• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trustworthy reviewers

The German

The German

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
2,788
Reaction score
1,697
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Last week CA released Attila: Total War. CA`s pervious game Rome 2 was a complete disaster. Buggy, glitchy, hillariously stupid AI, mashed up rotten textures, weird gameplay, lagging aand other crap. But all the establishment reviewers gave Rome 2 great reviews, with IGN giving Rome 2 for example a rating of 8.8 out of 10. Attila was fixed, it is a really good and fun game, but for some weird reason IGN gave the game 8.1. One other notorious example of last year is when they gave Alien Isolation a horrendous rating eventhough the game could have possibly been the best game of 2014.

We all know that IGN gets payed by developers to review their games in a positive way and that this trends is mostly followed through by most other mainstream game reviewers. Besides that there is also political motivations crawling into the games industry like for example by those soul less morons who started off the gamergate non issue. Sites like Kotaku are especialy eager to jump on into such bandwagons.

So which game reviewers do you still trust and watch today?

For me it`s Razorfist, Zero Punctuation and Elders Geek:





 
The German said:
Last week CA released Attila: Total War. CA`s pervious game Rome 2 was a complete disaster. Buggy, glitchy, hillariously stupid AI, mashed up rotten textures, weird gameplay, lagging aand other crap. But all the establishment reviewers gave Rome 2 great reviews, with IGN giving Rome 2 for example a rating of 8.8 out of 10. Attila was fixed, it is a really good and fun game, but for some weird reason IGN gave the game 8.1. One other notorious example of last year is when they gave Alien Isolation a horrendous rating eventhough the game could have possibly been the best game of 2014.

We all know that IGN gets payed by developers to review their games in a positive way and that this trends is mostly followed through by most other mainstream game reviewers. Besides that there is also political motivations crawling into the games industry like for example by those soul less morons who started off the gamergate non issue. Sites like Kotaku are especialy eager to jump on into such bandwagons.

So which game reviewers do you still trust and watch today?

For me it`s Razorfist, Zero Punctuation and Elders Geek:





Click to expand...


Mainly reviewers that aren't tied to corporate interests. This is pretty much independent reviewers on YouTube like Jim Sterling and TotalBiscuit; and publications that have shown to be in it for readers, like The Escapist.

Though any one big publication alone isn't a good source, aggregating the opinions of IGN, Polygon, PC Gamer, Kotaku, Gamespot, et cetera; isn't a bad way of getting a good idea of how good a game is.

Metacritic is awesome for doing exactly the above.
 
I'm still sad Adam Sessler left the industry. Loved watching that guy.

I don't believe IGN gets paid by developers to give positive reviews, that's absurd.

As far as people I trust and watch. I like TotalBiscuit, Jim Sterling, Zero Punctuation, Colin Moriarty, Greg Miller, and a lot of the old G4 crew. All entertaining and I trust well enough to go to them for their thoughts on games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom