GameSpot's Plan to Quietly Kill Their Reputation

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by T3H_1337_N1NJ4 (2079 posts) -

http://www.p4rgaming.com/gamespots-plan-to-quietly-kill-their-reputation/

Weirdly enough, I can't not take this seriously. It seems pretty spot on.

It's getting harder for System Wars to thrive when almost every major GameSpot's review seems to be solely aimed to counter the mainstream and earn clicks.

#2 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (10324 posts) -

Uhm...... Oookaaaaayyy......

#3 Posted by Sweenix (5398 posts) -

That's my website bro!

back off!

#5 Posted by DocSanchez (1566 posts) -

I don't trust their reviews much because there is always the lingering bad smell of politics on their reviewing. Gone Home, a 1 hour walking sim, gets 9.5. Now, if someone thought it was worth it, that's their opinion, but this is a reviews site. There isn't enough game there. Last of Us gets an 8, until the expansion comes out focusing on a little girl as a main character, and that's a 9 and game of the month. Beyond Two Souls, the very worst Quantic Dream game and a triumph of hype over substance, gets one of the highest scores of the year. It so happens to feature a none busty none sexual teen girl in the main role.

I just think it's full of the social justice warriors who aren't being completely honest in their scores. I don't want something as subjective as personal politics in my games. You can discuss morality of course but this is something else. They appear to be reading from the hymn sheet of the art thief Anita Sarkeesian, who flip flops about whether she actually plays games or not and has an entry level school of philosophy which could be summed up in one 5 minute youtube video.

#6 Posted by Bigboi500 (29373 posts) -

Interesting...

#7 Posted by Pffrbt (6528 posts) -

Now, if someone thought it was worth it, that's their opinion, but this is a reviews site.

Reviews are opinions.

#8 Posted by uninspiredcup (7869 posts) -

n some regards gamespot should be really respected. Many major webites (IGN/Gametrailers) opt to display attractive Victorian secret models. Woman displays purely for hormonal young males to oggle. Click bait. While to a degree gamespot is guilty of this. They have Keven Vanlord on display quite abit. A man who has freely admitted to be gay. Indeed, he had a gamespot gay union group. Likewise Caroline Petit is on display. Someone who has (or aspires) to change gender. Gaming websites seem to assume gamers are side cap wearing hand slapping dude bro's who dribble from the side of there mouth so I feel gamespot should get credit for giving us credit that we are open minded and modern enough not to be close minded little fucks.

Don't get my wrong, gamespot is still guilty of pandering. The front page is now full of shitty youtube style shows full of 20 something dudes you are suppose to identify with and the sexy girl next door who gives the young people news. But at least it has that. It's fucking something at least.

Also reviews.

#9 Posted by DocSanchez (1566 posts) -

@Pffrbt: Obviously. But professional reviews on sites like this are supposed to have some degree of subjective analysis and neutrality that identity politics doesn't provide. Review the gameplay, the graphics, the sound, the story, don't add layers of personal b.s. that is irrelevant to the average reader especially when you're being paid for it.

#10 Posted by Randolph (10473 posts) -

Low rent no name website tries to make a name for itself by "calling out" a much more successful site. Shocking.

#11 Posted by FoxbatAlpha (6169 posts) -

It is what it is, a sign of the times. Sites are either too biased, dumb, genuine etc...

This is where I go for my video game news and to argue with you fine gaming enthusiasts.

I have seen the site change over the years (not talking about SW either) but I feel it still is better than my alternatives. Sometimes.

#12 Posted by SolidGame_basic (16890 posts) -

It's funny because it's true. This site was at its best around 2000-2001.The forums were also much better back then too. Community was much better all around.

#13 Edited by uninspiredcup (7869 posts) -

@SolidGame_basic said:

It's funny because it's true. This site was at its best around 2000-2001.The forums were also much better back then too. Community was much better all around.

A good community is a boring community.

#14 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (10324 posts) -

@ DocSanchez

What the hell are you on about ? Ellen Page is Busty ?

You're even worse than the reviewers, lying to put down a "game" you don't like. You're so shameless.

#15 Edited by Suppaman100 (3779 posts) -

@DocSanchez said:

I don't trust their reviews much because there is always the lingering bad smell of politics on their reviewing. Gone Home, a 1 hour walking sim, gets 9.5. Now, if someone thought it was worth it, that's their opinion, but this is a reviews site. There isn't enough game there. Last of Us gets an 8, until the expansion comes out focusing on a little girl as a main character, and that's a 9 and game of the month. Beyond Two Souls, the very worst Quantic Dream game and a triumph of hype over substance, gets one of the highest scores of the year. It so happens to feature a none busty none sexual teen girl in the main role.

I just think it's full of the social justice warriors who aren't being completely honest in their scores. I don't want something as subjective as personal politics in my games. You can discuss morality of course but this is something else. They appear to be reading from the hymn sheet of the art thief Anita Sarkeesian, who flip flops about whether she actually plays games or not and has an entry level school of philosophy which could be summed up in one 5 minute youtube video.

Don't forget the critique GTA V got from GS. "GTA V is misogynous"

The amount of liberal, political correctness is unseen for a gaming website.

This site has become a joke for review scores, that's why many on here want metacritic to be the standard to decide if something is a flop or not.

#17 Posted by Suppaman100 (3779 posts) -

@Suppaman100 said:

@DocSanchez said:

I don't trust their reviews much because there is always the lingering bad smell of politics on their reviewing. Gone Home, a 1 hour walking sim, gets 9.5. Now, if someone thought it was worth it, that's their opinion, but this is a reviews site. There isn't enough game there. Last of Us gets an 8, until the expansion comes out focusing on a little girl as a main character, and that's a 9 and game of the month. Beyond Two Souls, the very worst Quantic Dream game and a triumph of hype over substance, gets one of the highest scores of the year. It so happens to feature a none busty none sexual teen girl in the main role.

I just think it's full of the social justice warriors who aren't being completely honest in their scores. I don't want something as subjective as personal politics in my games. You can discuss morality of course but this is something else. They appear to be reading from the hymn sheet of the art thief Anita Sarkeesian, who flip flops about whether she actually plays games or not and has an entry level school of philosophy which could be summed up in one 5 minute youtube video.

Don't forget the critique GTA V got from GS. "GTA V is misogynous"

The amount of liberal, political correctness is unseen for a gaming website.

This site has becoming a joke for review scores, that's why many on here want metacritic to be the standard to decide if something is a flop or not.

The amount of PS4 fanboys scoring Titanfall zero makes me laugh!!!! LOL

check the metacritic User Reviews.

True, it's pathetic.

It's a good game but still a multiplat so it's also pathetic that lemmings claim ownage over a game that's inferior on Xbone. The only place to play the game is PC.

#18 Posted by SolidGame_basic (16890 posts) -

@SolidGame_basic said:

It's funny because it's true. This site was at its best around 2000-2001.The forums were also much better back then too. Community was much better all around.

A good community is a boring community.

I'm not sure what you're getting at. It was MUCH more fun back then. We had a ton of great posters and the forums were much more loose back then. The moderators didn't baby you like they do here. Here they lock threads for the silliest things. That's what pretty much killed this place. Then a few years ago they implanted the tattle tale system where anyone can rat on you and get rewarded for it. That's what truly killed this place ("Nazispot" and "Nazimods"). Most of the good regulars left this place and created their own systemwars site for people who were tired of it. And then of course when Jeff Gerstmann and those guys left that was pretty much the end of old gamespot.

#19 Edited by BattleSpectre (5966 posts) -

I like Kevin VanOrd and have a lot of respect for him as a reviewer, so f*** off.

#20 Posted by tormentos (17161 posts) -

http://www.p4rgaming.com/gamespots-plan-to-quietly-kill-their-reputation/

Weirdly enough, I can't not take this seriously. It seems pretty spot on.

It's getting harder for System Wars to thrive when almost every major GameSpot's review seems to be solely aimed to counter the mainstream and earn clicks.

Dah why else you think they make controversial score like TLOU 8 or Beyond 2 Souls 9 which was even more epic.

Is all click and bait i remember the old day when i wasn't even a member of this site,back then this site was like a bible to me,their score were mostly spot on,they did things right and what was garbage was garbage period.

Now you have 1 review of GT6 been 7 and a reviewer complaining that the track need a make up,the rain he didn't like it and pointing the finger to a game that has more than 1,200 cars for having micro transaction,then you have a review of Forza where the dude either work for MS or was in charge of making a payed review.

