jlevy77's comments

Avatar image for jlevy77
jlevy77

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@ianpac Well then we have to agree to disagree on what the purpose of a review/reviewer is. I am not talking about "professional people" (your words, whatever that means) being objective, I am specifically talking about people who review media (be that games, movies, books, art, etc.). For example, "I think that everyone is going to love this game" is an idiotic review because everyone does not love every game. The Assassin's Creed games usually get good reviews, and I think they stink. GTA IV got 10/10 reviews -- I thought it was crap and returned the game (though I thought Red Dead Redemption was one of the best games I ever played, same genre). See how that works? It is called opinion, and opinion ain't objective.


Where is Petit interjecting her personal life or politics into the above review? I assume you are talking about her GTA V review, in which she thought parts of it were misogynistic. So now what, we shouldn't have any reviewers that identify as female because their estrogen might come leaking out into the review? That's crap. There is no such thing as an objective review (other than comments that the games are buggy).


Your example is (in your words) stupid, because it is a straw man argument. Petit isn't giving every game in a particular genre a low score out of bias (she happened to like Season 1 of the above game). Nor do I think Gamespot would hire someone who would. If you don't agree with her (after actually reading the review and not the arbitrary number score), then you're free to disagree with what she found lacking and buy the game.


You comprehend?

Avatar image for jlevy77
jlevy77

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Wow reading many of the comments here makes me really sad. How about actually reading the REVIEW and not just posting a rant the instant you see a meaningless number? Kinda reminds me of how Ebert despised giving a star rating, because the stars don't really mean anything. They're totally subjective.


Reviewers are not supposed to be objective -- how the heck can an opinion of a game be objective?? Reviewers are supposed to write what they thought of the game. I suppose the only thing that can be thought of as objective in a video game are perhaps the bugs or framerate slowdown. But how useful is a review that just says: "It didn't crash on my system, and looked nice, and I didn't run into any game-breaking bugs. 10 out of 10!"


With this one, I played Season 1 and remember each episode as being relatively self-contained, with payoffs for your choices within each episode. Apparently the first episode of season 2 didn't have this, which was disappointing. That's understandable. And if you actually read the review, it says that this episode is clearly not intended to stand on its own in the long term, and may work better after more episodes are out. Seems fair enough to me. I've seen lots of TV where I enjoy the series as a whole, yet there are crappy individual episodes.


So lay off guys, if you want to know how much YOU will like the game, then play it yourself. Perceived popularity does not merit a great review.

Avatar image for jlevy77
jlevy77

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

wow so I suppose putting Gamestop out of business will be good for developers?!?!

Probably though what will happen is that you'll have to buy a used games "pass" for each game to unlock it once it has been used. Though who knows what the pricing scheme will be OR whether Sony will just keep it all and not give any to the developers anyway.