You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
What I don't understand is how we went from tiny minority that no one will pay any heed, to suddenly having more influence than, well pretty much everyone. How was it that glowing reviews from pretty much the entirety of gaming journalism, an endorsement from both Penny Arcade and Penny Arcade Reports, and tons of praise from popular commentators like TotalBiscuit was defeated by some guys on comments and message boards? I really don't think anyone can really lay the blame for this on the "antis" doorstep, no matter how much they talked about hating it.
"Genuine reviews" is the phrase you're looking for. "Paid reviews" is what it equates to.
Honestly, I don't believe the professional reviewers were paid off at all. They've always celebrated games becoming more casual, as it brings it down to their level. Just look at how much they love GoW. As much as I dislike this game, I never imagined it would get poor reviews, and honestly I thought it would sell a lot better than it has, considering all that was working in it's favor.
Tameem's the one that killed DMC.
What the hell kind of name is that anyway?
PSN: Billysan291 360 Live: Billy Saltzman
From: DuuuDe14 | #119
Blame me all you want trolls. I am proud of what I have done. I didn't send death threats, I didn't metabomb or flame people. I simply told people about the terrible PR from NT, Capcoms blatant greed and the game's inferiority to the previous franchise.
I don't think any of us here on the boards were that extreme Dude and I'm getting rather tired of other people lumping us in with them.
As a consumer it is our right to spend our money on what we want. If we don't like what's being sold we don't buy it. The game sold poorly because NT and Capcom offered up an inferior/low quality product. Acting like sheep and just shelling out money isn't going to change anything quite the opposite really. It would be reinforcing this kind of quality and that's a message we shouldn't be sending.
As far as NT is concerned I only have an issue with their "illustrious" leader Tameem. He handled the PR for this game so unprofessionally it's sickening. He also made mistake 1# when it comes to business "NEVER deliberately piss off or insult your consumers." I have no sympathy for the guy. He dug his own grave and now he gets to lie in it. He deserves every shred of flack he gets for being such an arrogant ass-hat to people who could have been giving him money.
"Foolishness Donte, foolishness! No one can have this series. It's mine. It belongs to a true son of Sparda!"
"Paid off" is the catch phrase that pro-trolls like to use to make it sound like a conspiracy theory. But there is a reason that "professional reviewers" of video games are in no way critics or respectable.
Unlike film, literature and music, the video game industry lacks independent, 3rd party, non-biased critics that lack a conflict of interest. The reviewers for video games fall into one of two categories:
1) They belong to retailers, like Gameinformer belongs to Gamestop. Gamestop buys the product from the publisher, so they have a vested interest in selling the product. Thus they give the major titles good scores. The only time they don't is when they either a) don't plan to carry a huge stock of the game or b) the game in question is universally being given lower scores, so it's "safe" for them to score honestly.
2) They're a website that relies on ad-space or good relations with publishers so that they can get inside information, scoops and interviews. Ad-space is self-explanatory. But as for relations, if a site sours relations by giving games bad scores, the publisher is less likely to grant inside info, scoops and interviews. Point b) from above is an exception for them as well.
Contrary to popular belief, opinions can be, and often are, wrong.
There's a third factor that makes me unable to take them seriously, and that is simply I expect more from a "professional review" than they give me. Fact is, most of the reviews I read are so ludicrously tied to the reviewers own personal enjoyment of the game that they belong in blog posts, not on the front page of news websites. A pro review should be able to look at things with a certain amount of objectivity. Yes, their opinion is going to be in there, no person can be truly objective. But to be utterly incapable of seeing the good points of games that you don't enjoy, or lavishing unending praise on things they do like while ignoring the shortcomings, that just doesn't line up with what a professional review should be, at least in my opinion.
I'm no critic, but I can play a game that I hate, Dragon Age for example, and still point out the things the game does well, despite my opinion on it. On the other hand, I can still tear apart my favorite games if I have to, no game is perfect after all. And with how bad some of these reviewers are at games, it's getting more and more obvious all the time that they have no real critiquing ability, and just write what they feel. I'll accept that in a blog post, or a user review, but not a professional one.
The only good game any Dante was in Shin Megami Tensei III: Nocturne.
Official Pipo Snake of the PAS board.
Repeat this after me: I will never take on a god AGAIN! - Rugal Bernstein, KOF '98
Add user to Ignore List after reporting