A 9 this game has no weather changes,not night racing,doesn't have 1 1/4 of the cars GT6 has and is ridden with micro transaction,yet gets a 9, worse the whole industry join score say the game is a 7.9 game while gamespot claim is a 90 game.

Is not hard to see why the game got a damn 9 here,the game even have a special showing on this site where Turn 10 even talk about the game,it was exclusive i still remember it..

So while the entire gaming community agree that Forza is a 7.9 gamespot say it 90,and while the entire gaming community thinks GT6 is an 81 gamespot say is 70..

The is not standards for reviews now,there are no guidelines or originality,innovation or any crap like that which use to be totally useful back on the days,today is all about influenced or biased opinions,rather than actual guide lines,if gamespot had guide lines here Forza 5 would have not score 9 neither would Titanfall,or Beyond 2 Souls either.

#21 Posted by LJS9502_basic (150376 posts) -

@Pffrbt said:

@DocSanchez said:

Now, if someone thought it was worth it, that's their opinion, but this is a reviews site.

Reviews are opinions.

Yes. But review sites/magazines etc should also be professional and leaving one's bias out of reviews. If a game is well done...it's well done......whether the reviewer likes the genre/game or not. Saying a professional site etc..(not commenting specifically on GS here) is a cop out. If you just want to spout opinion....then make a blog.

As for GS reviews....they aren't my go to for reviews since they frequently are quite a bit off from other reviews. Still.....skip review scores and read the actual review to get a better idea from any source.

I never get why this forum is so enamored of scores....

#22 Edited by sts106mat (19044 posts) -

Metacritic is to blame for this shit....people have lost their jobs because a game performed badly according to it's metascore.

Has metacritic done anything for the gaming industry? Fuck no,,,shit games still get released

Just play the fucking games you wanna play and stop worrying about what a journalist thinks.

#23 Posted by LJS9502_basic (150376 posts) -

Metacritic is to blame for this shit....people have lost their jobs because a game performed badly according to it's metascore.

Has metacritic done anything for the gaming industry? Fuck no,,,shit games still get released

Just play the fucking games you wanna play and stop worrying about what a journalist thinks.

Metacritic isn't to blame if games are not well done. What a stupid idea.

#24 Edited by sts106mat (19044 posts) -

@sts106mat said:

Metacritic is to blame for this shit....people have lost their jobs because a game performed badly according to it's metascore.

Has metacritic done anything for the gaming industry? Fuck no,,,shit games still get released

Just play the fucking games you wanna play and stop worrying about what a journalist thinks.

Metacritic isn't to blame if games are not well done. What a stupid idea.

I didn't say it was metacritic's fault some games are bad. but metacritic score being used to determine whether someone should keep their job? that is a bad idea.

#25 Posted by tormentos (17161 posts) -
@Pffrbt said:

@DocSanchez said:

Now, if someone thought it was worth it, that's their opinion, but this is a reviews site.

Reviews are opinions.

And they shouldn't be..

Games should be rated on a standard rather on what you think of it..

innovation,replay,controls things like that rather than i just hate Micro transactions so this game get 1 point less.

And magazine that were here before sites use to have those guidelines.

#27 Posted by LJS9502_basic (150376 posts) -

@LJS9502_basic said:

@sts106mat said:

Metacritic is to blame for this shit....people have lost their jobs because a game performed badly according to it's metascore.

Has metacritic done anything for the gaming industry? Fuck no,,,shit games still get released

Just play the fucking games you wanna play and stop worrying about what a journalist thinks.

Metacritic isn't to blame if games are not well done. What a stupid idea.

I didn't say it was metacritic's fault some games are bad. but metacritic score being used to determine whether someone should keep their job? that is a bad idea.

That would be up to the company that employs them. You don't need Metacritic to go by scores by the way. It is possible to read the reviews and see if you find them acceptable. And one can still fire an individual. Anyway.....all jobs are based on performance. People are fired every day for not reaching them. Why should game designers be any different?

Bad games shouldn't mean employment.

#28 Posted by blue_hazy_basic (27385 posts) -

The whining about reviews is ridiculous. GS tends to score harder than other sites, esp when those sites hand out good reviews in return for favors/money/access. Metacritic is the absolute worst for gaming where any site which scores below the average gets lambasted by fanboys, who fail to realise that average scores get artificially inflated by "official", fan, paid for and sometimes downright fake sites. MC is what has lead to so many dubious reviews IMO.

