The thing is, as you indicate, it's not just one review. It's review after review after review that GS continually falls far on the low side of the bell curve. Either they've set up insanely high standards that no game will meet to get great scores, or they're intentionally being contrarian and throwing out low numbers just to get buzz and drive web traffic from people curious to see why GS scores are consistantly so much lower than other sites. (and my suspicion is that it's the latter).

Either way, it's becoming increasingly difficult to take their reviews seriously.

Thank you, ggregd!

The fanboy over-reaction and rage on reviews is starting to become quite alarming. I do hope your message here hits home. On the other hand, it won't hurt to have a more robust reviewing system. Much of the rage is caused by the vague or inconsistent reviews that are sometimes published here.

It's easy for us to simply dismiss it as opinion and simply check other websites or form our own opinions first hand, but it seems such a task is too difficult for the loud and angry masses.

It is kinda strange to see people hating on reviewers for expressing their opinions, its like raging at someone because they think oranges are better than apples. But video game communities tend to contain a large juvenile element. Its really not something to take seriously id say, if you like a game fine like it, why hate on people who don't and vice versa.

The War Z - 2

Dead Island: Riptide - 4

The Walking Dead: Survival Instinct - 4

Resident Evil 6 - 4.5

ZombiU - 4.5

Resident Evil - Revelations - 6.5

The Last of Us - 8 (Godlike in comparison!) 

Hopefully one day, people will get sick of all these terrible zombie games. There will be two decent ones, where all the hardcore zombie fans can hang out and hate on each other, and developers will move on to more imaginative things.

I think an 8 is, as the captions underneath it say, GREAT. What annoys me is that a few immersion breakers and minor A.I. problems knocked two points off it. There are games out there with a crap ton more problems such as Skyrim, and that got a 9.0. Then the more recently released Grid 2 which was arguably a step down from its predecessor got an 8.5. If we focus merely on the score (and I'm gonna go there) are we really meant to believe that this is on par with Call of Duty Black Ops 2, the same rehashed turd since COD 4? At least this is original in the sense that Naughty Dog are trying something they never have. Though overall I say we should get rid of the numbering system, because at times like these it makes no sense what-so-ever. Despite this being a great example, there are others where people speak nothing but well of a game, then give it a 9.0 despite no bad points being given. The number just causes problem after problem.

I have no issues with the score... i have issues with the lack of detail in the review. (and the vid review IS crap)

No mention to gameplay length (saying is hours is not really helpful, NOW i know its 14h +/-), no mention that there is New Game +, so specific on AI/mechanics problems, no mention that the MP splits in 2 and specifics of each, no mention to framerate/screen tear issues (if they exist or not), no specific on skill trees, or how points for it are obtained.... and other minor things that gamers like to know.

I see too many comments that are like "the review was terrible and rushed ... it wasn't even X minutes long!" and it makes me want to facepalm. I didn't even watch the video; I read the 2 page review, and it was fairly well written and covers most aspects of the game.

Perhaps the video review was rushed because he cares more about writing?

I think it was a publicity stunt - a decision to be different from other reviewers, to go against the consensus just to drive traffic to the site. And it worked like a charm. There are thousands of views, thousands of comments on his Review, some less flattering than others, but on the Internet publicity is publicity.

The review itself was weak - too short for one of the biggest games of the year, dare I say even a little lazy, but what matters is how it flared up the people, it drove them to GameSpot to vent their anger. Viewership and comments - that is what's important at the end of the day for an online business like GameSpot.

To be completely frank the game isn't even out until next Friday for most of us so couldn't possibly comment on whether it deserves an 8 or not. So perhaps play it first before unleashing your 'hate'. :-/

People are crying because :-

1. Made by Naughty Dog, the PS3 god developer.

2. Reviewed by Tom McShea, who is already a target of hate.

3. Getting 8 nowadays is like F grade to fanboys

4. It was a hyped title

Very well said man :). Enjoyed your input on this! :D

I'd say my biggest issue with unwarranted user backlash is the fact that its completely biased. The game isn't even out yet so all the people saying it deserved a better score were basing that opinion on absolutely NO experience with the game whatsoever (other than maybe a demo). Really, it would be funny if they went on to play the game and said to themselves "you know what, this is about an 8 and now I can see why". 

Just because someone doesn't conform to the average, that doesn't make them wrong. Just remember that once upon a time, only a small minority thought the world was round when the rest thought it was flat. Sometimes the minority ends up being right.

This is a bad horror game and a bad shooter, this is totally overhyped garbageware, the voice of truth here

I personally thought the video review could have been more detailed, and perhaps it didn't do the game justice, but that's just my impression, which isn't valid because I haven't played the game yet.

