Support NeoGAF

[Mr Reasonable]

I don't think most people see it that way, especially when sites give games like Hogwarts ridiculously low scores like this one:
https://www.wired.com/review/hogwarts-legacy-review/

Now you cannot tell me that's a legit review in any shape or form, or that it's legit and we're all "conspiracy nuts" for not think it is. I realize this is the absolute worst case ever seen in gaming journalism, but there are plenty of other instances where they are not reviews or opinions, but political assassination pieces.

I think that review sets out immediately the attributes that it's going to grade the game on. Here's why I don't mind:

A game might come out one day that is incredibly good fun to play, but challenges your moral centre. Maybe you're a suicide bomber, school shooter, hurt people just for fun because the game gives you points for doing it in every more gruesome ways, etc.

At that point you might say that you can't give the game a 10/10 because you don't agree with it on a fundamental level. If you think that'd never happen, think harder of a situation you find really distasteful then imagine the game.

What the writer here has done is made the decision (I assume, I can't be bothered to read it, but the headline is enough) that in their opinion the game is harmful in a way that overshadows the game itself.

And that's ok. There are hundreds of other reviews that'll fill you in on the game in the way you want. It didn't appear to hurt the sales, etc. etc. this is someone who is standing up for what they believe in, which is really what writers should do.

 

[EviLore]

I think that review sets out immediately the attributes that it's going to grade the game on. Here's why I don't mind:

A game might come out one day that is incredibly good fun to play, but challenges your moral centre. Maybe you're a suicide bomber, school shooter, hurt people just for fun because the game gives you points for doing it in every more gruesome ways, etc.

At that point you might say that you can't give the game a 10/10 because you don't agree with it on a fundamental level. If you think that'd never happen, think harder of a situation you find really distasteful then imagine the game.

What the writer here has done is made the decision (I assume, I can't be bothered to read it, but the headline is enough) that in their opinion the game is harmful in a way that overshadows the game itself.

And that's ok. There are hundreds of other reviews that'll fill you in on the game in the way you want. It didn't appear to hurt the sales, etc. etc. this is someone who is standing up for what they believe in, which is really what writers should do.

It’s called activism, it’s absolutely everywhere in video games now, and it runs contrary to the job of a professional reviewer. They shouldn’t be censored but they should also not be included in score aggregates or taken seriously. Having a warped, imbecilic, ideologically captured “moral center” that can’t handle the existence of a Harry Potter video game doesn’t have an iota of value in this world.

 

[Fbh]

I don't like most game journalists and I definitely agree there is an issue of political activism and a hostile reaction to anything or anyone who doesn't follow a narrow world view in games media.
That said I also think some of you are way overreacting. Reading this thread you'd think Stellar Blade was sitting at a 60 metascore when it has a respectable 82. It's the same as with Hogwarts Legacy which after all the talk about gaming media intentionally boycotting it ended up with an 84 Metascore which IMO is fairly accurate. Or when "gaming media" was going to trash FFXVI because of a lack of diversity...and it ended up with a 87 metascore when it's a 7/10 game at best.

There are some specific sites which suck like Kotaku, Polygon or IGN. But I think some here also vastly overestimate how much the average consumers cares about them. People here constantly outraged about something Kotaku said probably spend 100X more time thinking about that site than the average person playing games.

Sites like Kotaku aren't setting trends and forming opinions. They are an irrelevant site that mostly appeal to a tiny minority in an increasingly irrelevant form of media

 

[Pelao]

I simply stopped reading "professional" reviews years ago.
I have enough experience playing to know when something is going to appeal to me or not, and I can also rely on the recommendation of my group of friends because they know my tastes.

 

[KaiserBecks]

I very much enjoy Jeremy Parish’s YouTube channel. It’s pretty much the only thing I’d consider proper video game journalism, if there’s such a thing.

https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCrIttXi0WgLXHI1poCk0D6g

 

[Crayon]

Gaming sites are collapsing into a circle jerk. I'm not too worried about it.

 

[Shut0wen]

Best reviews i find are peoples own reviews whether it be on ps store, xbox store and even steam store, its pretty easy to skim read alot of posts and make your own judgement, see if im reading a review about a strategy game, 3 people give it 5 maybe 4 stars and theres 2 that give it the worst review of all time but cant spell for shit and say they cant get past the turorial then i know there is some good gameplay in whatever that game is, you can always tell by reading whose actually a gamer and who is a spastic with an attention span of 10mins

 

[ArtHands]

OP you should grow tougher skin. There's no need to be so angry or upset just because they speak ill for a game on your favorite platform.

