When did you realise all of those reviewers like IGN are literally bought and paid for?
 |
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
|
It was rated 9/10 by most review companies
When did you realise all of those reviewers like IGN are literally bought and paid for?
|
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
|
like 20 years ago
Gamergate was a decade ago bro
when they insisted the only reason people didn't worship Dragon Age 2 was because they were homophobes, so
when they gave NFS 2012 and me3 glowing reviews
When Gamespot gave that Wii Zelda game an 8.5, then they suddenly retracted the review, revamped their whole rating system, and gave it a 10.
I legitimately don't think they're paid (mostly). I think it's a mixture of "if we keep giving bad reviews people won't send us previews" as well as a rush to get out reviews first and the staff literally getting caught up in their own hype. Also lots of them probably just have shit taste. How many game reviewers these days do you think are over 30?
That, and they are literally paid by the publishers. Turn off your adblock for a second and have a look, who's paying them for adspace?
>inb4 they're not paying directly for review scores
No, but they're still paying their wages, and they can stop at any time (and have before). In any real journalism, this would be a 2000% big nono.
Giant Bomb happened because gamespot lost it's ad revenue when a guy wouldn't suck eidos' wiener and Slamdunk Holocausted Kane and Lynch in his video review, leading them to fire him, so the others left with him.
They then sold themselves to gamespot and left again.
Thing is, the early game actually was 9/10. Blizzard did a excellent job fooling just about everyone and garnering massive initial sales as a result. The game doesn't go to shit until about 10ish hours in.
>The game doesn't go to shit until about 10ish hours in
It goes to shit 10 minutes in when you visit an area that has been nerfed into the ground. Spent fifteen minutes in Dopamine Tunnels and cleared it out...two fricking levels.
You can't even beat the story in 10 hours, anon...
The Arkham Series. It was like playing a completely separate game from whatever the reviewers were applauding.
Same with Baldur's Gate 3
9.1 audience score. cope
>Far Cry 2 got 96% or something in PC Gamer.
>STALKER: Clear Sky for 62% or something in PC Gamer.
All videogame journalists and youtubers are morons.
When Kane and Lynch came out
Spore.
The same reviewers are giving BG3 10/10.
Difference is, BG3 is an actual game, and doesn't have twenty-dollar cosmetic sets or a non-refundable battlepass which automatically highlights the "purchase" option with no additional confirmation step in order to bilk people who misclick while flipping through menus.
It just had 3 year Early Access and it shits the bed after the First Act. Much better I suppose, for a game to only be good for 30% of its duration.
>shits the bed after act 1
What are you talking about. All the acts are great. Act 3 just has performance issues.
it's also full of bugs even though it was on early acess for years
Gamergate was right about gaming journalism.
Also I had blizzcucks so much.
Diablo 3 also got 9s out of 10.
>It didn't deliver on pvp arenas.
>It added a real world cash auction house to sell items.
>It changed the dark tone of the game to match World of Warcraft, its money printing franchise.
These issues were all handily ignored in the online review space. 'It will probably be patched; it's not a big deal and really overblown; this makes it easier for players who hate grinding.' This was 2012.
And of course, when there was no patch, there was no follow-up article reconsidering the score, not was there a follow up piece considering the nature of the review platform.
The score still stays up. Who cares? There's another game coming out. Finish this one so you can read our review of the next one and buy that too.
Frick modern gaming. Frick horse armor.
>>It didn't deliver on pvp arenas.
i forgot of those
This is why we have to kill Blizzcucks.
How do they STILL support Blizzard? How many frickups have they done in the past 2-3 years?
Entirely too many. It's clearly hurting them, given that they apparently can't even support Overwatch 2 on Battlenet alone anymore, but some people insist on shelling out money to them, despite their constant wienerups. They were convinced that D4 was a turn-around moment for the company, but when the fricking season 1 update came, it became inescapably clear that it's business as usual at Blizzard.
>people forgave the OW2 shit almost immediately
>people unironically shill for them for free on shit like facebook and god knows where else
It's insane. Are they battered housewives?
I don't even follow all the D4 news but I've heard enough bullshit to decide never to pick it up.
It was funny seeing them try to throw their hat into the Steam ring, and all the negative reviews calling them out on their lies about PVE.
