To me it seems like every title that’s ever released begins with a trailer “10/10” IGN 10/10 Gameinformer 10/10 G4 10/10 Gamespot 10/10 Cats are cool
To me it seems like “someone” pays these companies to make these reviews OR since companies like IGN have like 50 guys make multiple reviews, they simply take the top one, and take out quote “Amazing” 10/10" from 1 review, even if 10 others say 1/10 “Horrible”…
This is in regards to Halo 4, and basically every other game out there.
In my opinion, the best way to find decent ratings is to wait 1 week after the game is released, than check Amazon.com. Then you see how many stars a game has an subtract half a star due to many of the 5/5 ratings being from people within the company. Then look at the 1/5 reviews, and also look at personal reviews on Youtube. That seems to be the only way anymore.
Think how much a 10/10 rating for any game is actually worth from IGN…could make the worst game sell a million copies.
As a business student I will tell you flat out NO! THEY ARE NOT TO BE TRUSTED!
If 343 gives a reviewer an early copy of H4, and that reviewer gives it a bad review, this has the possibility of harming 343’s bottom line.
Next time 343 releases a game, they don’t send that reviewer an early copy, and now all of a sudden they’re the only reviewer without an early copy, and all of their competitor’s are writing pieces while they’re unable to.
Also think about the money which 343 spends on advertising. Why would you advertise your game with a group which gave it a bad review?
The reviewer is basically at the mercy of 343. No reviewer would survive long by making all of the developers their enemies. It is a symbiotic relationship, and game reviewers understand that, so they give favorable reviews to the major players in the gaming industry.
If you find a small independant reviewer, doing it as a hobby (Who is NOT using game reviews to pay his bills), I would say that their integrity is much higher, though they may not know what they’re talking about (Look how many false opinions are floating around on this forum for example).
If you really want people’s opinions, ask the people on your friend’s list.
I don’t, not anymore. Gameinformer is the worst now - and with them being owned by Gamestop, they really have a conflicted interest when they issue good and bad scores. Heck, they deemed Mass Effect 3 a perfect ‘10.’ What a joke. Any AAA game, with rare exception, is gonna get a 9 or higher from most
I have a question when people on here judge the game do they judge the game offline such as campaign, forge and custom games (exception being spartan ops online). Or do you judge it mainly on the matchmaking. These are the two ways people look at this game I look at it from the 1st perspective because I do play campaign and system link when friends are over like the older halo games. Honestly I don’t really hold match making as the main factor in the game because eventually like halo 2 it will be gone (hopefully by then spartan ops will be able to be downloaded on to console). To me this series is awesome and still fun to replay weather it be ce,2,3 or reach with friends but it seems to most matchmaking is the only thing.
> I have a question when people on here judge the game do they judge the game offline such as campaign, forge and custom games (exception being spartan ops online). Or do you judge it mainly on the matchmaking. These are the two ways people look at this game I look at it from the 1st perspective because I do play campaign and system link when friends are over like the older halo games. Honestly I don’t really hold match making as the main factor in the game because eventually like halo 2 it will be gone (hopefully by then spartan ops will be able to be downloaded on to console). To me this series is awesome and still fun to replay weather it be ce,2,3 or reach with friends but it seems to most matchmaking is the only thing.
I judge a game from a full perspective. I have hundreds of games, and fully play through the campaigns, and most all of the features. (Except Call of Duty…because the campaigns repeat…)
Here’s my ratings based on the era or time they were released:
Halo 1: A+
Halo 2: A+
Halo 3: A+
Halo Wars: C
Halo 3: ODST: D
Halo Reach: C+
Halo 1 Anniversary: C+
Halo 4: B+
While I understand the incentive for a major game reviewing company to give out good reviews, there are many counter examples out there that refute the initial assertion.
I’m not going to list them all, but could use the recently released Black Ops II as an example. It received only an 8/10 on Gamespot, which I’d consider to be sub-par from the average Call of Duty game.
There are some very honest reviews out there. I really enjoy the Halo 4 review by Machinima. He’s honest in the things he doesn’t like and the things he does. I’d have to say after playing the game for a few weeks now that I very much agree with his review.
So, while it’s quite possible that reviews can be influenced through corporate incentive, in my opinion, I feel that they aren’t influenced as much as some of you may believe.
> So, while it’s quite possible that reviews can be influenced through corporate incentive, in my opinion, I feel that they aren’t influenced as much as some of you may believe.
You should see how many people give good reviews on amazon just to get into their “review program” where Amazon will give you free games weeks before they are released.
