Slashdot Mirror
Why Videogame Reviews End Up Being So Controversial
Thanks to GamerDad for its editorial discussing why videogame reviews are sometimes controversial, and "why fanboys have such a hard time understanding that reviews are just opinions." The author explains: "I think it's simply a product of the games being essentially mechanical constructs... The mechanics of a game are often reviewed with their own numerical scores that then produce the overall total score." He goes on: "So many folks believe the pieces that create the game, because of the technology used (good or bad), define how good it can or can't be", before concluding: "Five stars out of five doesn't mean that's the greatest game and no game could be better. It does mean that it's one of the very best your money can buy in the opinion of the writer of the review."
who cares? why is this posted?
Tommy Tallarico is the only sane game reviewer out there. He calls the shit, shit, and he appreciates the ins and outs of game coding. I guess if you really like your games to be faggy cartoon characters, or gay wizards and such, you may find him to be a disenting voice. Of all the gamers I know (admittedly, not many are pimply faced kids in Grade 10), Tommy is the ONLY reviewer any of us trust. If he says "go out and get it today", I don't even have to read any other reviews, and he has NEVER led me astray in, what like 6 years? In case you are going to dig up some gay stats on how long G4TechTV has been on air for, he started doing his reviews for Electric Playground.
As for the insults on the games, couldn't care less. If the 300 dollar meal isn't worth it, I don't care if it gets reviewd as a "sub-par masterpiece" or "a plate of steaming shit", so long as I know not to waste my money, the reviewr's job is done.
Just for fun, can you name a revolutionary turn-based strategy game, that was made in the last 5 years. Didn't think so.