Are GameSpot's reviews trustworthy?

Trustworthy?

  • Total voters
    29
A

Airstrike92

King
Joined
Jun 26, 2010
Messages
615
Location
St. Louis
In the past I never really gave much thought to GameSpot, or it's reviews, but recently I've been using it quite a bit. However I'm beginning to question the trustworthiness of GameSpot's reviews. For instance all of these titles (except MW2, which is overrated) are underrated by the GameSpot review team (not taking into account critic or user reviews), Resident Evil 3: Nemesis received a 4.7 (link), Alpha Protocol received a 6.0 (link), Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 for PC received an overrated 8.5 (link), whereas Medal of Honor only received a 7.5 (link), Resident Evil: Director's Cut received a 6.9 (link), and countless other reviews that I would argue are fundamentally wrong. So what is your opinion on GameSpot's reviews? Are they usually good? Or are they wrong too often to be fully trustworthy?
 
I don't care much about their score (even the average of gamers doesn't tell you that much) but I do read their reviews to get a feeling of the good and bad sides of a game. I will then judge for myself whether those characteristics matter a lot to me or not.
At the very least it steers me away from some really horrible, buggy games and it gives a decent enough description of what the gameplay is about.
 
No websites are trustworthy. Look at all the ridiculously high scores SPORE got.. and the games a steaming pile! Its not worth more than 55% IMO, yet all over the place it had reviewers jizzing themselves over it.
 
Gamespot isn't very good. Occasionally they have a decent review but I stopped going to them a few years ago for anything. IGNorant.com is even worse, Google "blown ign" and see how many results you get. They've been "blown away" by a LOT of games, some of which were utter crap. Makes you wonder what kind of blow they are referring too.
 
PrinceScamp said:
Gamespot isn't very good. Occasionally they have a decent review but I stopped going to them a few years ago for anything. IGNorant.com is even worse, Google "blown ign" and see how many results you get. They've been "blown away" by a LOT of games, some of which were utter crap. Makes you wonder what kind of blow they are referring too.
Click to expand...

You can't spell ignorant without IGN.
 
To be honest, I rarely check game reviews anymore, simply because any franchise with a significant/vocal fanbase will automatically have games that get near-perfect scores.

They do still reward good games for being good, but bad games from a good franchise will get their score boosted quite heavily.
 
I stopped trusting review sites after ETW got like 9.6s across the board.
 
I used to read Gamestation + Nintendo Official Magazine. Well, not for a long time.

Now I just seem to buy all the franchise games. Call of Duty series, Age of Empires series, CIV series etc.
 
Based solely on Yahtzee, the only games I would have played are like Prince of Persia Sands of Time and Batman: Arkham Asylum.

And I'm not sure why I mean, Batman was pretty good... Like 8 out of 10.

Anyway, I do agree with most of what he says and he's pretty darn funny, but really, if you're going there to find some praise or some suggestions, you may be disappointed, as it's mostly complaining and pointing out ridiculous game design decisions.
 
SimonL said:
Based solely on Yahtzee, the only games I would have played are like Prince of Persia Sands of Time and Batman: Arkham Asylum.

And I'm not sure why I mean, Batman was pretty good... Like 8 out of 10.

Anyway, I do agree with most of what he says and he's pretty darn funny, but really, if you're going there to find some praise or some suggestions, you may be disappointed, as it's mostly complaining and pointing out ridiculous game design decisions.
Click to expand...

You clearly haven't been watching for very long or you haven't been listening. He frequently recommends games as good buys, even if he points out a million flaws and only a few positives... plus, you missed out the two games he reviewed best.
 
tycoonist said:
I only trust Yahtzee
Click to expand...

Yahtzee is hilarious, but he is not a real reviewer. His 'reviews' are primarily for comedic value first, and reviewing second or third. I certainly do not use him or anyone else as the sole source.

Angry Joe is one of the best reviewers I've found, but even then i wouldn't take his sole word for it.

Only exception has been an admin on the Taleworld's (Mount&Blade) forums who has led me to many great deals on a good games. And even then there are often other opinions to find that agree.
 
PrinceScamp said:
Yahtzee is hilarious, but he is not a real reviewer. His 'reviews' are primarily for comedic value first, and reviewing second or third. I certainly do not use him or anyone else as the sole source.
Click to expand...

I disagree with him on occasion, but very rarely. He does a pretty good job of picking apart the crap games.
 
Well Yahtzee points out what flaws the game has, and leaves it for you to judge if you can live with them or not. Also he is a person with his own taste for games, so what he likes, you may not like and vice versa.
 
Rheinmetall said:
Well Yahtzee points out what flaws the game has, and leaves it for you to judge if you can live with them or not. Also he is a person with his own taste for games, so what he likes, you may not like and vice versa.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Since he doesn't review turned based or strategy games, he's mostly
entertainment value for me.

As for Gamespot - I have always thougth their ratings were inflated. But reading
the review usually gives enough info to get an idea of whether I might like it or not.
 
Serutan said:
As for Gamespot - I have always thougth their ratings were inflated.
Click to expand...

Or deflated. For example, Mount & Blade was given an astounding score of 4.0, and after that, I never read a review of someone named Kevin VanOrd, ever. (correct me if I'm wrong)
 
I thought it was 6.0 and yeah it wasn't a great review. I feel like he took too many points off for its shortcomings (the quests aren't always that great for example) and he must have taken off a point or two for not having the latest graphics. I don't think he appreciated the gameplay which is actually really cool and an improvement (at least realism wise) over almost every other game's melee combat system. The horses are also incredibly easy to control and deal with, unlike in most games with horses. In the blurb summary thing on top he listed like two or three downsides and over twice as many positive things, yet gave it a 6/10.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom