This is why you can't always trust reviews...
Luthor_ posted...Do you guys google random crap to try and use here, and then settle for any garbage site ever that comes up?
Except in his case it's YOU that is going off of a couple of bad reviews and ignoring the dozens of good/great reviews...don't believe me, go to metacritic and see for yourself!
This isn't just about Zombi U...it's the simple fact that reviewers should state how far into a game they played. If someone hated Zombi U and didn't feel like they had to play any further to state that fact, it should be mentioned in the review how long and where he left off. It is something to consider and not just be ignored.
huyi posted...That is why i like angry joes reviews, he plays through the game till completion THEN he expresses his opinion on the game unlike ign who are fueled by money and nothing else, on top of that i hate when someone reviews a game in 5 minuites, its impossible to review a game in such a small period.
They should be, they would better fit with the companies they cover.
Works for the Apple Blogs.
If I support the game company, then I won't be supporting the blank DVD business.
Never played ZU, but it got mixed reviews, not horrible ones and it clearly isn't for everyone. Perhaps some reviewers were to harsh, some were overconfident, whatever.
I really don't think that Tank*3 is the best pick for arguing that reviewers suck. It is pretty obvious that Tank*3 has a really low production value and that Namco is going for that sweet, quick, launch-buck.
Tank*3 has been getting nothing but mediocre to poor reviews from every reviewer on e.g. metacritic and gamerankings, mainly because they feel it's a $10 game in a $50 dress. So, treat reviewers as just another opinion, but using Tank*3 as an argument as to prove their incompetence doesn't quite stick.
From: Lemmywinks13 | #041
This isn't just about Zombi U...it's the simple fact that reviewers should state how far into a game they played.
Why, when it should be obvious that they completed a game?
Reviewers don't toss games aside when they don't like it. They're not allowed to. If they do, they'll be fired so fast. You're not put on a pedestal for being a reviewer on a famous website. The game industry is **** and the job is ****.
When a reviewer doesn't finish a game, they'll state that they didn't and not assign it a score. Anthony Burch when he was on Dtoid http://www.destructoid.com/not-review-metro-2033-168418.phtml
So again, this is
From: AdamLazaruso | #002
He doesn't 'expose' anything. His entire argument seems to be "I don't agree with their reviews so they didn't play the game".
I am hip
people are desperately trying to vindicate themselves. geez
Except IGN DOES complete their games before reviewing them.
The Storm Is About To Rage.....
I learned not to trust reviewers a long time ago when some of my favorite games got slammed by reviewers. They're a guideline, but ultimately what matters is your own feelings and opinion. Go with your instincts and you'll rarely go wrong.
"What was the point of that pregnant pause!?" - Edgeworth
From: Gen2000 | #046
Godstriker8 posted...Except IGN DOES complete their games before reviewing them.
If anything, this prove they finish their games before reviewing them.
I am hip
But it's a link to a review (not labeled preview or random thoughts) ....of a game they didn't finish...so no.
The Storm Is About To Rage.....
Drones are hilarious. "guize, guize, I just had a GRATE idea.. we can BLOCK any person that dusnt think teh Wii U is da best things our mommys have evur bought us EVER!!!! Itf full=proof!!"
You do realize your little hypothetical quote/anger towards Wii-U fanboys is just as hilarious - why do you have so much invested in what console/games others choose to play?
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | EVGA GeForce GTX 460 Superclocked
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES