Praise to Carolyn Petit and Tom McShea

  • 93 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by drekula2 (1653 posts) -

McShea giving Bioshock Infinite a 4 and Carolyn giving Arkham Origins a 6. I'm happy they're being honest.

What I dislike, and highly suspect, is that too many reviewers follow the typical game-rating logic:

"I didn't really enjoy the game, but it's a big-budget game in a popular series - So 8/10"

#2 Edited by darkspineslayer (19012 posts) -

I agree for the most part (if only because I don't believe Caro bitched about women in the Batman Review)

Shame this point had to be made in an obvious troll thread.

#3 Edited by Sweenix (5095 posts) -

I actually despised mcshea, but then i saw his review of bioshock infinite, and fell in love with him again

#4 Edited by BranKetra (46506 posts) -

@darkspineslayer said:

I agree for the most part (if only because I don't believe Caro bitched about women in the Batman Review)

Shame this point had to be made in an obvious troll thread.

I do not know if this is a troll thread since I do not post much in system wars. I will give this thread a chance.

I think those two are being harsh and not merely critical. The latter of which I am referring to I have come to prefer over the years. Critical review tend to be strict when regarding a game's mechanical aspects such as level design and character movement. At the same time, they are enthusiastic about any fun that can be experienced and the ideas which may influence the gaming industry holistically. The fair and balanced reviews are refined into numerical scores. What makes harsh reviews different is their lack of balance. To explain, unrefined game mechanics and even gameplay-detracting bugs are not given the precedence they need so anyone looking for a respectable informing opinion may decide to purchase the games focused on or not. I do care about what reviewers say because I do not like buying bad games new and then being unable to return them for their lack of quality. They serve as an expectedly good source of information. Furthermore, reviews which do not focus on entertainment enough and instead focus on mechanics too much miss the intention of games sometimes. Things that are popular and good do not always need terrible altering, but a new setting and more variety to character abilities may be all that is needed to continue a franchise. In other words, change in a game of a series does not have to be revolutionary to be adequate for a high score like its predecessors.

#5 Posted by ShepardCommandr (1514 posts) -

I can't take these two people seriously.

They are a joke.

#6 Posted by Netret0120 (1521 posts) -

I don't care about 1 person's opinion on a game. That is why i go watch multiple reviews and then i decide for myself if it is worth it

#7 Edited by lamprey263 (21022 posts) -

I don't see how scores really change the merit of the review body, (i.e. those words that go on and on that say what the games about and their issues with them and tell the reader more about the game). Scores don't say everything.

I remember Dead Island got horrible reviews when it came out, but I read the reviews, and in each one I read the reviewers kept saying how damn fun the game was, just that it shipped with tons of flaws. So I decided to get it and it and indeed it was a blast, and slowly but surely they kept patching it, and that made it even better.

#8 Edited by verbalfilth (4535 posts) -

Just finished origins.

Plot and presentation is better than the last two games

Boss battles were great

city is larger (and if that's not your cup of tea then there is fast travelling)

...Alfred

Aside from those improvements the core game is as solid as Arkham City.

Can't see how anyone would not like this if they liked arkham city.

#9 Posted by blamix99 (1327 posts) -

its jumbo petit that knows nothing about games

#10 Edited by mrintro (1354 posts) -

I stopped caring about Carolyn's reviews after she gave Luigi's Mansion 3ds a 6.5 because she got frustrated from one sequence that actually wasn't that big of a deal at all if you had a golden bone (which is easy to get). I think McShea is too esoteric with his reviews and often complains about things that really wouldn't bother most peopld.

#11 Posted by Lumpy311 (673 posts) -

Those 2 people are idiots, my grandmother would make better reviews.

#12 Posted by freedomfreak (36416 posts) -

They're good for getting people's panties in a twist. Keep 'em on board.

#13 Posted by soulitane (13343 posts) -

I like that they're critical, but most of the time they seem to bitch about something for the sake of it. They're hardly very good reviewers and simply know how to get hits.

#14 Posted by gameofthering (9633 posts) -

I want either one of them to be the one to review Call Of Duty Ghosts.

#15 Posted by waltefmoney (18030 posts) -

The BioShock review was spot on(though the score was kinda low, 6 is more like it).

#16 Edited by R4gn4r0k (14474 posts) -

I want either one of them to be the one to review Call Of Duty Ghosts.

If they give COD a 6 then Activision won't invite them to their review events anymore so that won't happen.

#17 Edited by pelvist (4225 posts) -

CP gave Gone Home 9.5, Iron Front Liberation 2.0 for being buggy and Dark Souls PTDE with all its bugs a 9.5 as well. CP is the worst reviewer on GS IMO.

#18 Edited by Pikminmaniac (8273 posts) -

I had no respect for Mcshea for a while because of his rampant inconsistency in his own opinion, but now it's become increasingly obvious that he's a professional troll. It's like he actively seeks the high he gets from fan backlash these days.

