Yup.
Polygon: the thread
I am saying that he probably was not the right person to review the game. What if someone who did not want x game to be made reviewed x game. I dont really care about his dislike of the game. Most of gaf probably agrees with him.
If we're counting reviews as journalism, the Breitbart Dragon Age: Inquisition review is probably the worst, most pandering review for anything I've ever read. If the reception from gators is any indication (the review is littered with buzzwords and everything they want to hear), it acts as a window looking into their vision of what game "journalism" and critique should be: devoid of any actual criticism, the bare minimum amount of research and experience with the subject matter, emphasis on aspects of the game that actually don't matter in the grand scheme of things and pandering to the views and opinions of a target audience rather than neutrality. Politicizing games journalism is only okay when they agree with the views. All other views are corrupt and unethical!
https://archive.today/Z3Mxz
I was going to suggest Hernandez's "Is killing female players online equivalent to rape?" article, but just remembered that was in 2013. I'd like to nominate that same article as worst of the 2010s, though.
Probably the Sonic Lost World porn is right up there. That is some shit I never wanted to know nor did it deserve to be shown in a public light.
Think about it as an Iggy Azalea or Nicki Minaj performance. Why is it different? And why does it indulge holier than thou articles over it? You could dislike it, but spending a whole review explaining why you disliked it isn't missing the point?
There is no such article, it only ever existed as a photoshopped straw-man. She wrote an article about the use of "raped" in trash talk, but that's not even remotely the same thing.
Of the ones I read, at least: http://www.giantbomb.com/reviews/driveclub-review/1900-677/
Gerstmann has an uncanny talent to drive fanboys into an irrational hatred lolOf the ones I read, at least: http://www.giantbomb.com/reviews/driveclub-review/1900-677/
That EGM review of Aliens: Colonial Marines
My pick is for "Kissing vs Killing: How Shadow of Mordor fails to explain the difference".
I won't link to it, but it's over at Polygon. Maybe you can see a Google cache version of it, I'm not sure how clicks work with those. But to save you time, the gist of it was that because the start of Mordor teaches you to sneak by sneaking up on your wife with flowers and a kiss, gamers are somehow missing the difference between that and slicing throats because the input is the same on the controller. Derp!
Games can make us feel those different emotions. They’re that powerful. They have the tools to do that through their lighting and their animation and their context and most importantly and sneakily, through the way we actually control them. When a designer or animator gives up and decides to use the same controls and animations for two actions that couldn’t be more different it’s a giant wasted opportunity.
This. This article singlehandedly introduced videogames into a situation that has absolutely nothing to do with the genre. Ferguson was volatile, and the article read as click-bait of the worst kind.
It was an embarrassing editorial decision, and I actually enjoy reading some of Polygon's pieces (even if we tend to disagree).
Recent Eurogamer The Order article comes to mind
Recent Eurogamer The Order article comes to mind
https://games.yahoo.com/news/pokemon-killing-nintendo-203038043.html
Probably the worst article of 2010's for now.
All the clickbait trash that Eurogamer.net pukes.
A game review is a subjective opinion piece wherein you talk about your feelings on a work, your likes, and dislikes... Whether those have to do with gameplay, aesthetic, theme, or content. It matters simply because it's something the reviewer didn't like about the game. His duty is telling you what he enjoyed and didn't enjoy and his greater thoughts on the piece. If anything, I think you're missing the point of a review.
I like Bayonetta 2 a lot, doesn't mean his opinions and experiences aren't valid to me.
Wasn't it the case that MCC worked fine before general release, when reviewers were playing it? The matchmaking problems thus couldn't have been included in the review as they hadn't yet occurred.
This one is hardly related to gaming, but Polygon tried so hard to use it as a pitch for Watch_Dogs and body cameras that it deserves a spot:
Article here (But seriously, dont read this shit)
This disgusting article essentially uses the Ferguson protests and try to equate this very complex racially-fueled situation to the flimsy world of Watch_Dogs and argues that the sole focus and solution of this situation could have been body cameras, and then proceed through the rest of the article to talk about them, it is the most shameless and embarrassing segue into a pitch that includes an interview with the CEO of the company, then the articles ends with your usual "CNN: The truth lies somewhere in between" bullshit by implying that both sides of this conflict are too emotional and the truth will never be known because there was no tape.....except for that other time a black man was killed by the cop on camera, or that other one time with the kid.
It is one of the vilest, clueless articles ive seen, and im never going to Polygon again.
Polygon has both the best and worst articles of the year.
What do you think the point of a review is? I would argue that it's to explain to people what you liked/didn't like a game and why, so other people can be warned. The FPS example also isn't really accurate, because that's a core part of the gameplay. Bayonetta's gameplay is action, not sex haha. It's like criticizing an FPS for starring an in-your-face hyper sexualized female.Thing is, Bayonetta is a game conceived as a sexualized extravaganza. It was created like that. He can dislike it, but spending 10 paragraphs rambling about it before even talking about the game is awful. It's like criticizing a FPS for making you shoot stuff.
Think about it as an Iggy Azalea or Nicki Minaj performance. Why is it different? And why does it indulge holier than thou articles over it? You could dislike it, but spending a whole review explaining why you disliked it isn't missing the point?
Polygon: the thread
Succinct and accurate. It is starting to look like an offshoot of Clickhole.Polygon: the thread
Not as bad as Polygon stuff but honourable mention should be made to when Patrick Klepick was calling out the maker of 2048 for making a clone of Threes, starting posting the dudes contact info on his twitter and told the internet to attack him, THEN finally shut up once people called him out because its only a issue because he was friends with the dude that made Threes and share office space.
I don't remember this happening. Please post proof?
Ah, see you edited in a blog post about the situation. Cheers.
I don't have a problem with Gies' Bayonetta review. If the overt sexual content was enough to detract from his experience, then I think he was justified in giving it that score. I've read worse articles/reviews this year.
WanderingWind said:Jesus. This gets my vote. What the holy fucking hell were they thinking?
Not as bad as Polygon stuff but honourable mention should be made to when Patrick Klepick was calling out the maker of 2048 for making a clone of Threes, starting posting the dudes contact info on his twitter and told the internet to attack him, THEN finally shut up once people called him out because its only a issue because he was friends with the dude that made Threes and share office space and how dumb it was he was actling like a 4chan troll while also writing anti bullying speeches for Ted X
http://www.giantbomb.com/articles/meet-the-clones/1100-4891/
http://patrickklepek.tumblr.com/post/81715518097/the-line
Yup.
Not as bad as Polygon stuff but honourable mention should be made to when Patrick Klepick was calling out the maker of 2048 for making a clone of Threes
https://games.yahoo.com/news/pokemon-killing-nintendo-203038043.html
Probably the worst article of 2010's for now.