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

I think that review sets out immediately the attributes that it's going to grade the game on. Here's why I don't mind:

A game might come out one day that is incredibly good fun to play, but challenges your moral centre. Maybe you're a suicide bomber, school shooter, hurt people just for fun because the game gives you points for doing it in every more gruesome ways, etc.

At that point you might say that you can't give the game a 10/10 because you don't agree with it on a fundamental level. If you think that'd never happen, think harder of a situation you find really distasteful then imagine the game.

What the writer here has done is made the decision (I assume, I can't be bothered to read it, but the headline is enough) that in their opinion the game is harmful in a way that overshadows the game itself.

And that's ok. There are hundreds of other reviews that'll fill you in on the game in the way you want. It didn't appear to hurt the sales, etc. etc. this is someone who is standing up for what they believe in, which is really what writers should do.

Clearly you didn't read it. They gave it a 1/10 and everything they said was incorrect, all because they were virtue signaling to a specific crowd that hates J.K. Rowling.

Hand waiving something egregious as that review and stance tells me you're either trolling or... I think I'll just end it here. Have a nice evening.

 

[FIREKNIGHT2029]

Good thing I don’t give a shit about reviews. I’ve been gaming 35 years so I know exactly the kind of games that I like, and I don’t need some idiot with a journalism degree that barely games telling me what to buy.

 

[Fredrik]

Stop reading IGN, Gamespot, Edge. That fixes most of your problems. They’re trying too hard to be edgy to get attention and stir up discussions, like here.

Stellar Blade has a metascore of 82. 84% positive reviews, 15% mixed, 0% negative. Shows that most reviewers liked it. I don’t know what more you expected, going by the demo we already knew not everybody would like the game.


I think the biggest problem with gaming media today is that they’re setting permanent scores for games that are still getting patched.

A game with years of updates will still have a low score even if the previous 7/10 game turns into a 10/10 game.

Likewise if a highly rated launch version gets patched to get worse with some microtransactions nonsense or censorship or whatever. It’ll still have a high score.

That to me is absurd.

I think professional reviews needs to have frequently updated scores for frequently updated games.

Otherwse the reviews won’t help the consumer in any way. Anyone who buy a game 3-12 months later will get a different game than what was reviewed.

 

[Dr. Claus]

I think that review sets out immediately the attributes that it's going to grade the game on. Here's why I don't mind:

A game might come out one day that is incredibly good fun to play, but challenges your moral centre. Maybe you're a suicide bomber, school shooter, hurt people just for fun because the game gives you points for doing it in every more gruesome ways, etc.

At that point you might say that you can't give the game a 10/10 because you don't agree with it on a fundamental level. If you think that'd never happen, think harder of a situation you find really distasteful then imagine the game.

What the writer here has done is made the decision (I assume, I can't be bothered to read it, but the headline is enough) that in their opinion the game is harmful in a way that overshadows the game itself.

And that's ok. There are hundreds of other reviews that'll fill you in on the game in the way you want. It didn't appear to hurt the sales, etc. etc. this is someone who is standing up for what they believe in, which is really what writers should do.

Imagine defending this trash.

 

[Mobilemofo]

Never gone with reviews for my opinions, ever. Just like the news, I avoid that bollocks. Not sure if op is a little knobish. Hfw is actually a good game.

 

[Damigos]

I only trust NeoGAF

 

[Robb]

 

[darth.shrimp]

I'll say it again: I think one of the main issues is that those "journalists" are technically being paid by the people making and selling the products they're reviewing.

Back when we had paper magazines, you, the consumer, would buy them and read articles and reviews. Sure they included ads, but a lot of them were unrelated anyway (I remember one we had in France where the last few pages were only ads for porn hotlines lol).

Now those guys write for websites that you (usually) don't need to pay to access. Where does most of the money come from? Ad revenue. What happens if that site writes a bad review for a game? The publisher threatens to remove their ads, decreasing the ad revenue, and to stop sending review copies for their future games. How the hell are you supposed to be objective and independent when that happens?

 

[Heimdall_Xtreme]

.

I have absolutely no idea why you are acting so proud about this, it's genuinely pathetic.

It's called perseverance and honesty and madness... Despite the game's flaws, I had the willpower to finish it...

I mean, I didn't have the loser's thinking of putting it aside, something that magazine has... It wasn't sincere... At least despite the obstacles, I was able to overcome the challenge of finish this horrible game.

 

[mansoor1980]

 

[Kumomeme]

most of gaming journalist right now just prefer clickbait than real story

and most of them has political agendas. all the woke stuff wont happened without them.

