Has Gamespot always been critized for it's reviews?

[Invisible Crane]

To me ever since they reviewed Twilight Princess, Gamespot has got nothing but crap from gamers (especially from people on GameFAQs).

I was wondering, has Gamespot always been crapped on by gamers because of their reviews, I know this sort of thing probably happens to other video game review sites, but Gamespot seems to get the worst of it

[Johnny]

(especially from people on GameFAQs).


There's (at least part of) your answer. Simple truth is that there are an awful lot of people out there who, whether it's jealousy that they can't afford more than one console or just blind allegiance, will defend "their" console as if their lives depended on it. GameFAQS is generally like a breeding ground for these people.
The very people who will hear of minor differences in a multi-platform release and, although they've never complained about tearing or draw distance or particle effects in their life, will use it as 'proof' that the console they own is superior.

[ADC]

I've noticed that what really seems to piss off the fanboys is that Gamespot's reviewers are very reticent to give out the 9+ and Editor's Choice ratings. They gave Twilight Princess an 8.8 (Wii) and 8.9 (GCN) to reflect that the game was awesome but not quite classic, and that seems right to me. No other magazine or site reviewed it lower than 9.5 or equivalent, of those listed on the wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Legend_of_Zelda:_Twilight_Princess). Similarly, they gave Metroid Prime 3 an 8.5 while most other sites were giving it a 9.0 or better, per the wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metroid_Prime_3:_Corruption).

They just don't throw around the ZOMFG BEST GAME EVAR nonsense that you'd expect from a frequent poster on the GameFAQs forums. So they get reviled for it. I don't always agree with Gamespot on the reviews and scores, but I think they're more reliable than 1up or IGN, anyway.

[Suwako Moriya]

Secret for you. Any given review will have those that hate it. There are some that will throw a fit if a game gets a score higher than 1 and others will throw a fit if it gets a score lower than 10. Going by a 1-10 scale. In fact people at Gamefaqs have complained about reader reviews at Gamefaqs before.

That being said there are times reviews from varying places deserve harsh criticism. Simply because you start to wonder if the reviewer actually played the game in question. Another problem you run into is many reviewers will review X expecting it to be like Y when it's X for a reason. Think of it like someone eating a piece of cake and then throwing a fit because it didn't taste like Chicken.

In general both reviewers and readers can be problematic. Reviewers have to actually play the games they review. They have to make sure their opinion is well written and reasonable. That way even if you disagree you can still understand where the reviewer is coming from. Readers must be willing not to go off the deep end every time a game doesn't get the score they want it to. They have to be reasonable in any criticism.

[Leon_Belmont]

Gamefaqs is a very Nintendo dominant site. A reviewer at Gamespot, OTOH, plays a shitload of games and probably doesn't give two shits what console the game is for. I personally think thy're usually a lot more on the money than other sites. GF will have you believe they're MS or Sony biased but they didn't hesitate for a second to hand Laid and Blue Dragon ass whoopings.

Reviews in general catch a lot of flack from ignorant players. They're done by individuals to begin with so they're always gonna be "biased", but I find a review site like Gamespot much less so than some douche on the Gamefaqs message board.

[TheStrongMan]

My issue with Gamespot is that their reviews come off as extremely pretentious. IGN is the red headed step child of the gaming press and they seem to know it. On the other hand, Gamespot tries to be all edgy and intellectual and to me, they just end up sounding pretentious.

But, I don't see the point in getting all riled up over their reviews. A review is just a general indication of how a game is going to play and whether or not I'll like it.

[Lego]

I predict they give Halo 3 a ten and proclaim it the best game ever like they did with Halo 2.

[porkchopexpress]

I predict they give Halo 3 a ten and proclaim it the best game ever like they did with Halo 2.

They who, Gamespot or gamefaqs?

[Nosredna]

While I don't care much for reviews, I think Gamespot is much better than IGN. IGN thinks way too many games are classics.

[BonifaceVIII]

Who the hell listens to GameFAQs kiddies?

[Lego]

Who the hell listens to GameFAQs kiddies?

I go to FAQ's for the namesake and not much else

[Fudce]

In the current climate of xbots, wiibies, and playboys (that one doesn't sound like an insult - but it is), any and every review is going to be critisised.

If it gets a good score, the other two factions will be annoyed. If it gets a low score, the first faction will be unhappy.

[Perfect_Cell]

I predict they give Halo 3 a ten and proclaim it the best game ever like they did with Halo 2.

It got a lower score from the original, me, I expect a lower one but still within the 9.0 range.

[Lego]

I could see the TP score even though I'm a hardcore Zelda fan. I mean if you went into it a lot of it just didn't feel "Zeldaish". Still it wasn't a horrible game and I loved it. Metroid is one where I'd take the most issue with the "lolz the controls are so good it makes it easy".

[NeoCortex]

GameFAQS users have also been particularly nasty towards GameSpot since GS took control of GF and merged the forums. Anytime somebody with a GS account posts a reasonable critique of a game or something, the GF users just write it off as another ignorant GS user who should be shunned.

[Suwako Moriya]

Gamefaqs users even hate each other.... In any case I'm going to speak as at least one person on this forum who actually does post at Gamefaqs on occasion, but honestly not that much lately. Here is the real problem. Gamefaqs is too large. You have dozens apon dozens apon dozens apon dozens of boards. You have thousands apon thousands of posters. So it's rather easy by default to find morons there because of the size and morons tends to be more vocal. Plus most people only visit certain sections. So you get what can be considered cults formed...

[Lego]

GameFAQS users have also been particularly nasty towards GameSpot since GS took control of GF and merged the forums. Anytime somebody with a GS account posts a reasonable critique of a game or something, the GF users just write it off as another ignorant GS user who should be shunned.

Much like movie reviews and reviews in general I think you just have a bunch of hyper sensitive people looking for bias. Not that there isn't a lot of that floating around, especially in the gaming world, but you get my point. So when you have a bunch of those people all in one area with a questionable review, you're going to get outbursts.

[Johnny]

I predict they give Halo 3 a ten and proclaim it the best game ever like they did with Halo 2.

Mate, everyone is going to do this. Apart from Edge* who will give it a 7 just to piss people off :D

*Edge is an extremely pretentious UK magazine who seem to relish in giving games that everyone else scores highly low marks and vice versa.

[ayareiko]

In the current climate of xbots, wiibies, and playboys (that one doesn't sound like an insult - but it is)
How 'bout we call 'em psboys (pronounced pissboys) instead?

[Starwind Amada]

GF will have you believe they're MS or Sony biased but they didn't hesitate for a second to hand Laid and Blue Dragon ass whoopings.

Laid? Is that the version of Lair with the secret sex sequence Jack Thompson got wind of? :D

[ape2020]

GF will have you believe they're MS or Sony biased but they didn't hesitate for a second to hand Laid and Blue Dragon ass whoopings.

Laid? Is that the version of Lair with the secret sex sequence Jack Thompson got wind of? :D

Oh I can see it now "Its okay Puff, this is how all the cool riders mount their dragons." :> :> :>

-ape2020