"User reviews" are no longer reliable for PC games, now it's just agenda bullshit - Games

Has anyone noticed this lately? It seems ever since a couple years ago every tabloid PC gamer with an agenda learned how to do user reviews at websites, making legitimatly great games seems poor from a user review standpoint simply because it doesn't fit X feature they idolize, or because of a bandwagon. And any review that doesn't 100% agree with them they slander. I remember I few years ago I could look on websites like Metacritic and Amazon.com to get a good idea of the *REAL* value of a game. People generally posted sensible opinions on their games or gave a very thurough reviews. They balanced out the often "too praise-worthy" or "too underated" official critics. Now a days, it seems like every PC game on metacritic and amazon is user rated with some bullshit agenda. I'm going to use Crysis as a major example since that's what I've noticed most recently. Legitimately great games like Crysis 2 and Crysis Warhead get shit ratings from reviews, and every positive review is stormed with negative ratings. The game must really suck right? Actually, the majority of reviews are thoughtless tabloid bullshit. Dragon Age 2 also suffered from this, despite being a generally decent game (even if it's not "excellent"). See: [url]http://www.amazon.com/review/RJV9SSDFPAVX1/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B002BS47YE&nodeID=&tag=&linkCode=[/url] Granted this happens with any game but I've noticed it tends to happen a lot more now a days with games where PC gamers have some kind of absurd vendetta against. To balance it out, here's a legitimatly lengthy negative review on the game: [url]http://www.amazon.com/review/R1GKBD4NH7G7XE/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B002BS47YE&nodeID=&tag=&linkCode=[/url] If you notice, it's currently the "most helpful" review for the game on the site. Yet if you actually read it, it's complete tabloid bullshit. Much of what he says is flat out wrong. For example: [quote] ----The visual effects are a major downgrade. Crysis 2 shipped as a DirectX9 game, whereas the original Crysis was built in DirectX 10 and it shows.[/quote] While it's true Crysis 2 ATM is only DX9, Crysis 1 WAS NOT built in DirectX10 at all. Every single "DX10" feature worked in DX9, and usually better. And guess what - Crysis 2 runs most of those same exact effects, and more (deferred rendering, global illumination) yet runs 3x better. [quote]Crysis 2 now plays like your typical on-rails, scripted, Call of Duty game. The enemy soldiers you fight are now generic and *ultra-serious*, a far cry from the humor of stalking the hapless and hilarious North Koreans of the original Crysis through the jungle. Vehicles also fall by the wayside and are used much less even though the strategic options they offered were a strength of the original Crysis. Think you're going to hop in an APC and mow enemies down with the turret like you did with Crysis 1 jeeps? Think again, you'll be ripped to shreds by enemies in a matter of seconds because they are extremely accurate even over long distances. [/quote] This is completely absurd because so far the mission design plays almost exactly like Crysis 1 in practice, except it's in the city and thus slightly more confined. There are more moments where you plan your approach and stalk your prey in C2 than there ever were in C1 actually, despite featuring smaller levels. And it's funny he mentions how using a jeep in Crysis 1 was a strength since 99% of people unversally accepted them as completely useless and better at killing yourself. To contrast, here's a legitmiatly lengthy review that (admittedly I wrote) actually reads like a review with downsides and upsides: [url]http://www.amazon.com/review/RUHBZ7IUOI5MU/ref=cm_cr_pr_perm?ie=UTF8&ASIN=B002BS47YE&nodeID=&tag=&linkCode=[/url] Yet despite this, it's rated very poorly by other users. --------------- Crysis 2 wasn't the only game to suffer from unreliable user reviews, it's Crysis Warhead also suffered from this with 90% of the reviews bashing the DRM - despite the game having extremely lax DRM and being a damn great game. Dragon Age 2 also suffers from this. Look at the user review score of Dragon Age 2 on metacritic: [url]http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-ii[/url] It's completely off the wall. Granted, DA2 isn't an excellent game but by any means it's not a bad one at all. It has it's upsides and downsides, just like the first game did. But because they decided to take a slightly different direction, suddenly the fury of the PC gaming master race elitist agenda was summoned and the game gets put on a light as if it's worse than Big Rigs. It's amazing why people even bother with PC game user reviews anymore since most of them these days tend to read like tabloid agenda bullshit instead of legitimate criticism. These days I honestly trust user reviews from console versions of games more than non-console versions since they actually tend to rate the ACTUAL GAME and it's nuances better than PC gamers.

I love how Crysis 2 had user ratings on almost every site complaining about the quality of the BETA. Ie: "Cutscenes didn't even work and it was badly optimized, 1/10" [editline]23rd March 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=KorJax;28771705] Dragon Age 2 also suffers from this. Look at the user review score of Dragon Age 2 on metacritic: [/QUOTE] 4.3/10 holy shit.

[quote][B]Dragon Age 2[B][/B][/B][/quote] Paid reviews

[QUOTE=KorJax;28771705]Dragon Age 2 also suffered from this[/QUOTE] Thank God for User Reviews.

i don't read reviews since they're usually opinions or about glitches/minor bugs i watch gameplay videos and i'll get it if it looks fun

"no longer"?

Users are fucking idiots I thought everyone knew that already.

Both user reviews AND professional reviews are on average unreliable. But at least through reading a number of user reviews, you can get an accurate image of what the game is like by discounting nitpicking and taking into account genuine criticisms. Professional reviewers also have an agenda, the agenda of being paid phat wads of cash and getting future exclusives, and it often shows.