 

[Fabieter]

How would you want to go back to the snes era? Kill the internet? Influencers are just as bad as gaming journalism. Most of them are attention farming and nothing else.

 

[Mr Reasonable]

Clearly you didn't read it. They gave it a 1/10 and everything they said was incorrect, all because they were virtue signaling to a specific crowd that hates J.K. Rowling.

Hand waiving something egregious as that review and stance tells me you're either trolling or... I think I'll just end it here. Have a nice evening.

Ok, I read it, it goes further than I expected, and the stuff about some people refusing the call, and who the most creative people in games are feels a bit of a stretch and a bit cringe-y to me. If I were the editor, I'd be ok with the first half however.

Fundamentally, it's as I said though, some writing from someone who feels that what the game represents overshadows the game itself. I think it's totally fine that they wrote about that.

 

[Mr Reasonable]

How would you want to go back to the snes era? Kill the internet? Influencers are just as bad as gaming journalism. Most of them are attention farming and nothing else.

Yes please.

I don't care for influencers much, but I would love to be captivated by Super Mario World in a way that I don't think would be possible now.

 

[LazyParrot]

Obsession with game journalism is the disease of this board. At this point I'm half convinced Kotaku et al. would have gone under years ago if people here didn't keep supplying them with a steady stream of clicks every time one of their writers says something stupid.

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

Ok, I read it, it goes further than I expected, and the stuff about some people refusing the call, and who the most creative people in games are feels a bit of a stretch and a bit cringe-y to me. If I were the editor, I'd be ok with the first half however.

Fundamentally, it's as I said though, some writing from someone who feels that what the game represents overshadows the game itself. I think it's totally fine that they wrote about that.

Yeah, I agree with that, but I also agree with what others have said about filtering them away from the aggregate metacritic numbers simply because they are designed to bring it down and not represent an informative function. Those articles are more akin to the likes of clickbait efforts you see on the Yahoo home page that can basically slant or cloud any subject without repercussions.

 

[Mr Reasonable]

Yeah, I agree with that, but I also agree with what others have said about filtering them away from the aggregate metacritic numbers simply because they are designed to bring it down and not represent an informative function. Those articles are more akin to the likes of clickbait efforts you see on the Yahoo home page that can basically slant or cloud any subject without repercussions.

I think this is a problem of video games - that a particular review will contribute to the metacritic score.

And the metacritic score is a thing which doesn't take into account the words that the author has written, just the number they give at the end. It is a nuance free measurement.

I think journalists who are going to write an essay on a game shouldn't care if they skew the metacritic because their job (in my mind) is to offer more than a number. It's ok if you only want the number, but the writer isn't beholden to prioritise giving the number that they think everyone else will give.

I used to read a particular video game magazine and I felt that I understood the magazine's criteria and tone. That when they rated a game highly that I should get that game because I'd enjoy it. I didn't care what other reviews said because I felt I had found a guide that suited my preferences and the idea that metacritic averages would matter wasn't part of the equation.

I also know generally the tone on a couple of internet forums - I bought RoboCop because people fawned over it on one forum I visit. I didn't love it that much and in retrospect, I should have taken into account that forum's ageing membership and love of all things 80s. I played myself.

But, I digress. There'll be various articles being written from various perspectives every day. They don't all need to be the same is the gist. Some will be from a perspective that resonates with you, some wont. That doesn't mean one is disingenuous. What's the point in 100 people all writing the same thing?

 

[Georges Chiellins]

"Journalism".

Good one.

 

[Windom Earle]

The thing is, gamers have shit taste and opinions too. Its not just journalists. Just look at the backlash against people like Neil Druckmann for daring to try something different. I cant trust any opinion but my own. Because if I listened to gamers I would never have touched TLOU 2, GTA 4, Calisto Protocol, or any game running at 30fps for that matter.

You had me until Druckman.

 

[RoboFu]

Stellar blade is not a GREAT game.

 

[ahtlas7]

These are not journalists and they make no attempt to hide their demagoguery.

What surprises me is the ‘ho-hum’ stance people take towards blatant propaganda peddling.

 

[Hudo]

the closets thing is Jason Schrier.

And even he, by his very own mission statement (no interest in being objective, etc.), is far, far, far away from journalism.

 

[GrayChild]

You bigots can't deny that this is some top-tier journalism. I'm happy that others also see the parallels, and I couldn't be more satisfied with this great hitpiece from the greatest video game media of all time:

Archived version (don't wanna give them extra clicks):

https://archive.ph/JWGPH

It's so great, I was almost tempted to make a new thread about it.