This looks like a great Black Friday purchase at a steep discount :)

@ArabrockermanX:

To be fair, the comparison is apples and oranges and you clearly didn't play Madden 16

$120/year for no ads?! Wow! What a steal! And truly so much innovation and excellent to be had at that price!

Go **** yourself Google.

@Alurit:

And, I think you're missing my point: I never said a review should be 100% objective. Thus, when you asked, "tell me one useful description that is entirely objective," I answered your question directly. Notice, you said ONE USEFUL DESCRIPTION. You didn't say anything about the entire review being objective or useful.

Now, however, you seem to be implying that I've discussed objectivity in a vacuum as if opinions shouldn't be part of the equation. Both are important aspects. My initial point was to merely say exactly that. BOTH are important to a good review, and subjective aspects can be improved with objectivity to back them.

I think you're confusing me for someone else or misunderstanding what I'm saying, but I definitely get your point.

@Alurit:

"you can describe the gameplay and it's mechanics"

Yes, that is indeed one way in which you can "make objective observations about gameplay." Thank you for acknowledging my point :)

"but can't say that it's good or not cause something being good is subjective"

(1) That's not what I said.

(2) Regardless, this is more or less correct, but two other things (1) Not all subjective opinions are equal, since they can be dependent on other things such as objective points and (2) You can still make objective observations about how you perceive others will enjoy said gameplay, even though their enjoyment may be subjective.

"tell me one useful description that is entirely objective."

You're not apparently moving the goalposts, but your point is silly regardless. By asking this ridiculous question, you're assuming no objective point is useful. I would say any description that informs a player/viewer of what he is getting into should they purchase the game makes them more informed and, thus, is useful.

@Alurit:

"if something has good gameplay, because it is purely subjective thing."

But you can make an objective observations about gameplay.

@Halloll:

To be fair, it's been a pretty crap year for Nintendo.

@elheber:

"I even italicized that for you, but you skipped that part for some reason."

Because (1) your assertion is baseless, (2) even if substantiated there is no context as to what the actual discrepancy is, and (3) based on whatever the potential discrepancy may be, the explanation I already provided regarding the general differences could easily still apply (i.e. their different scaling of scores, within the reasonable area of a bell curve, etc.).

"is a very typical one and it's harmful to shoo people away when a particular review is wildly inaccurate."

Except that's not what I'm doing, but nice job conveniently ignoring the point.

"Good reviews are all fairly accurate"

Of course, but you've presented nothing to suggest this review, and a large number of their other reviews, are inaccurate. So, now you're essentially moving the goal posts, which another baseless assertion.

"And don't you dare come at me with, "there can't be bad reviews because opinions can't be wrong,""

Didn't say that, but nice job ignoring everything I've said thus far and thinking preventatively with some goofy straw-man.

"It isn't a critic's job to tell you if they like the game. Rather, it's his/her job to figure out if their readers will like the game."

Wow. No kidding...LOL. Seriously, you're just obfuscating and ignoring what I've said at this point.

"As such, reviews can be inaccurate and misleading. Systems exist to prevent these occurrences, including editorial review and discussion among staff; and if bad reviews weren't actually a potential problem, those systems wouldn't exist."

Again, these are baseless, blanket statements that address nothing. You're speaking vaguely and generally on things which address nothing I've said. If you have something specifically and substantively to point out regarding "inaccurate" and "misleading" reviews, PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

"Some measure of internal consistency is necessary even among different critics at GameSpot, because whether it's "Bob's review" or "Sandra's review," they are all reviewing for the same GameSpot audience. GameSpot's name and seal of approval is stamped on all of them."

Literally the same response as below. You're ignoring the point and fundamentally failing to provide a substantive response as to why the 2 different reviews are problematic given that they're different reviewers. Please provide citations and actual argument for why there is an issue or admit you were wrong.

"Let's keep this in perspective. I'm not saying it's currently a problem. All I'm saying is that it's been a problem in the past and I am keeping my wits about me with every Nintendo game review."

LOL And there we have it...Tacitly admitting that everything you stated was BS speculation and completely irrelevant to everything I said. Good day.