In the end it feels like both Carolyn and Mcshea are reviewing to parade their own opinions rather than giving the reader information and suggestions on whether or not a game is worth it for them. It's my opinion that the function of reviews should be about us and not the reviewer as much as possible.

It feels like more and more reviewers are becoming selfish.

#19 Posted by cfisher2833 (1190 posts) -

@Sweenix said:

I actually despised mcshea, but then i saw his review of bioshock infinite, and fell in love with him again

McShea has horrible taste in games. If it's not a heavily story driven game or a 2D platformer, he'll pretty much completely dismiss it. I also can't stand his position on violent videogames. Overall, he's just not someone who's opinion I really care about, as he's too jaded and dismissive of games that don't fall within his comfort zone.

#20 Posted by SKaREO (3161 posts) -

Both those reviewers are the reason I only bookmark the forums and not the front page. Their reviews are filled with absolute drivel.

#21 Edited by PhazonBlazer (10975 posts) -

Nevr4GetTheLastOfUs

#22 Posted by Link3301 (1673 posts) -

Yes, I really do like their reviews. They are actually hold their own opinions instead of just giving scores the fans want.

#23 Edited by foxhound_fox (85264 posts) -

McShea I respect for having an opinion he is more than willing to express no matter what... but Petit is a terrible writer. Feminism or not. I respect her for at least having an opinion, but I'm not sure how she gets paid to express it.

#24 Edited by TheEroica (12748 posts) -

Ill always take a review based on recommendation over a review based on personal philosophy any day.

#25 Edited by madsnakehhh (13915 posts) -

McShea has become the troll reviewer of the site, so i don't trust him in any sort of way.

"I love Bioshock and Infinite is not a carbon copy of it, so i'll just score it incredible low, also we always need the hits".

#26 Edited by Eddie-Vedder (7746 posts) -

You hipster tweens are hilarious. The point of a review is to gauge a game's quality for the masses to know if it's worth purchasing/playing.

Example, John likes racing games, McShea reviews a racing game, gives it a 9, John would assume that means it's a worthy purchase for a fan of racing games.

The problem with these terrible reviews is they are morons that throw their moronic baseless taste around as objective opinion. When McShea gives a game a 9 you never know what it means, it could be a shitty 60 Metacritic garbage title, if he gives it a 6 you don't know what it means cause you can turn around and it's one of the highest rated best games ever made.

They don't understand their own purpose. They think it's to tell the masses what they like, it's not, their point it's to objectively measure quality to the best of their abilities.

AKA They suck. And if you can't see that you're part of the problem with shitty game journalism. This is also why Gamespot has gone from the single greatest source of game reviews in the WORLD, to a total joke over the years.

#27 Posted by Lumpy311 (673 posts) -

You hipster tweens are hilarious. The point of a review is to gauge a game's quality for the masses to know if it's worth purchasing/playing.

Example, John likes racing games, McShea reviews a racing game, gives it a 9, John would assume that means it's a worthy purchase for a fan of racing games.

The problem with these terrible reviews is they are morons that throw their moronic baseless taste around as objective opinion. When McShea gives a game a 9 you never know what it means, it could be a shitty 60 Metacritic garbage title, if he gives it a 6 you don't know what it means cause you can turn around and it's one of the highest rated best games ever made.

They don't understand their own purpose. They think it's to tell the masses what they like, it's not, their point it's to objectively measure quality to the best of their abilities.

AKA They suck. And if you can't see that you're part of the problem with shitty game journalism. This is also why Gamespot has gone from the single greatest source of game reviews in the WORLD, to a total joke over the years.

this

gamespot is a joke now, gives 8 to TLOU and gives a 9 to Beyond? What the fuck where they smoking?

#28 Posted by foxhound_fox (85264 posts) -

You hipster tweens are hilarious. The point of a review is to gauge a game's quality for the masses to know if it's worth purchasing/playing.

Example, John likes racing games, McShea reviews a racing game, gives it a 9, John would assume that means it's a worthy purchase for a fan of racing games.

The problem with these terrible reviews is they are morons that throw their moronic baseless taste around as objective opinion. When McShea gives a game a 9 you never know what it means, it could be a shitty 60 Metacritic garbage title, if he gives it a 6 you don't know what it means cause you can turn around and it's one of the highest rated best games ever made.

They don't understand their own purpose. They think it's to tell the masses what they like, it's not, their point it's to objectively measure quality to the best of their abilities.

AKA They suck. And if you can't see that you're part of the problem with shitty game journalism. This is also why Gamespot has gone from the single greatest source of game reviews in the WORLD, to a total joke over the years.

The butthurt over TLOU is still strong with this one.

