Post by TonberryKing on Sept 13, 2018 11:04:52 GMT
Part of me feels like I may not need to ask you guys this But I'm oddly curious to get a discussion going. What brought this up was a tweet from a Polygon employee... Something tells me this should tell you all you need to know. "how do you live in 2018 and still think that video game publishers pay journalism outlets for positive coverage
do you not understand how reviews work or" Now be warned I don't follow her it was somebody else who tweeted it which is why it popped up in my feed.
Alright let's toy that fact that reviews aren't bought for a second... That when websites like Polygon, Kotaku, and IGN give a game a good review score it is legitimately accurate to how the person felt. I can see this sometimes, I really can sometimes I feel like when you watch a review your are getting the genuine feeling of weather game is good or not. This is more particlutarly why I watch youtube for my game reviews as I follow people who actually have similar intrests as I do, which gives me a basis of how enjoyable the game is. The Problem is there isn't much consistancy. I've often questioned how Call of Duty can keep getting 9's every year. There defense is always the same, oh well we review it as if somebody has never played a call of duty game before. Look I haven't played the past 20 entries, past the tutorial, with the few that I have played, most i've just pasted on. What makes you think I'm going to hop right in and start playing it because you talk it up. Let's talk about the youtube side of things. Nintendo is a company that will blacklist, people from getting review copies of games if they give to many nintendo games a bad score there are also others companies that do this as well. Some actually put it in writing that you have to say good things about the game before they will send you a review copy. Jim Sterling (that guy can suck his left nutsack by the way) was even sued by a company for continuously a companies games bad reviews. So I think this claim is bullshit but I What you guys think.
do you not understand how reviews work or" Now be warned I don't follow her it was somebody else who tweeted it which is why it popped up in my feed.
Alright let's toy that fact that reviews aren't bought for a second... That when websites like Polygon, Kotaku, and IGN give a game a good review score it is legitimately accurate to how the person felt. I can see this sometimes, I really can sometimes I feel like when you watch a review your are getting the genuine feeling of weather game is good or not. This is more particlutarly why I watch youtube for my game reviews as I follow people who actually have similar intrests as I do, which gives me a basis of how enjoyable the game is. The Problem is there isn't much consistancy. I've often questioned how Call of Duty can keep getting 9's every year. There defense is always the same, oh well we review it as if somebody has never played a call of duty game before. Look I haven't played the past 20 entries, past the tutorial, with the few that I have played, most i've just pasted on. What makes you think I'm going to hop right in and start playing it because you talk it up. Let's talk about the youtube side of things. Nintendo is a company that will blacklist, people from getting review copies of games if they give to many nintendo games a bad score there are also others companies that do this as well. Some actually put it in writing that you have to say good things about the game before they will send you a review copy. Jim Sterling (that guy can suck his left nutsack by the way) was even sued by a company for continuously a companies games bad reviews. So I think this claim is bullshit but I What you guys think.
