Game Informer's Harsh yet Honest Review

You have a very impressive vocabulary, I had to google a ton of those words! lol I totally haven’t even thought about flagging what I though to be a mean response to someones post in the past. Thanks for pointing that out I will be sure next time I see a post that seems mean I will flag it and let the mods do what they do best.



Me too :smile:
I think my english skills will refine over time only by reading your great composed posts @Giuvito .
Offtopic MK.II: found your Limmerick-topic this morning, which made this day the best of this week, period.

1 Like


I do see what you mean, but I’d say the following was his way of linking it back to the earlier discussion;

Which is to say that the numeric values remove the facade of opinion as it nearly implies the formulaic, making it no longer presented as an opinion. That is at least what I gathered from it, and I may be wrong. We’ll let @jjand302 clarify his statement, but I doubt he meant it as was a gag-order on opinions.

Now, you have touched very cleverly on an irony with the concept of review. Which is that is seems to affect only those which care little on the topic. Those who have an opinion will assume that the critical analysis which doesn’t suit said opinion doesn’t suit their own, and is therefore wrong. But this isn’t absolute.

To quote Oscar Wilde, a man who very much believed that the irony of the critic is they’re often those who themselves cannot create;

“The critic has to educate the public, the artist has to educate the critic.”

Now, this is naturally tongue in cheek.

There are critics I often disagree with despite me agreeing with the format of their criticism. Eric Auerbach is a genius, but I don’t always agree with him, but his format is flawless. In regards to games, I love Ben ‘Yahtzee’ Crowshaw’s method of critique, despite disagreeing with him as often as I agree. I find his format to be one of the best and putting forward points I cannot contest.

I think one of the major failures of discussion is when people equate self-worth and wit to the idea of disagreeing on a matter. Even in a debate or discussion, the victorious party is that which has learned most from the experience.

I know full and well I’ve disagreed with opinions on here which were probably better formed than mine, and that is why I always give wide berth.

You’re really being too kind, thank you though. Please recognize your opinion on here is valued, not just myself but by Ganja and the rest of the moderating staff /devs. I genuinely hold true that none of GBX’s titles would be half as good without the level of community interaction they promote. That is really why I do this.

Haha, you’re too kind dear. Give me ANY suggestion you want, and I’ll make a Limerick on it. Keep em coming!


You hit it spot on. Reviews are not opinion pieces because they don’t exist for that reason. They exist to inform the public as to the release state of a product to the masses. They should be objective. People are going to use them as if they were.

1 Like

And yet so many reviewers themselves treat them as opinions.

I think that might be to boring without opinion. I mean reviews would be like manuals for games with only bias and no opinions. If all what the reviewer felt and thought while playing the game was left out all that would be left is an explanation of how the game is played. What content there is and a rundown or checklist like "does it have 60 fps? Y are there noticeable bugs? no. Would be incredibly informative and at least for me super boring. On the other side with opinion whats the golden standard which others are judge against in video games? What should be used as a bar to say this game gets a 9 on a scale of 10. Seems like a no win scenario when trying to quantify or critique art.

1 Like

I highly agree with your assessment. I’d like to add that it used to be more quantifiable though. It used to be broken down in categories like sound, visuals, replayability, etc. There are things that you can say make this (for any product) a good product. Does it work? Is it buggy? Is it innovative and does it do something very well? These are things that could really be quantified generally and would be the same for all consumers. These are to a large degree considered objective.

On the other hand you get into gaming as an art, and I ask why would you want to give artwork a number? To describe your opinion on art shouldn’t be able to summarized by a final score. It takes away from depth and the impact that makes art special.

1 Like

That’s the problem. They SHOULD be objective and they should NOT be opinion pieces, but they are almost never the former and frequently the latter.

As I said before, I don’t care if a reviewer likes a game. I care whether or not I will. The kind of reviews you and I want to read hardly exist anymore, and it only gets worse is journalism as we know it slowly becomes extinct. We have all this information at our fingertips now, but as a result, the quality of that information suffers.

Another pet peeve of mine: reviewers that are openly disdainful/hostile towards a particular type of game writing reviews about it (and I know in some cases they have no choice, but still).

1 Like

We shouldn’t malign reviewers/critics over their pieces any more than critics should malign developers over disagreements.