#29 Posted by Gama_Forever (2644 posts) -

I have to agree. They need to go to a different rating scale or re-assess the review process. McShea genuinely does troll every game. What McShea's role should be on the site is to troll every other review. Make every 1 a 10 and every 10 a 1. Label the segment McShea on the Contrary or some weird name like that. Have Petit have a segment about gender in video games. Put them in places where they belong because they clearly aren't objective. That's the truth. I'm sorry, but it's the truth.

#30 Edited by ReadingRainbow4 (11035 posts) -

Ill always take a review based on recommendation over a review based on personal philosophy any day.

#31 Posted by dreamdude (4594 posts) -

They both certainly make system wars more entertaining.

I also agree that it's nice to see people giving games the score they think it deserves over what the industry thinks a game should get.

#33 Edited by Zaraxius (191 posts) -

I agree for the most part (if only because I don't believe Caro bitched about women in the Batman Review)

Shame this point had to be made in an obvious troll thread.

Are you suggesting her complaints aren't legitimate?

You're not one of those people who think women aren't oppressed by the patriarchy, are you?

#34 Posted by PSdual_wielder (10643 posts) -

The way I see it McShea is trying take the stance of seeing video games as something far beyond the medium, with an emphasis on storytelling and drama and everything in the game has to revolve around that and make sense based on the narrative. Which is entirely moronic because games have never been entirely about that, and trying to make himself look intellectual by being verbose and taking some higher stance just shows he doesn't understand video games.

Bioshock Infinite has it's issues and the story has its flaws, but it wasn't nearly that bad and the game certainly wasn't a 4. One point he tried to make which made me throw up was that the game made you tread through levels with mindless killing. When did a video game rated M not make the player go through levels defeating enemies? The same structure was used in the last decade.

#35 Posted by Yo-SUP (235 posts) -

@zaraxius: this post is invalid due to the person you are discussing. Like calling me batsman because I say I am.

#36 Posted by YoshiYogurt (5938 posts) -

There opinions don't give an accurate representation of the game. I expected Luigi's mansion to be a steaming POS but I was surprised it was so great when Caro gave it only a 6.5. It's also easy as hell, no idea why she struggled with it. Controls aren't that difficult people(cough*Tom*cough)

#37 Posted by Ninja-Hippo (23418 posts) -

I like that Gamespot are using the full review scale. Long may it continue.

#38 Edited by cfisher2833 (1190 posts) -

The way I see it McShea is trying take the stance of seeing video games as something far beyond the medium, with an emphasis on storytelling and drama and everything in the game has to revolve around that and make sense based on the narrative. Which is entirely moronic because games have never been entirely about that, and trying to make himself look intellectual by being verbose and taking some higher stance just shows he doesn't understand video games.

Bioshock Infinite has it's issues and the story has its flaws, but it wasn't nearly that bad and the game certainly wasn't a 4. One point he tried to make which made me throw up was that the game made you tread through levels with mindless killing. When did a video game rated M not make the player go through levels defeating enemies? The same structure was used in the last decade.

And the only games he doesn't apply that rule to seem to be 2d platformers. I also think it's comical that he despises violence in games so much, yet doesn't seem to recognize that even games like Rayman are violent in essence. I much prefer someone like Kevin V., Jim Sterling, or Max Scoville who can play a game as a game--the kind of people that see hilariously over the top violence in a game and laugh, instead of groan. McShea just reminds me of the kind of guy that would get offended over that scene in the Stanley Parable where the guy is shown giving a starving African kid a cigarette (the good decision, lol) and then lighting him on fire (the bad decision).

#39 Posted by AcidTango (340 posts) -

Well you have to give them credit on one thing. They're good at pissing off a lot of people. Them and the people at IGN.

#40 Posted by Nengo_Flow (8777 posts) -

I can't take these two people seriously.

They are a joke.

This.

yet they seem to be the only reviewers GS has.

#41 Edited by ArisShadows (22503 posts) -

I like that they're critical, but most of the time they seem to bitch about something for the sake of it. They're hardly very good reviewers and simply know how to get hits.

Baazaam!

#42 Edited by PrincessGomez92 (2554 posts) -

If I cared about critic reviews, I wouldn't be able to take them seriously.

#43 Edited by treedoor (7478 posts) -

I only trust the opinions of my waifus when it comes to game reviews.

#44 Posted by DocSanchez (1102 posts) -
#45 Edited by freedomfreak (36416 posts) -

@freedomfreak: Why is that a good thing?

Because I like seeing people get their panties in a twist over a review.

#46 Edited by Shinobishyguy (22108 posts) -

@Nengo_Flow: oh they got more reviewers. They're just milking Tom and Carolyn for all they're worth to get that easy traffic.

#47 Edited by DocSanchez (1102 posts) -
#48 Posted by freedomfreak (36416 posts) -
#49 Posted by DocSanchez (1102 posts) -
#50 Posted by freedomfreak (36416 posts) -

It's funny seeing people get wind up over the opinion of a reviewer(bad is it may be) to the point where they want them fired, or start personally insulting them.