Since the dawn of time, well maybe not that far back, publications have played games. Then they rate and review them for apparently our benefit as consumers. Sometimes they align with your views, sometimes they don't. Every gamer is different. With the slew of Skyward Sword reviews coming in and a few of them being controversial for their scores or comments, It's making me wonder who you all actually trust? I admit I haven't really examined all of the 38 different publications currently collected in our Zelda Review Thread, but I definitely know who I trust. When Nintendo World Report gave the game a 10/10, that is pretty much all I needed. Then when Famitsu did the same with their 10/10/10/10 rating, I knew my beliefs were real. Sure what they had to say mattered a lot too. It's not just about the number. I trust those two sources quite a lot with my gaming decisions, looking to them for guidance on any game I'm unwavering on, or when I'm looking to solidify my own thoughts or not. I used to feel that way with IGN but after the core group left, things got weird (though really that started before they even were out), but even seeing their perfect score puts a little smile on my faith. Makes me feel like they're not as crazy as I thought considering what I believe to be true from the trusted reviews I do care for.
So my roundtable question to you all is this,... Who do you trust with your gaming opinions? What reviewers do you trust and care for? Who are you weary about? Or are you open your heart to all publications evenly? Most importantly, WHY do you put your faith in those reviewers? Explain yourself and defend your preferences. I'm eager to learn some perspective on all this and I'm sure others are as well.
Just like GE mentioned, I would have to say Matt Casamassina and the old IGN crew. I really connected with those guys. I know nothing can last forever, but right now all the gaming sites just seem like they are all the same. I really don't trust too many of them. Too many sites have the same people reviewing games for all systems and in today's world there is too many HD fanboys out there.
I guess what it really comes down to, I always knew what games I would like before the internet ever happened and that still holds true today.
I don't really turn to review sites any more for my game buying decisions. As long as the game sounds like something I will enjoy, I am more than likely to give it a go. This is done primarily by hearing out the fine folks here at Negative World, but I supplement this forum by listening to Radio Free Nintendo, which provides very thorough discussions about games in great detail. I find reviews helpful not so much so that I will blindly buy a game based on someone's glowing review, but rather so I can understand what aspects of the game that reviewer liked or didn't liked so that I can decide if the game is right for me.
I trusted Craig Harris for years back when he was on IGN. Now that he's not reviewing games though... I pretty much have to rely on myself. Although if a game gets glowing praise from a group of forum posters that I know and trust, I'll give the game a shot.
Honestly, I sometimes skim a few reviews from GameRankings for out-of-nowhere games, but I've developed kind of an innate sense of what I'll like. And, if I have a chance, I'll always give a 'maybe' a shot on a rental or demo. Or, when it hits five bones, I'll just buy it, to be forever preserved in plastic...
I guess that I do listen to podcasts, but I'm not sure if they influence me, since most discuss games that I don't give a shit about.
Oh, but I value all of your e-pinions, of course! (Actually, I do appreciate when you guys discuss or review under-the-radar stuff.)
I go to IGN more out of habit than trust these days. What I usually do is go around to all the sites I know of and compare. If the scores are in the 7-8 range and I'm interested the game, I'll probably pick it up. If it's a game I don't know about and it gets straight 9's or 10's I check it out. It really just depends on the game for me.
Myself. I usually read the reviews from major franchises first, then I take in consideration what gaming franchise are we talking about. After the game release, I then check with people I know that bought the game early and ask about the experience of playing the game. I rarely buy or play something just because someone told me it was ok.
In all seriousness, I pretty much trust myself. If I see a game and I think I'm going to like it, I get it. I'm not swayed too often. The only games I can RECALL purchasing, or having something end up on a list are Resident Evil 4, Okami, and Zack and Wiki. First two were pretty good, didn't get around to Zack and Wiki yet. Someday.
IGN or other review sites have never forced me to or detered me from purchasing a game.
Some of the people I've heard on podcasts, mostly, and of whom I understand the preferences, pet peeves and such. Jeremy Parish, Chris Kohler, Kat Bailey, Ray Barnholt, etc. Even if they give certain games I like so-so scores, I know enough about them to understand what bothers them that doesn't bother me, and what they like that I don't care about.
Right. Chris Kohler was the first name that came to mind for me, and that's because he's an intelligent, skillfull writer who clearly expresses his point of view. Even if you don't agree with him on everything you can respect it and use that information to form an opinion on whether you'll like the product or not. Roger Ebert is the same way with movies.