Critical assessments should be fluid, but numerical values imply a uniformity in quality perception which doesn’t exist and really shouldn’t as it could never be correctly implemented.

Here is a bit of a paradox.

Let’s say some one were to rate their game by the following;


And they give everything but the game play a 10/10, but the game is so unplayable that they give that a 3/10.

That would mean a score of 8.25?

Surely not. I don’t care if it’s early 90’s watercolor graphics with MIDI audio and the controls of a pregnant Steller’s Sea Cow, if the Gameplay is good I’m sold.

The reviewer seems like a good enough fellow, but the headline to his review is clearly meant to grab attention and his rating system seems unbalanced in my personal opinion. I would much rather he continued to expand on his thought as, although I disagreed with them, he was forming them well.


I’m sure the reviewers work hard at their trade.

And make their reviews as much of an art as possible.

But you know what…I think that many…many…MANY times they entirely over analyze ad nauseaum when something as simple as a review should call for clarity and simplicity.

I also worry about background “deals” being made…and who owes what to whom. Because if you don’t think that advertising or future influence on particular web sites from particular companies doesn’t exist then I have some wonderful land under two feet of swamp water in Florida to sell you.

Given all that…I still want these guy’s gig. Sounds like a job that really isn’t a job to me.


But many of these are questions with only subjective answers. I didn’t find Diablo that innovative, as it was just a dumbed down and sped up rogue-like, but many would disagree with me. I don’t think The Witcher does a good job of…most anything, really, but many would disagree.

How buggy is buggy? Do we have a scale based on how many bugs were encountered and how serious they are? What qualifies as a serious bug?

1 Like

Are we now just reviewing a review?

Reviewception, or something?


Honestly, I think the problem with a lot of reviews is the ten point scale.

I think in most instances, using a 10-point scale “over-fits” the available data.

Ask yourself, how many times have you seen anything rated 1-4 on a ten point scale? The answer is, not often, or at least not often enough if we take “5” as average.

When consumers go to a review site and see a score of “5,” they don’t say to themselves, “oh, OK, this is a pretty average piece of media.”

Instead, they assume it’s awful.

Consumers only really think a piece of media is “good” if it’s an 8-10, which should actually be a signal that it’s “exceptional,” not just good.

I think a better system would be a three point scale:

  1. Not Great.
  2. Pretty Average.
  3. Excellent.

With the edition of “Editors Choice” or something if the reviewer thinks it’s truly exceptional.

You could even do this on a per-category basis, if you want to get fancy (graphics, sound, gameplay, etc…).

When you combine this with the subjective review, I think we’d end up with a little less ratings drift, and a slightly more “objective” (in the sense that it is internally consistent) product.

1 Like

I’m reviewing your review of the review on the reviewer.



Oh, shouldn’t we give him at least one arbitrary point because he’s actually getting paid for reviewing? You know, unlike 99% of the “reviews” we read on a daily basis.

What you’re describing here is is a good example. While you may not agree with their assessment overall, you do agree with their format. That’s what makes it a good review. Things always seem more accurate when we find them agreeable.

Hypothetically, let’s say the score given were to represent people instead of just some numeric value. A 6/10 would than imply 6 out of 10 players will probably enjoy the game. Do you think that would make it more accurate? Or just more agreeable?

I don’t even see anything critical in this review that hasn’t been mentioned by half of the other reviews out there and feedback on this very forum by people who bought the game. Is everybody just upset that the game was given a numerical rating of slightly above average? It’s not even that far off of the meta-critic average.

Every time a review comes out people who purport to “not care about review scores” seem to really really care about review scores.


Interesting hypothetical, well thought out. I don’t know if I or anyone else would ultimately place value on the conjecture of the amount of people who would enjoy it.

In the end the quality rating and the applicability rating would be roughly the same.

I don’t see anyone being upset? I don’t know where you see this.

Please do express opinions on the matter, but ultimately, I don’t think you should be engaging in broad generalizations and attempting to use basic psychology on everyone posting here. They’re expressing themselves, and should you take issue with that, you’re welcome not to post on this particular thread.

I don’t think anyone would appreciate their opinion on the matter being disqualified by your assessment of how much they’re invested in it.

That was my impression from reading the thread. And I was expressing my opinion on the matter. If you don’t like my opinion I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.

1 Like