>people forgave the OW2 shit almost immediately
OW hasn't been relevant for years, a frick up in OW2 is meaningless to the average person. It's not like the morons that play OW play other Blizzard games.
Not only was there a patch they redesigned the entire game, removed the auction house entirely, and made it pretty dumb fun.
>When did you realise all of those reviewers like IGN are literally bought and paid for?
20 years ago when you were in your father balls
God Hand
When Dragon Age 2 released. I was naïve before.
We were just excited for more Dragon Age, we didn't stop to think why it was coming out so soon after the original.
I fricking hated DA2. people keep trying to convince me, but it sucks.
Even DA:I was better.
It was worse for me, I spent like a year in the army since we have mandatory conscription and when I was done with it it released.
I used to joke that I would buy even a bag of trash if it had the Bioware logo on it.
Well I actually fricking did. It was horrible and ME3 just completely fricked me up. I basically turned to jrpgs and never looked back until Kingmaker.
It's a good game, just not a good arpg game
They surely are but reviewers are also just stupid out of touch and usually don't play or understand the games enough which is probably what happened with D4
Big review sites make reviews by and for normies basically and this would be true even if they weren't being paid
>from slopware releases reskinned Dark Souls for the 9th time only this time you get to ride on a car around an empty world and copies amount of immersion breaking boss and enemy re use
>ZOMG 10/10 REVOLUTIONARY POST ELDEN SLOP WORLD GAMES BEGAN HERE
But really long before then you'd have to be a fricking moron to not see outlets get to "play ball" if they give favorable reviews to big names
Reviews are for normalgays who only play occasionally.
diablo 2 better
If these video game review sites were real they would echo the general public's genuine reaction or at least explain the reason for the reaction, take for example this board's genuine reaction to the D2R models and specifically the Amazon being turned into a man faced William Dafoe type troony, if these review sites were worth their salt they wouldn't echo the troony hate but explain why forced troony representation and gaywashing of characters is bad for everyone even the gay people you are trying to represent, how the controversy around that deflects from the fact they made a lot of D2R unaesthetically pleasing in the demake and hide behind lame reasons like the game is 20 years old so the characters should look it, while the voice acted lines don't match the character looks or saying why do you care D2 was pixelated not even taking into account the demake was to improve the graphics, it's really an ecosystem of insipid sinister gaslighting these entities exist in
literally nothing you said has anything to do with gameplay
If reviews were honest they would say Diablo 2 is a dogshit game with bad balance and no endgame: Just go play PoE
that's ok, you don't play video games, my comment isn't for someone that's only purpose here is to push a political agenda badly, because they're too incompetent or get laughed at when they do it where it really matters in the realm of actual politics by making legislation and getting it passed
>that's ok, you don't play video games
I do, which is why I know your botted rmt shitpile isnt worth touching
Deep down you know it too, which is why youre utterly helpless to defend your slop and are trying to deflect
>someone that's only purpose here is to push a political agenda badly
You typed a paragraph about a model in a bad game having a jawline you dont like, the only thing youre doing is badly pushing a political agenda
Bro, Diablo 2 is fricking ass. Anyone who thinks it's good only played it when they were 10 and in a poor family so Diablo 2 was basically the only game they owned. They had nothing to compare it to at the time and in general, are fricking moronic because they're 10.
Pic related getting 10/10's and Masterpieces from so many gaming publications only cements the fact that they all really are in Nintendo's pocket.
I legit think most Zelda games are 15-20 points higher than they should be. Some Zelda games are great but so many of them are overrated.
Maybe it's me, maybe Zelda just didn't click for me.
Though I did love the gameboy color one...
doesn't matter whether they are or not because their opinions are worthless either way
Back in like 1997 when I was reading a gaming mag that had a review for a game that I had played that the reviewer clearly did not. I don't remember the game, but I do remember it being a buggy mess and the review specifically saying that the game was relatively bug free.
So 25+ years ago.
when was kane and lynch? fricking game faqs
Who could've guessed that people didn't want another always online live service game. Meanwhile, games like Baldur's Gate, Elden Ring and Starfield will be discussed for the next 5 years
>Who could've guessed that people didn't want another always online live service game
But they do, which is why Diablo 4 sold tens of millions of copies
before you found this site through reddit
in fact, probably before you were fricking born
Around OoT's release.