Anyway, that's what opinions are for -- they are not facts. A review is a reflection of a game from the eyes of the reviewer; thus it cannot be 100% objective. I don't even think it's supposed to be. If any other reviewer had reviewed the game, it would have gotten a different score, and that alone is proof of subjectivity. 

In any case, the reaction Mr. Tom McShea received was unwarranted, immature and an absolute lack of respect for the man. Fine, insult the review all you want, but at least respect him as a human being. An verbal attack on McShea is an attack on the whole staff, the site and the members who really care about it. 

GameSpot shouldn't have to put up this crap. Send warnings to users and ban the hell out of them if you have to. We don't have to agree with everything but blind hate is not an opinion. Opinions have reasonable justification at least.

This ungrateful attitude is what is wrong with societies all over the world, and it's sad to see it spread to our youth because they are future of mankind and will determine the state of the world for decades to come. 

I know this is just about a review but my point applies to other aspects in life as well.

Words of wisdom right there. Thank you for writing this blog because I needed to talk about this at an appropriate place. 

I'm not going to say what has already been said, so I'll try and add a different perspective. 

It simply may be youth, stupidity or bandwagon mentality, but I think human beings just naturally feel the need to put down those who seem above us or those who are in a position that garners them respect and admiration, because they themselves might not be getting the same.

That's why people are so read to lash out when celebrities or authorities make one simple mistake or have an opinion that is different from everyone else's. And the fact that majority of people feel the same way when this happens makes them think it's right and okay for them to do that.

I've never had a problem with GameSpot or any of their reviewers, but I did have a question about Tom's review (which of course went unanswered). When a game is so big, so in-depth and so hyped why was the ensuing video review barely over three minutes long? I read the review as well and it was very well-written but for a lot of users on GameSpot and other gaming websites the video review is the star of the show, and it just didn't seem like much of an effort was made here this time.

i agree with more harsh reviews. but if Last of Us gets 8 , then CoD and FFlightings returns should have corresponding 5~6 as well.

I do not think anyone can defend McShea on how his opinion is far out of sync, the reasons he marked the game down may prob be legit, but was it so game breaking that he could not settle for a 9?. I mean, when you observe the score itself, it feels almost as if it was done to increase the visits to Gamespot. This is one of those situation where this opinion is far removed from the majority of other reviews. 

I am not saying the game may not be justified, but common, a site that scores SEQUELS and AVERAGE games a 9, now back pedals on a NEW IP that actually does something right on so many levels with a score of 8?. Too much is wrong with that

I would admit i didnt read the reviews because i didnt want any atom of spoilers, this is a game that got massive roars at 2012 E3, i played the demo as well, its an obvious pudding on general consensus that the game is awesome but this review score, it just comes off as a attention seeking rather than a critical observation

For me it's not the score itself, it's how he reviewed it

I came here because I thought u were gonna review the game, lol.

When I read the review, I felt like this was somewhat expected (even after coming off IGN's perfect score review) and didn't really have my own response other than 'I know people are gonna flip over this'.

Down with the numbering system for f**ks sake -.-

I do sympathize with the reaction, not because I consider Tom to be incompetent as a reviewer, far from it, but because it shows the flawed nature of a game  scores that are based on decimal system. The decimal system was designed to be objective, but we know that game scores are opinions and don't and shouldn't follow a mathematical formula. It would be better if gamespot adopted a five-star system like giantbomb; that would free from this old and non-functional system.   

No reason to care about anyone's opinion of entertainment other than your own. But if you DO want to see a consensus of opinions on a game obviously the best way is to group them together a la metacritic and give a overall score of many different people. Relying on one person is never the way to go.

Halo Cod and even FF get that score or higher for just good, or in the case of FF average games. So I think the backlash is warranted when 50 plus critics across the board give it a 95 and this guy gives it an 8 or the equivalent of an 80. 

Honestly, they really need to start having multiple people review a game on a site, and not have it come down to one person. Have like 5 or 6 of your employees review the game and take an aggregate. Why is that so hard?

There's nothing wrong with Tom's review, but I suspect the reaction to it has served as a reminder to the GameSpot editors, a reminder that I myself have had to consistently keep in mind throughout the past month, due to all of the Xbox One rumors.

Take gamer anger and rage (especially from this website) with a grain of salt. Some might feel the collective gamer outcry is a barometer for justice and fairness in the gaming industry. As in, if the majority is upset, then they have good cause?something must be wrong.

But of course, that's far from the truth. Give gamers what they want, or they'll rabidly flock together and endlessly complain. Unfortunately, what they want isn't always fair, or right. His review is a prime example of that.

The funny thing is that the game isn't even out yet, so the people complaining about the low score haven't even played it. It'd be one thing if they disagreed after playing it themselves, but they have no basis for saying that the review and the score are unfair or inaccurate. How would they even know?