#29 Posted by tormentos (17161 posts) -

Metacritic is to blame for this shit....people have lost their jobs because a game performed badly according to it's metascore.

Has metacritic done anything for the gaming industry? Fuck no,,,shit games still get released

Just play the fucking games you wanna play and stop worrying about what a journalist thinks.

Metacritics has nothing to do with those people losing their jobs,Metacritics is a site where all scores are gather and accounted,so rather than putting your faith blindly on gamespot you can on 100 sites,look at TLOU it has 97 reviews and is 95% so yeah you know the majority of those sites agree the game is great,rather than going by this site alone who thinks the game is good 80.

If over scoring a game is bad under scoring it is even worse because you are denying those hard working people a fair score according to what the game deserve.

Score can make a horrible game sell,and can make a good one stop been made.

#30 Posted by T3H_1337_N1NJ4 (2079 posts) -

The whining about reviews is ridiculous. GS tends to score harder than other sites, esp when those sites hand out good reviews in return for favors/money/access. Metacritic is the absolute worst for gaming where any site which scores below the average gets lambasted by fanboys, who fail to realise that average scores get artificially inflated by "official", fan, paid for and sometimes downright fake sites. MC is what has lead to so many dubious reviews IMO.

So you're basically using the same logic the fanboys always use to say that the lowest review is the one that matters.

"It's the lowest because they're not afraid to say the truth, all the others were paid to lie!"

#31 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (10324 posts) -

My Goodness. Look at everybody pointing fingers !

You wana know whos fault it is game scores are they way they are ? Its your fault !

Nobody even reads the Summaries of reviews anymore let alone the review itself, now people just wana know what genre and what numbered. Its just numbers all that people care about hence why metacritic is the way it is.

Hell Gamespot and Metacritic won't even let me write a User Review without rating/scoring it.

I don't wana put a number on it because the moment you do, you've lost 99% of people who were actually going to read it. Not to mention a game that scores 5-7 is considered Broken-Mediocre. A 5 is decent. Thats the half way mark... Not the lowest point !

Leave Gamespot and Metacritic alone, they're just following gamer's lead.

#32 Posted by betamaxx83 (351 posts) -

1998-2007 were the golden years for GameSpot. Ever since the original crew left, walked out, or got fired this site has turned into trash.

I use to enjoy their reviews, but their reviews suck and quality has been downgraded significantly. I recently came back months ago after a three year break. Best gaming site by far back in the day, but now it's not even a fraction of what it was during its glory years.

#33 Posted by sts106mat (19044 posts) -

@sts106mat said:

@LJS9502_basic said:

@sts106mat said:

Metacritic is to blame for this shit....people have lost their jobs because a game performed badly according to it's metascore.

Has metacritic done anything for the gaming industry? Fuck no,,,shit games still get released

Just play the fucking games you wanna play and stop worrying about what a journalist thinks.

Metacritic isn't to blame if games are not well done. What a stupid idea.

I didn't say it was metacritic's fault some games are bad. but metacritic score being used to determine whether someone should keep their job? that is a bad idea.

That would be up to the company that employs them. You don't need Metacritic to go by scores by the way. It is possible to read the reviews and see if you find them acceptable. And one can still fire an individual. Anyway.....all jobs are based on performance. People are fired every day for not reaching them. Why should game designers be any different?

Bad games shouldn't mean employment.

obligatory "no shit sherlock"

I agree about the employment, but using metacritic to determine a games' quality? that's bad. MC is a measure of how well the game was critically received....nothing more.

Bad games can still get good reviews and good games get bad reviews

Like i said above. just play the game you wanna play.

#34 Posted by LJS9502_basic (150376 posts) -

@LJS9502_basic said:

That would be up to the company that employs them. You don't need Metacritic to go by scores by the way. It is possible to read the reviews and see if you find them acceptable. And one can still fire an individual. Anyway.....all jobs are based on performance. People are fired every day for not reaching them. Why should game designers be any different?

Bad games shouldn't mean employment.

obligatory "no shit sherlock"

I agree about the employment, but using metacritic to determine a games' quality? that's bad. MC is a measure of how well the game was critically received....nothing more.

Bad games can still get good reviews and good games get bad reviews

Like i said above. just play the game you wanna play.

