4 ms·

Does anyone really trust online game reviews? Game media is corrupt to the bone and the first thing I think when I see a positive review is that it was bought.

by Kenji 10y ago

Does anyone really trust online game reviews? Game media is corrupt to the bone and the first thing I think when I see a positive review is that it was bought. Besides, the culture of game media is often far, far away from true gamer culture. That's why I often just watch raw gameplay footage, then I can make up my mind myself. I think this is a non-issue. “Consumers have the right to know if reviewers are providing their own opinions or paid sales pitches,” I think consumers should start to learn to think for themselves and stop relying on the state, bans and fines.

ccvannorman 10y ago
> I think consumers should start to learn to think for themselves and stop relying on the state, bans and fines. An idealist viewpoint, and perhaps a correct one. But in practice I support government rules against intentional misleading of audiences for the same reason I support government rules against lying about ingredients in food.
- Kenji 10y ago
  Okay, lying about what's inside a can of food is nothing short of fraud, that is, not fulfilling your contractual obligation to the buyer properly, even worse if it's intentionally. I don't want to abolish contracts, that would be ridiculous. However, what goes on between a game company and PewDiePie, in monetary but also in other terms, is their private matter. I don't see a reason why it should be illegal to pay PewDiePie to be enthusiastic about the game when it's actually garbage. No contract was violated here. PewDiePie is not an authority on this game and what he says matters not for any purchase contract. So people who are mislead by him are fools themselves for relying on random internet stuff.
  - DanBC 10y ago
    > I don't see a reason why it should be illegal to pay PewDiePie to be enthusiastic about the game when it's actually garbage. That's totally legal. What's illegal is for them to not disclose the payment.
a_small_island 10y ago
>"I think consumers should start to learn to think for themselves and stop relying on the state, bans and fines." I see both sides. The reality is that these games are advertised not for us, but for the new generation of kids. Not sure if 8 year olds are being victimized by this or not, but I'd say its a possibility.
- Kenji 10y ago
  8 year olds should be protected by their thoughtful parents in these matters.
  - dec0dedab0de 10y ago
    I routinely tell my son "I dunno, that kinda looks like it sucks. Lets wait and see"
  - Retric 10y ago
    lol. So, it's all the parents fault. Look, companies advertise because it works, banning deceptive advertising is a good idea with minimal downsides.
dec0dedab0de 10y ago
I think consumers should start to learn to think for themselves and stop relying on the state, bans and fines. Absolutely, it's best to assume any who cares enough to do a review is biased in some way. Then it's just a matter of selecting reviewers who have a track record of honesty, and similar tastes as yourself.
SCdF 10y ago
> Does anyone really trust online game reviews? It depends on what you mean by "trust", and "game reviews". I have varying levels of trust for different individuals, which you can factor into how much you take what they're saying at face value. I don't think the concept of a game review is particularly helpful: they are all subjective opinion pieces. They could be essays (game reviews), rants or opinion pieces (what TB does say), raw gameplay (lets plays) or live interactive exploration of the title (Twitch). You can combine those various streams, along with "lesser" (read "easier") user generated content like Reddit threads and what-not, to help you come to some kind of conclusion before a purchase. > the first thing I think when I see a positive review is that it was bought I feel for you, that can't be a nice way to think about things. I'm not sure where you're getting that kind of cynicism from honestly, but if the issue is as widespread as you say I feel like there is a pretty good expose in that. > Besides, the culture of game media is often far, far away from true gamer culture. That's a really odd statement. I'm not sure what "true gamer culture" is, but there is a good chance I come from a completely different country to you, have a completely different background and life experiences to you. Except I play video games. I'm not sure declaring some "true gamerness" test and segregating people who fit your expectations and those that don't is particularly healthy. I think especially these days many people play games, to varying levels, on varying platforms. Games are not holy relics to be cherished by the anointed few, they are pieces of culture to be enjoyed (or not I suppose, if they're junk) by everyone. > I think consumers should start to learn to think for themselves and stop relying on the state, bans and fines. I'm not sure those are mutually exclusive ideas. People should think for themselves, obviously. But since basically every opinion you've ever had is based on the media you read / experienced it in, trying to push media toward being a cultural experience and not an advertisement is important too. Especially in a world where everyone is hyper critical and distrustful of media (especially media that contains opinions they don't agree with), it's a boon to promote yourself as a game reviewer / critic / lets player who is not corrupted by the almighty dollar.
- vlunkr 10y ago
  > I'm not sure declaring some "true gamerness" test and segregating people who fit your expectations and those that don't is particularly healthy. This is exactly the problem with GamerGate. They think all games and game media are made specifically for them.
uep 10y ago
There is basically one game-review site I really trust, Giantbomb.com. The site was created after Jeff Gerstmann was fired from GameSpot for giving a bad review to a game whose advertising was all over the site at the time[1]. I don't know how impartial they really are, but one of my favorite parts of the site are their Quick Looks. It's just a couple of people playing a game and talking about it. It feels like it gives me a good representation of what to expect from a game. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Gerstmann#Termination_from_GameSpot_.282007.E2.80.932008.29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Gerstmann#Termination_fro...
wnevets 10y ago
A lot of gamers aren't using game reviews from these major outlets to help decide to buy a game or not. These reviews are mostly used to validate an existing purchase or compare to someone else's favorite game. [1] Much like fandango star ratings virtually no one gets an actual bad review. 1. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/fandango-movies-ratings/ http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/fandango-movies-ratings/
makomk 10y ago
One of the problems with allowing undisclosed paid reviews is that it eats away at trust in reviews - as you put it, "the first thing I think when I see a positive review is that it was bought". It doesn't matter how honest a reviewer is, no-one will trust them. Also, watching gameplay footage wouldn't have saved you here - the only people who could post gameplay footage were paid promoters whose contracts required them not to show any glitches or anything else that showed the game in a negative light.

by Kenji 10y ago

ccvannorman 10y ago

> I think consumers should start to learn to think for themselves and stop relying on the state, bans and fines. An idealist viewpoint, and perhaps a correct one. But in practice I support government rules against intentional misleading of audiences for the same reason I support government rules against lying about ingredients in food.