I only like RPS's reviews, because they're fun to read.

[quote]Crysis 2 now plays like your typical on-rails, scripted, Call of Duty game. The enemy soldiers you fight are now generic and *ultra-serious*, a far cry from the humor of stalking the hapless and hilarious North Koreans of the original Crysis through the jungle. Vehicles also fall by the wayside and are used much less even though the strategic options they offered were a strength of the original Crysis. Think you're going to hop in an APC and mow enemies down with the turret like you did with Crysis 1 jeeps? [B]Think again, you'll be ripped to shreds by enemies in a matter of seconds because they are extremely accurate even over long distances.[/B][/quote] Everything up to the bold is true.

[QUOTE=koekje4life V2;28771923]I only like RPS's reviews, because they're fun to read.[/QUOTE] Yeah, plus they seem to be pretty honest, nice number of criticisms, find myself nodding my head often.

[quote=big rigs review]Simply stunning graphics, addictive gameplay, and intense plotline folded into one of the best pc games ever made. In my country of Ceylon, there was been petitions to even glorify this stunning game to sainthood. I already worship and make sacrifices to Big Rigs. A bit of goats blood, cinnamon, and dewdrops make it happy. [/quote] User Critics are great

I think the problem is that people think that in order for their score to matter, they have to give the game either 0 or 10.

[QUOTE=Chickens!;28771735]4.3/10 holy shit.[/QUOTE] Too generous. :smug:

[QUOTE=Riutet;28771900]Both user reviews AND professional reviews are on average unreliable. But at least through reading a number of user reviews, you can get an accurate image of what the game is like by discounting nitpicking and taking into account genuine criticisms. Professional reviewers also have an agenda, the agenda of being paid phat wads of cash and getting future exclusives, and it often shows.[/QUOTE] That's ridiculous users will give 1/10 for one flaw on reviews of anything at least an average of all professional reviews across the board gives some kind of indication, plus there are still reviewers out there with actual credibility, like Eurogamer.

[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;28772184]That's ridiculous users will give 1/10 for one flaw on reviews of anything[/QUOTE] So why even take those reviews into account? Liars that give a very poor score to a game are just as bad as liars that give a very good score. I agree that Eurogamer is fairly decent, as well as RPS, but I'm still wary of whatever I read and will make my judgment if and when I get around to playing the game.

I generally only read reviews to get small details on games that I would like to buy. I talked about this in the Dragon Age 2 thread a few weeks ago and basically it comes down to people that do not like certain aspects of a game will take that and use it to completely bash the whole game and it's developer without looking into it any deeper. Hardcore Christians and Fox News are the same damn way with everything and it's annoying. Also putting a rating on something is shit.

Anyone who sumarises their reviews with a numerical score immediatly loses all credibility in my eyes. Also the fact that 90% of PC gamers are unpleasable bastards doesn't help when looking for balanced reviews.

[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;28772416]90% of PC gamers are unpleasable bastards[/QUOTE] More like 90% of console gamers are completely clueless as to what constitutes quality. :smug:

Don't go to review sites. Ask people, do some research, watch videos. The only value that user reviews on Metacritic had were for looking up your favorite game, finding the lowest rated review and posting it in thread for everyone to have fun hating the reviewer.

[QUOTE=Riutet;28772450]More like 90% of console gamers are completely clueless as to what constitutes quality. :smug:[/QUOTE] :iceburn:

[QUOTE=ZapDing;28771929] "a [b]far cry[/b] from the humor of stalking the hapless and hilarious North Koreans" Everything up to the bold is true.[/QUOTE] I see what they did there.

I haven't brought bulletstorm because every one said it was no so great and meh overall. Then I played it in my friends house. Later that day I brought it and beaten it - what an awesome game.

Reviews are just another person's opinions. I wouldn't base my purchase on whether or not someone else liked the game.

[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;28772479]:iceburn:[/QUOTE] I agree that numerical scores are lame though.

[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;28772416] 90% of PC gamers are unpleasable bastards[/QUOTE] You'd think if PC gamers love older games like Half-life, X-COM, Unreal, Quake, C&C and the like it'd be easier to make games just as good with the same standards like graphical settings, non-radial menus (putting items in a list format is a whole lot easier than making a radial menu, it's just lazy) and decent performance. But PC gamers are apparently asking for too much.

[QUOTE=Take_Opal;28772540]You'd think if PC gamers love older games like Half-life, X-COM, Unreal, Quake, C&C and the like it'd be easier to make games just as good with the same standards like graphical settings, non-radial menus (putting items in a list format is a whole lot easier than making a radial menu, it's just lazy) and decent performance. But PC gamers are apparently asking for too much.[/QUOTE] TBH sounds like the PC gamer equivalent of an ultra conservative

I think most people take this kind of journalism as a joke these days the user reviews of Dragon Age 2 are about as ridiculous as the critic reviews so the balance of the universe is still intact.

I only consider user reviews if it differs slightly from the critic review. Like if the critic gave it a 8.6, but users gave it a 8.9. I can usually guess that what the critic downgraded it on was something trivial or irrelevant to what people were looking for in the game.

[QUOTE=KorJax;28772696]TBH sounds like the PC gamer equivalent of an ultra conservative[/QUOTE] It's like being accustomed to wearing boots for a long, long while, and then told you're only going to be wearing sandals from now on, and the straps like to come undone every so often. Plus some people like to wear socks, and sandals don't go well with socks.