Why is it bad? It's just a consolidation of various reviews. If the game is good....the average is good. Blaming Metacritic is idiotic.

#35 Posted by blue_hazy_basic (27385 posts) -

@blue_hazy_basic said:

The whining about reviews is ridiculous. GS tends to score harder than other sites, esp when those sites hand out good reviews in return for favors/money/access. Metacritic is the absolute worst for gaming where any site which scores below the average gets lambasted by fanboys, who fail to realise that average scores get artificially inflated by "official", fan, paid for and sometimes downright fake sites. MC is what has lead to so many dubious reviews IMO.

So you're basically using the same logic the fanboys always use to say that the lowest review is the one that matters.

"It's the lowest because they're not afraid to say the truth, all the others were paid to lie!"

Congratulations for not reading what I said, "where any site which scores below the average". Yup that's the same as where you said I went.

#36 Posted by freedomfreak (39225 posts) -

p4rgaming is funny.

#37 Posted by blue_hazy_basic (27385 posts) -

My Goodness. Look at everybody pointing fingers !

You wana know whos fault it is game scores are they way they are ? Its your fault !

Nobody even reads the Summaries of reviews anymore let alone the review itself, now people just wana know what genre and what numbered. Its just numbers all that people care about hence why metacritic is the way it is.

Hell Gamespot and Metacritic won't even let me write a User Review without rating/scoring it.

I don't wana put a number on it because the moment you do, you've lost 99% of people who were actually going to read it. Not to mention a game that scores 5-7 is considered Broken-Mediocre. A 5 is decent. Thats the half way mark... Not the lowest point !

Leave Gamespot and Metacritic alone, they're just following gamer's lead.

I honestly think this is a great point and again where metacritic is a bad thing, more so than a single site's review, because everything just boils down to a single number. A single number which is compared to other numbers which use totally different number and sources of reviews.

#38 Posted by sts106mat (19044 posts) -

@sts106mat said:

Metacritic is to blame for this shit....people have lost their jobs because a game performed badly according to it's metascore.

Has metacritic done anything for the gaming industry? Fuck no,,,shit games still get released

Just play the fucking games you wanna play and stop worrying about what a journalist thinks.

Metacritics has nothing to do with those people losing their jobs,Metacritics is a site where all scores are gather and accounted,so rather than putting your faith blindly on gamespot you can on 100 sites,look at TLOU it has 97 reviews and is 95% so yeah you know the majority of those sites agree the game is great,rather than going by this site alone who thinks the game is good 80.

If over scoring a game is bad under scoring it is even worse because you are denying those hard working people a fair score according to what the game deserve.

Score can make a horrible game sell,and can make a good one stop been made.

Oh really?

http://www.gamesradar.com/now-metacritic-can-do-developers-out-of-bonus-pay-and-jobs-as-bioshock-studio-demands-metascores-on-applications/

http://kotaku.com/metacritic-matters-how-review-scores-hurt-video-games-472462218

http://gamasutra.com/view/news/174829/Ask_Gamasutra_84_Metacritic_need_not_apply.php

http://www.gameinformer.com/themes/blogs/generic/post.aspx?WeblogApp=codygilleymcnugget_blog&y=2011&m=07&d=31&WeblogPostName=the-problems-with-metacritic&GroupKeys=blogs/members/

It is now considered the "industry standard" despite several well documented, glaring flaws within its make up.

For anything else other than a place to find a collection of reviews, metacritic is useless. without that score, the website would basically be just another website that nobody cares about.

It's bollocks.

#39 Posted by sts106mat (19044 posts) -

@sts106mat said:

@LJS9502_basic said:

That would be up to the company that employs them. You don't need Metacritic to go by scores by the way. It is possible to read the reviews and see if you find them acceptable. And one can still fire an individual. Anyway.....all jobs are based on performance. People are fired every day for not reaching them. Why should game designers be any different?

Bad games shouldn't mean employment.

obligatory "no shit sherlock"

I agree about the employment, but using metacritic to determine a games' quality? that's bad. MC is a measure of how well the game was critically received....nothing more.

Bad games can still get good reviews and good games get bad reviews

Like i said above. just play the game you wanna play.

