Gunvalkyrie is a 6.2 in there minds! they can't rate worth ****:mad:
Printable View
Gunvalkyrie is a 6.2 in there minds! they can't rate worth ****:mad:
yea i saw that...i thought they rated it even lower though!! anyways..i made a post about that yesterday and how they trashed it..but ign gave it an award!! whats up with that..anyways....my post got deleted for some reason....whats up with that also!!
I'm just so damn sick of gamespot..
Did you play Gunvalkyrie? If not how can you say that is not accurate? I don't know about you but many people flamed gamespot for give Raw such a low rating and then low and behold it sucked.....so unless you played it shut up! Oh yeah and this is just one persons opinion, do you get mad at everyones option, because if you do you are going to end up living a lonley life?
Well, no, my cousin got it today and said its a very good game, but I think raw should of atleast got a 10 in graphics!
I don't know who to trust anymore for reviews.
Gamespot are a bunch of PS2 fanboys, but IGN is madeup of a bunch of Xbox fanboys.
They rates Wreckless, DOA3, and Raw way too high, while Gamespot generally rates Xbox and Gamecube games too low.
I still think I trust Gamespot more than IGN, though, even though they both suck.
For instance, Gamespot gave DOA3 7.9, which I think was quite generous. IGN must have been doing crack when they gave DOA3 a 9.4 and Raw and Wreckless 9 or above.
How do you get mad at someone's opinion? If they didn't like it, why should they say otherwise? I don't understand. Even if they have a bias, it's still their perception.
I'm not saying you have to agree with them. But to rant and rave about "How could they do that?"... it's their job.
Yea, I get your point but..i can't help it i just get ****ed off:confused:Quote:
Originally posted by Batman2372
How do you get mad at someone's opinion? If they didn't like it, why should they say otherwise? I don't understand. Even if they have a bias, it's still their perception.
I'm not saying you have to agree with them. But to rant and rave about "How could they do that?"... it's their job.
Like I said it is just another persons opinion. I personal thought doa3 was worthy of a 9.4, but then raw and wreckless deserved way less the a 9.....see thats my opinion. so instead of getting ****ed at someone elses feelings, rent the game and make your own review.....damn sheep! You use others reviews as a guideline not if you are going to buy the game or not. Their is a saying "one mans trash is anothers treasure"Quote:
For instance, Gamespot gave DOA3 7.9, which I think was quite generous. IGN must have been doing crack when they gave DOA3 a 9.4 and Raw and Wreckless 9 or above
Oh yeah and people who generally buy a game they are going to be biased towards it even if it blows!
y dont you all rent the games and rate them your self and then you can make up your own opinion . . . y do u care what a bunch of other people think of the game anyway, if you like it and have fun playing it then just play it and dont worry about what the magazine or website says
or better yet go to college, get a degree in writing, get a job at ign or gamespot and get paid so other people can base what video games to buy after reading YOUR $%#ty opinion on the game
opinions r like @$$holes everyone has one, and everyone elses stinks
LOL....exactly!Quote:
opinions r like @$$holes everyone has one, and everyone elses stinks
CLOSE OPIUM... but its like this....
opinions are lik @$$holes... everyone has one, yours stinks...and i sho in da hell don't want to hear it.
I've developed a healthy dislike for a number of the reviewers as well. The two factors I find most interesting are the overall averages of the user reviews, and the number of reviews. Neither is bulletproof though. Gamers tend to rate high, and if your opinion is more than a standard deviation from your average hardcore gamer, then the average isn't worth didly. The number of reviews often is a direct reflection of the marketing quality and marketing budget that the publisher put into a given title. So it isn't proof positive, either. I have found that the demos are pretty good, if I like the demo, I've liked the game. Otherwise, rent first is good advise.
dont go by what gamespot or ign rate them by, go by what the users rate them by.....thats all that is too it.
jeez did you think gamespot was gonna give it a fair rating? It got a 9 on IGN, including a 10 in graphics!
personnally, i dont like Gamespot. They never update. And there ratings blow.
YES EXACTLY!!!! finally some one speaks out. here's the thing, reading reviews just gives you an idea of the game really. gamepro is just mean towards to too many xbox games. come on, halo did not get a 5 for controls which i think is really stupid. its all based your own personal opinion. if u like a game that no one else does, what does it matter? u like it and u play it!!! that's all there is to it. the real meaning of "review" is that someone that is unbiased takes a look at it. if that's the case, then aren't most scores of the reviewers be similar, though they may not be on the same scale??Quote:
Originally posted by Heyyoudvd
I don't know who to trust anymore for reviews.
Gamespot are a bunch of PS2 fanboys, but IGN is madeup of a bunch of Xbox fanboys.
They rates Wreckless, DOA3, and Raw way too high, while Gamespot generally rates Xbox and Gamecube games too low.
I still think I trust Gamespot more than IGN, though, even though they both suck.
For instance, Gamespot gave DOA3 7.9, which I think was quite generous. IGN must have been doing crack when they gave DOA3 a 9.4 and Raw and Wreckless 9 or above.
Yes, it's the reviewers opinion, but they should try to be impartial. What use is a review if it's some jackasses biased opinion? That's why movie reviews are useless. Movies are reviewed by ***gots, women, and other pretentious bastards. These are people who couldn't make a good movie to save their lives, or act their way out of a paper bag--that's why they're critics, they're jealous, envious losers.
That being said, a good example is the RAW video review from Gamespot. I agree with the overall grade the guy gave it, but he was totally biased and had a hard-on for Smack Down 3 (a horrible game by the way). Anyone who liked a SD at all for PS should be outraged by the half-assed attempt for the PS2. I like RAW, but it could have been a LOT better with more time. RAW 2 will be awesome (I hope), but I still don't think we'll get everything we wanted.
Anyway, all I'm trying to say is that these guys should be more objective. I can't stand RPGs with that turn-based nonsense, but that does mean I would give FFX a 2.0. I could care less about Nintendo games, and I haven't cared for a Mario game since SMB World, but I wouldn't rate SSB:M a 3.5 (especially when I'm getting to play the games for free). I would play through the game, see what it has to offfer, and judge it based on overall merit. Save the personal likes and dislikes for a "tilt" category which doesn't factor in.
Ever since Gamespot took the time to write a letter responding to the many accusations that they are not "anti-XBox" has brought me to the conclusion that they are definately a bunch of flakes.
A real leading site goes on while not defending themselves. They are obviously very insecure. Anyway, just my 2 cents :)