• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Most trusted publications of 2016 by OpenCritic

I'm surprised by iDigitalTimes. Last time I even saw them it sure seemed like they just repurposed and republished news and rumours from other news sources - regardless of veracity - and did a little SEO magic to get into the first set of results on Google.

Apart from that, clearly I need to get into Easy Allies.
 
That feel when EZA is basically ranked twice.

9nEKKRf.gif
 
I'm surprised that Eurogamer is rated so highly.

EZA in top spot is perfect, always trusted their reviews since the early GT days.
 
I don't think it's worth doing inference on this because of the massive selection problem (OpenCritic users are a very very particular type of users) and because of the fairly large recency issue, where the inclusion or exclusion of a source is likely based on their score for a specific and recent game.
 
I don't think it's worth doing inference on this because of the massive selection problem (OpenCritic users are a very very particular type of users) and because of the fairly large recency issue, where the inclusion or exclusion of a source is likely based on their score for a specific and recent game.

So you're saying OpenCritic wouldn't make the "Most Trusted Aggregators" list?
 
I don't think it's worth doing inference on this because of the massive selection problem (OpenCritic users are a very very particular type of users) and because of the fairly large recency issue, where the inclusion or exclusion of a source is likely based on their score for a specific and recent game.
GameTrailers is kinda an oddball though considering... Well, they're dead.
 
Moderately sad to see Ars Technica on there. Maybe they've gotten better but in the PS360 days they were a total joke. They are the only remotely credible publication to do things like use the heavily MS-fanatic manipulated GT5/Forza "comparison AI" video in their articles about how much GT5 sucked.
 
Grats to EZA!

I imagine gametrailers is on there because lots of people trusted those reviews and just never got around to taking them off their lists?
 
The only thing I know about Easy Allies is that video of them reacting to the Final Fantasy VII Remake trailer and I don't think I ever want to watch anything of theirs again.
 
Glad to see GB on there, I don't always agree with them, but I always trust them.

Kotaku has gotten a whole lot better tho.

Sadly this isn't enough to get rid of that"lol Kotaku stigma"

I don't really think much about Kotaku much positively or negatively.

That said they were owned by a reprehensible person who is completely untrustworthy.

Even if Kotaku seemed perfect, their ownership would overshadow that imo.
 
I don't think it's worth doing inference on this because of the massive selection problem (OpenCritic users are a very very particular type of users) and because of the fairly large recency issue, where the inclusion or exclusion of a source is likely based on their score for a specific and recent game.

What I'm wondering is how do you even define trust in a review outlet nowadays, since people seem to think everything has to be subjective and reviews are mere opinions?

The list should probably just be labeled as "preferred review publications".
 
Kotaku not being there says something too.

Yeah it's kind of a bummer because Kotaku generally has great scoops. The fact they moved away from having "scored" reviews also make them more trustworthy to me because they want reviews to be judged on the basis of the content of the review instead of the overall score.
 
The only thing I know about Easy Allies is that video of them reacting to the Final Fantasy VII Remake trailer and I don't think I ever want to watch anything of theirs again.

Your loss because their content isn't anything like that. They got excited for some games once and now they're stereotyped like that, pft.
 
The only thing I know about Easy Allies is that video of them reacting to the Final Fantasy VII Remake trailer and I don't think I ever want to watch anything of theirs again.

Give them a chance, watch one podcast of theirs or a review. Guaranteed 100% you'll change your mind.
 
I tried giving the EZA podcast a shot, it was like the gaming version of going to one of those southern mega churches. Just a whole lot of singing and shenanigans and no actual content. I noped out of that lol.
 
What I'm wondering is how do you even define trust in a review outlet nowadays, since people seem to think everything has to be subjective and reviews are mere opinions?

The list should probably just be labeled as "preferred review publications".

I'd say it's a mixture of how knowledgeable, reliable and unbiased the publication is. Easy Allies, for example, has years of experience and has shown themselves to not care about console wars, "fanboys" or garnering outrage. To say that it's entirely based on the opinions they hold is incredibly reductive; opinions on opinions are still opinions, after all.

EDIT: Though yeah, trust is just a single element in what reviewers you prefer. I trust Superbunnyhop completely, for example, but I don't go to him for advice on what games I should buy as his tastes don't align that well with mine.
 
Eurogamer is the only publication I've come across that actually writes competently, other than AV Club, so it's heartening to see them so high.
 
Top Bottom