The reviews that are long and dramatic = Fake
Reviews that are short, someone who values their time = True
> > I have a question when people on here judge the game do they judge the game offline such as campaign, forge and custom games (exception being spartan ops online). Or do you judge it mainly on the matchmaking. These are the two ways people look at this game I look at it from the 1st perspective because I do play campaign and system link when friends are over like the older halo games. Honestly I don’t really hold match making as the main factor in the game because eventually like halo 2 it will be gone (hopefully by then spartan ops will be able to be downloaded on to console). To me this series is awesome and still fun to replay weather it be ce,2,3 or reach with friends but it seems to most matchmaking is the only thing.
>
> I judge a game from a full perspective. I have hundreds of games, and fully play through the campaigns, and most all of the features. (Except Call of Duty…because the campaigns repeat…)
>
> Here’s my ratings based on the era or time they were released:
> Halo 1: A+
> Halo 2: A+
> Halo 3: A+
> Halo Wars: C
> Halo 3: ODST: D
> Halo Reach: C+
> Halo 1 Anniversary: C+
> Halo 4: B+
My rating for the series is
Halo 1: A+
Halo 2: A+
Halo 3: A+
Halo Wars: B
Halo ODST :B+
Halo Reach: C
Halo CEA: B
Halo 4: A-
Trust me we have been fortunate with this series not to have an actual bad game. Look at my rating for sonic (3d era, but honestly it there where games in the 2d era that could mimic this)
Sonic Adventure: A+
Sonic Adventure 2: A+
Sonic Heroes: B
Shadow the Hedgehog: C-
Sonic 06: F
Sonic Unleashed C
Sonic Colors B
Sonic Generations A
> My rating for the series is
>
> Halo 1: A+
> Halo 2: A+
> Halo 3: A+
> Halo Wars: B
> Halo ODST :B+
> Halo Reach: C
> Halo CEA: B
> Halo 4: A-
>
> Trust me we have been fortunate with this series not to have an actual bad game. Look at my rating for sonic (3d era, but honestly it there where games in the 2d era that could mimic this)
>
> Sonic Adventure: A+
> Sonic Adventure 2: A+
> Sonic Heroes: B
> Shadow the Hedgehog: C-
> Sonic 06: F
> Sonic Unleashed C
> Sonic Colors B
> Sonic Generations A
Haha, I never liked sonic until I got Sonic Adventure 2 Battle. Loved that game. Raising chows.
> > So, while it’s quite possible that reviews can be influenced through corporate incentive, in my opinion, I feel that they aren’t influenced as much as some of you may believe.
>
> You should see how many people give good reviews on amazon just to get into their “review program” where Amazon will give you free games weeks before they are released.
>
> The reviews that are long and dramatic = Fake
>
> Reviews that are short, someone who values their time = True
I’m not denying that games reviews are influenced by factors outside of “how the game is”.
I thought we were talking about Major Companies though. So I’m pretty confused as to why you’re citing much smaller reviews for the amazon “review board” as a counter argument.
Sure, people definitely will give a review to get some incentive, these smaller people will; they have nothing to lose. The larger review websites though, have to try and retain their credibility. If they give a good review for a game that is clearly not good, people will stop respecting their review, and there goes their main audience.
So once again, while Major Company reviews may be influence in some measure through corporate incentive, I do not believe that they are SO influenced that they shouldn’t be trusted.
> > My rating for the series is
> >
> > Halo 1: A+
> > Halo 2: A+
> > Halo 3: A+
> > Halo Wars: B
> > Halo ODST :B+
> > Halo Reach: C
> > Halo CEA: B
> > Halo 4: A-
> >
> > Trust me we have been fortunate with this series not to have an actual bad game. Look at my rating for sonic (3d era, but honestly it there where games in the 2d era that could mimic this)
> >
> > Sonic Adventure: A+
> > Sonic Adventure 2: A+
> > Sonic Heroes: B
> > Shadow the Hedgehog: C-
> > Sonic 06: F
> > Sonic Unleashed C
> > Sonic Colors B
> > Sonic Generations A
>
> Haha, I never liked sonic until I got Sonic Adventure 2 Battle. Loved that game. Raising chows.
The chao garden is sonic adventure was ackward so was the racing, it was not until sonic adventure 2 the chao garden was a fun and full experience. Then sega said you like chao while say good bye
Two interesting facts Big the Cat’s voice actor in Sonic Adventure also voice Duke Nukem, And in shadow the hedgehog Black Dooms voice actor also voice Goku from Dragon ball