Why is it bad? It's just a consolidation of various reviews. If the game is good....the average is good. Blaming Metacritic is idiotic.

reading comprehension

#40 Posted by hoyalawya (342 posts) -

I am new to systems war & fanboys silliness. What reputation did GameSpot use to have?

#41 Edited by sts106mat (19044 posts) -

I am new to systems war & fanboys silliness. What reputation did GameSpot use to have?

depended what the game was and what platform it was on (aka SSDD)

#42 Posted by T3H_1337_N1NJ4 (2079 posts) -

@T3H_1337_N1NJ4 said:
@blue_hazy_basic said:

The whining about reviews is ridiculous. GS tends to score harder than other sites, esp when those sites hand out good reviews in return for favors/money/access. Metacritic is the absolute worst for gaming where any site which scores below the average gets lambasted by fanboys, who fail to realise that average scores get artificially inflated by "official", fan, paid for and sometimes downright fake sites. MC is what has lead to so many dubious reviews IMO.

So you're basically using the same logic the fanboys always use to say that the lowest review is the one that matters.

"It's the lowest because they're not afraid to say the truth, all the others were paid to lie!"

Congratulations for not reading what I said, "where any site which scores below the average". Yup that's the same as where you said I went.

Did I misinterpret? Are you not saying that good sites give below average scores because the over average ones were paid to review the game well?

#43 Edited by HadOne2Many (1255 posts) -

I have to agree...Gamespot is no longer a news source for me. Over the years they have gone from a respected site to the gaming equivalent of the Huffington Post. It is still a decent source of entertainment though and they have decent coverage of the industry events (E3, etc.).

#44 Posted by LJS9502_basic (150376 posts) -

@LJS9502_basic said:

@sts106mat said:

@LJS9502_basic said:

That would be up to the company that employs them. You don't need Metacritic to go by scores by the way. It is possible to read the reviews and see if you find them acceptable. And one can still fire an individual. Anyway.....all jobs are based on performance. People are fired every day for not reaching them. Why should game designers be any different?

Bad games shouldn't mean employment.

obligatory "no shit sherlock"

I agree about the employment, but using metacritic to determine a games' quality? that's bad. MC is a measure of how well the game was critically received....nothing more.

Bad games can still get good reviews and good games get bad reviews

Like i said above. just play the game you wanna play.

Why is it bad? It's just a consolidation of various reviews. If the game is good....the average is good. Blaming Metacritic is idiotic.

reading comprehension

I noticed but I didn't want to point it out. Also....punctuation seems to be a problem. Again....why are you blaming Metacritic when pubs depend on sales to make money? If a dev doesn't deliver the sales....and bad games should NOT....why should they still be employed? I noticed you sidestepped that question.

Would you want a firefighter employed if he was unable to perform the job? How about a doctor? Or computer tech? Why do you put devs on pedestal and think their performance should not be tied into employment?

If a game is well done....Metacritic will show that. Likewise if a review is average but the game is selling....no one is getting fired. You actually have not provided any evidence that talent is unappreciated.

#45 Posted by blue_hazy_basic (27385 posts) -

@blue_hazy_basic said:

@T3H_1337_N1NJ4 said:
@blue_hazy_basic said:

The whining about reviews is ridiculous. GS tends to score harder than other sites, esp when those sites hand out good reviews in return for favors/money/access. Metacritic is the absolute worst for gaming where any site which scores below the average gets lambasted by fanboys, who fail to realise that average scores get artificially inflated by "official", fan, paid for and sometimes downright fake sites. MC is what has lead to so many dubious reviews IMO.

So you're basically using the same logic the fanboys always use to say that the lowest review is the one that matters.

"It's the lowest because they're not afraid to say the truth, all the others were paid to lie!"

Congratulations for not reading what I said, "where any site which scores below the average". Yup that's the same as where you said I went.

Did I misinterpret? Are you not saying that good sites give below average scores because the over average ones were paid to review the game well?

Some of the reviews that do are sure. Some of the low outlying scores are simply click bait because if they get on MC lots of people will rage click on them. You decided to try and put an agenda on what I said that was never there. What I said was that there are reviews which simply aren't genuine and affect the score. In an era of subversive marketing its commonplace, especially when companies have so much at stake. I never said that there aren't plenty of genuine reviews which score games highly.

But hey read what you gotta read I guess.

#46 Posted by blue_hazy_basic (27385 posts) -

Can whomever locked this message me please?