sliced bread, which it isn't.
 
Cons Himself said:
Now Gamespot have only ever awarded 4 games 100%. Note that this is a score most magazines never EVER give, quoting 'no game can ever be perfect'. Which is fair enough because as soon as someone makes the perfect game(tm), no one else would bother developing again.
Click to expand...

Not exactly. See, 100% doesn't mean perfect in the sense that it's the end-all be-all game, and once you play it there's no need to buy anything else (or that that one game will never grow tiring). Gamespot, for example, rates games on several factors. If the graphics in the game being reviewed are basically the best to date, it gets a 10.

If the sound quality matches some of the best in any game, it gets a 10. They're not implying the graphics and sound won't ever get any better, but that the graphics are essentially setting (or meeting) a new standard.

Therefore if a game receives 100% from any magazine, all you can assume is that they think the developer spent enough time to polish each part of the game and each part is on par with some of the best games of all time.

-UnmarkedOne
 
i just dont think giving out 100%'s gives enough room for manouvere if a better game in the same genre comes out 6months to a year down the line....which is prob why most mags dont do it.
 
The reason i dont normally trust gamespot reviews is because they have a different guy that reviews different games based on how popular it is.

Example: Greg Kassavin only reviews most games that have the most hyped or the one he is particularly looking forward to playing. The games that don't really have much hype to them, other editors that work at Gamespot review the games. It looks to me as that the editors favore all different genres of games. It looks to me that Greg Kassavin favors RPG's over FPS's.

Other than that i don't really have a big problem with Gamespot reviews.
 
Everyone has to keep in mind that they rate games compared to the other games on their platform, so because a console game rates higher than a PC game doesnt mean its better. Also, PC games have much higher expectations than console games simply because the platform has been around for so long, and has the most games available. Also, to all those saying that gamespot is trash: the reviews are just the reviewers presentation of their opinion on a game, so you generally have to find a reviewer or review site that your opinions match up against.

I usually agree with Greg's opinions (he reviews most of gamespots major games), so I go to gamespot alot, whereas i think IGN is an overrated piece of trash. I like gamespy too, even though theyre sticking with the five star rating system because the content in their reviews is usually very well thought out.
 
they gave 9.9 for super mario, and they're giving 9.2 for hl2?
BS, i'd say
 
The official "gamespot sucks" thread

Sometimes Gamespot puts in pretty good review scores, but other times it really disapoints me.

Overrated games:
Halo XBox: 9.7
Halo PC: 9.0
Quake III: Arena: 9.4
Unreal tournement 2004: 9.4
Neverwinter nights: 9.2
Emperor: Battle for Dune: 8.3

Underrated games:
Counter-strike: 8.4
Starcraft/Broodwar: 9.1
Diablo II/LOD: 8.5/8.2
Ground Control 2: 8.5

What else was there?
 
Yea, sometimes Gamespots reviews are kindof retarded, but it usually depends on the person who's assigned to do the review. For example, Gamespot's half life 2 review was done by some person that ive never heard of. I really wish they put Greg to the job this time too, or had some system like EGM where multiple reviewers post their scores.
 
**** gamespot seriously. IGN gives a nice thorough review. How can Soul Caliber get a perfect 10 and half life 2 a 9.2?
 
Jason who ?!
Who is this guy ?? Why did they let him review it ?!
why did he say the story suck, when all the other mags said that the story is one of the major pros ??!!
omg some people these days...!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
B
Community Interviews: Tony Newton, co-creator of Redemption
Replies
0
Views
5K
Barnz
B
caste
Composers who could share the same spirit with Half-Life ?
Replies
1
Views
2K
10n02
10n02
Omnomnick
Valve Announces Source 2 + Steam Link [GDC 2015]
2
Replies
67
Views
37K
Skyace65
S
Pikminiman
New Steam Feature: Steam Reviews
Replies
3
Views
4K
ríomhaire
ríomhaire
Back
Top