Whiplash wrote:I'm not gonna deny that, some people take bribes, some jump on bandwagons, and yes some people get caught up in the hype.
So it's ok to propagate this right? Hint: Just because you are a marketing shill doesn't mean I have to be.
But yes, overall gaming journalism in general and reviews are worth paying attention to. I mean to think otherwise is a blatant exaggeration.
Can you back up this statement with any kind of logic other than "I am incredibly naive and refuse to believe that people can be dishonest"?
I mean, I refuse to believe that critics didn't like this game because its not what they expected/ it wasn't made by a big company/ they didn't get money to praise it.
Believe it. Pretty much every reason you named HAS heavily affected reviews, over and over again. How many examples do we have to point out of games that got 5 star reviews...for the all the same reasons as games that got 1 star reviews?
Stark can point you to reviews where they pretty much say "this game isn't like Splinter Cell so I didn't like it". I can point you straight to a review where, I shit you not, the reviewer gives the game a demerit because Thorton can only carry
two fucking guns. If that's not biased journalism to you I don't know what the hell is.
I mean look at Dark Void, Force Unleashed, Bionic Commando, Resident Evil 5 (granted that one was the best reviewed of this bunch), Lost Planet 2, and Metro 2033. Can honestly say that the reviewers of those games were full of shit?
No, but I can honestly say you finding a couple of bad games with bad reviews doesn't do shit to help your point. It also doesn't help that a lot of those examples suck.
Best care anywhere.