Support NeoGAF

[GymWolf]

0 out of 10, would ignore again.

 

[killatopak]

It is A factor not THE factor for me purchasing a game.

 

[saintjules]

Reviews more than scores. Sometimes they read like two different things.

IGN years back would say 7 or 8/10 but don't cite negatives in their conclusions to warrant the score. What kept a game from being 10/10 for that particular review. Unknown

 

[fart town usa]

Option 3.

 

[jroc74]

A couple of my fav games:

Sonic Unleashed
Crackdown series, yes all 3 games

I liked Remember Me.

I could care less about scores if I like a game. That said...one of the few regrets I have is buying the Saints Row reboot. This is one of the few times I should have paid attention to reviews, scores.

If anything, I pay more attention to the review itself vs the score.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Zero.

The reviewers are in the corner of the publishers, not you and I. If a game has performance issues, they won’t tell you.

I’m 100% Steam user reviews, Youtube, and forum impressions.

Gaming site reviews, Metacritic, Scores, and all that worthless crap, can die off.

 

[Daymos]

I usually check the scores of games for two reasons-
1. A game I'm interested in needs an overall 7 or higher or I'll get worried and check reviews. It's totally possible for a 7.0 metacritic scores game to be my best game of all time though..

2. If a game I have ZERO interest in gets a bunch of 10s (or close) I want to read up on it and see why.. cuz maybe it's a new type of game that's worth my time.

 

[Mung]

Not at all.

You can basically predict review and Meta scores on the whole by the pre launch general narrative and hype.

I ignore them almost completely and decide to buy purely on my impressions and those of people I trust.

 

[RyRy93]

So let's say Elden Ring gets 3/10s across the board and it's unplayable on all platforms 31.3% of you guys would just say fuck it take my $60? Not even bothering to check out the responses here or videos?

A lot of you guys are too dismissive of what critics have to say, they aren't always right but isn't it worth listening to people that have followed the industry for years and put dozens of hours into the game you're thinking about purchasing?

 

[ShadowNate]

For quite a few years now, probably more than a decade, I go to gameplay videos, maybe with some player commentary who understand the genre they're playing and are at least somewhat competent at it so that they can show the interesting or innovating aspects of the game. No hour long opinion piece videos, no multiple commentators and no screaming/singing idiots.

I'll probably still read a few reviews occasionally, but not to decide on making a purchase, rather than get different perspectives, interpretations and a sense on how reviews nowadays have evolved/devolved. I'll avoid anything written by those I know that have used troll/clickbait tactics or be complete jerks to attract readership/vieweship.

 

[Farawayfromhell]

I do my own thing as always and usually I do the opposite, if a game does not interest me but receives positive reviews I give it a chance.

 

[Knightime_X]

Scores meant a lot more in the 90's.
Mostly because they were more objective than subjective.

 

[Sosokrates]

I think they are good to inform at the general quality of a game. But once a game gets above 80 they really dont mean shit.

Like what does it even mean if a Game is 85 and another is 95 is the 95 game 10% better?

 

[Kenneth Haight]

When review breakdowns are written by interns who don’t play games, then I certainly don’t pay them any attention. If it’s thoughtfully written with valid criticisms then I will take it on board.

 

[Fattious Floyd]

Not so much anymore. Most of these "Reviewers" are just entitled scrubs who either come across as hypercritical for the sake of sounding interesting...or they just come across as compromised windbags, looking for handouts/advertisements on their websites/channels.

 

[Danjin44]

I mostly trust my own taste more than “scores” and so far it hasn’t failed me.