FortNinety said:
Best quote of the entire thread.
And for the people who think ragging on EGM's scores is a bit too much... while its true that they're "just some people's opinions", but they reflect the magazine as a whole (its a primary reason why people read them in the first place, isn't it?).
No, it reflects the individual opinion of the reviewer. The only thing that is supposed to "reflect the magazine" as a whole is the quality of the writing.
The primary reason people read them is to get just one or a few insights on a particular titles quality. It is an opinion. EGM usually has a few reviewers on a game, so the expectation is not that they all got together and came out with a fair score but that they expressed their unique opinions and let you, the reader, come to his/her own conclusions. It's a "guide" to help you decide where you should spend your money if you're unsure. And as with any guide it's not a end-all-be-all determinate for your decision.
Having multiple viewpoints is a great format because it allows others to bring up valid points than another reviewer might not have thought of. Maybe that specific point is something you like, or don't like. Maybe you'd be able to make a more informed judgment then.
None of it is a fact, none of it is particularly objective, EVERY reviewer has some bias, and if you're just reading it to reaffirm your own position then it's not going to do anything for you.
FortNinety said:
All I can is say is that even though I haven't played Kingdom Hearts 2, I have a funny feeling its not a 10 game. There used to be a time when getting a 10 was a monumental event in the pages of EGM. And now they hand it out like its nothing. It just shows a lack of... perspective, to a certain degree. A 10 game has to last the ages... will KH2 do just that?
No, getting three 10s is a "monumental" event. Kingdom Hearts II got different scores from three different reviewers, and the consensus was that it was an extremely high quality game. The funny thing is you don't even have to agree with that. How does three independent reviewers thinking it's a great game act as an indictment of the quality of EGM reviews? If one thought it was worthy of 10, and another a 9.5... what's the issue here? Read it, agree or disagree and move on.
The most hilarious thing with your post, and I'm sorry if it sounds like picking on you but just to make an example here...
...you haven't even
played Kingdom Hearts II. You admit that. There's a lot of people here doing complaining that also haven't played the games behind the review scores. This is obviously not true in all, or even most cases... but this is part of why it's silly. How do you know KHII won't "last the ages"? You don't. You can make an educated guess reading previews/reviews, playing the first game... but you don't know until you play and beat it.
But let's say you did play and beat it. Your conclusion is "I don't think KHII will last the ages." Now you go and read a review, and they think it's a monumental achievement that will be looked back upon for years to come. Is the reviewer wrong?
Will KHII last the ages? I don't know. I personally doubt it, but that's irrelevant. It's three unique, independent opinions that don't have to jive with my own view. That's the nature of it.