Kenji 10y ago
Okay, lying about what's inside a can of food is nothing short of fraud, that is, not fulfilling your contractual obligation to the buyer properly, even worse if it's intentionally. I don't want to abolish contracts, that would be ridiculous. However, what goes on between a game company and PewDiePie, in monetary but also in other terms, is their private matter. I don't see a reason why it should be illegal to pay PewDiePie to be enthusiastic about the game when it's actually garbage. No contract was violated here. PewDiePie is not an authority on this game and what he says matters not for any purchase contract. So people who are mislead by him are fools themselves for relying on random internet stuff.
- DanBC 10y ago
  > I don't see a reason why it should be illegal to pay PewDiePie to be enthusiastic about the game when it's actually garbage. That's totally legal. What's illegal is for them to not disclose the payment.

a_small_island 10y ago

>"I think consumers should start to learn to think for themselves and stop relying on the state, bans and fines." I see both sides. The reality is that these games are advertised not for us, but for the new generation of kids. Not sure if 8 year olds are being victimized by this or not, but I'd say its a possibility.

Kenji 10y ago
8 year olds should be protected by their thoughtful parents in these matters.
- dec0dedab0de 10y ago
  I routinely tell my son "I dunno, that kinda looks like it sucks. Lets wait and see"
- Retric 10y ago
  lol. So, it's all the parents fault. Look, companies advertise because it works, banning deceptive advertising is a good idea with minimal downsides.

dec0dedab0de 10y ago

I think consumers should start to learn to think for themselves and stop relying on the state, bans and fines. Absolutely, it's best to assume any who cares enough to do a review is biased in some way. Then it's just a matter of selecting reviewers who have a track record of honesty, and similar tastes as yourself.

SCdF 10y ago

> Does anyone really trust online game reviews? It depends on what you mean by "trust", and "game reviews". I have varying levels of trust for different individuals, which you can factor into how much you take what they're saying at face value. I don't think the concept of a game review is particularly helpful: they are all subjective opinion pieces. They could be essays (game reviews), rants or opinion pieces (what TB does say), raw gameplay (lets plays) or live interactive exploration of the title (Twitch). You can combine those various streams, along with "lesser" (read "easier") user generated content like Reddit threads and what-not, to help you come to some kind of conclusion before a purchase. > the first thing I think when I see a positive review is that it was bought I feel for you, that can't be a nice way to think about things. I'm not sure where you're getting that kind of cynicism from honestly, but if the issue is as widespread as you say I feel like there is a pretty good expose in that. > Besides, the culture of game media is often far, far away from true gamer culture. That's a really odd statement. I'm not sure what "true gamer culture" is, but there is a good chance I come from a completely different country to you, have a completely different background and life experiences to you. Except I play video games. I'm not sure declaring some "true gamerness" test and segregating people who fit your expectations and those that don't is particularly healthy. I think especially these days many people play games, to varying levels, on varying platforms. Games are not holy relics to be cherished by the anointed few, they are pieces of culture to be enjoyed (or not I suppose, if they're junk) by everyone. > I think consumers should start to learn to think for themselves and stop relying on the state, bans and fines. I'm not sure those are mutually exclusive ideas. People should think for themselves, obviously. But since basically every opinion you've ever had is based on the media you read / experienced it in, trying to push media toward being a cultural experience and not an advertisement is important too. Especially in a world where everyone is hyper critical and distrustful of media (especially media that contains opinions they don't agree with), it's a boon to promote yourself as a game reviewer / critic / lets player who is not corrupted by the almighty dollar.

vlunkr 10y ago
> I'm not sure declaring some "true gamerness" test and segregating people who fit your expectations and those that don't is particularly healthy. This is exactly the problem with GamerGate. They think all games and game media are made specifically for them.

uep 10y ago

There is basically one game-review site I really trust, Giantbomb.com. The site was created after Jeff Gerstmann was fired from GameSpot for giving a bad review to a game whose advertising was all over the site at the time[1]. I don't know how impartial they really are, but one of my favorite parts of the site are their Quick Looks. It's just a couple of people playing a game and talking about it. It feels like it gives me a good representation of what to expect from a game. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Gerstmann#Termination_from_GameSpot_.282007.E2.80.932008.29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Gerstmann#Termination_fro...

wnevets 10y ago

A lot of gamers aren't using game reviews from these major outlets to help decide to buy a game or not. These reviews are mostly used to validate an existing purchase or compare to someone else's favorite game. [1] Much like fandango star ratings virtually no one gets an actual bad review. 1. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/fandango-movies-ratings/ http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/fandango-movies-ratings/

makomk 10y ago

One of the problems with allowing undisclosed paid reviews is that it eats away at trust in reviews - as you put it, "the first thing I think when I see a positive review is that it was bought". It doesn't matter how honest a reviewer is, no-one will trust them. Also, watching gameplay footage wouldn't have saved you here - the only people who could post gameplay footage were paid promoters whose contracts required them not to show any glitches or anything else that showed the game in a negative light.