Well... Who!?
Do you trust IGN? Or your local no name, small community platform specific fansite? Or do you trust your internet buddies? Or do you trust your real lfie buddies?
Or do you listen to the wind, like an American Indian?
Well... Who!?
Do you trust IGN? Or your local no name, small community platform specific fansite? Or do you trust your internet buddies? Or do you trust your real lfie buddies?
Or do you listen to the wind, like an American Indian?
The latter and I wait for the opinions of a selected bunch of random internet people a few weeks after the release.
Usually, believe it or not, I go by what Game Informer says. Well, some of the guys anyway. Not all are fit to review a game (won't say who for fear of having rotten fruit thrown at me). They can be spot on at times.
EDGE and GamesTM.
But more than either of those... my own personal opinion! Crazy idea, I know!
If it was just you, you'd never buy a game without a demo, and demo's are sometimes misguiding.
I usually just listen to the general consensus and go by Metacritic, although not in a usual sort of way.
What I usually do is ignore most of the highest scores and check a good amount of the lowest ones. Usually the lowest scores complain about stuff like difficulty level, so if this is the case I don't mind, because I like playing most games on the hardest setting anyway. But if the lowest reviews complain about things that really annoy me about games then I'd probably end up passing on it.
If the low scores only complain about difficulty, or things that I don't really mind in games, than I usually spend a while reading the average scoring reviews (7s to 8s). I tend to find that these are the most balanced ones in general, so they spend time mentioning both bad and good points, rather than focusing on one side more than the other.
After all of that, I usually end up with a good picture of the actual quality of the game.
Other than that, I'd probably trust the opinion of people that I play with regularly on XBL, because obviously we tend to have a similar taste in games. But we usually end up buying the same games without ever asking each other anyway.
Generally it's a mix of internet buddies, a kind of double "reading between the lines" from GamesTm and EDGE and I sometimes use metacritic in a similar way to G1GA. Dismissing the most gushing high-scores, the most cynical "I cant play it therefore it's shit" low scores; and taking a good smattering of user reviews in as well.
The best of my games have come from just knowing I'll probably love it though. If I'd listened to reviews I'd probably not have got ChromeHounds ( which myself and a load of friends absolutely caned for a good while ), Grand Slam Tennis and the real biggie Demon's Souls which had no reviews to speak of when I bought it... I just caught wind of it on the EG forums, knew I'd love it and pre-ordered it then and there. Only game that I've ever clocked up 70 hrs on in one week.
An amalgamation of scores, forumite word-of-mouth and (preferably) some hands-on experience with a demo.
What everyone else said! I don't think it's a good idea to trust one source and base your purchases on that, just as it isn't a good idea to get your hard news from one newspaper. It's pretty easy to see how good/bad/average a game is going to be by looking at a few sites and chatting to folk on forums. Then you can weed out the over scoring and the under scoring that one or two sites might have done, THEN you buy.
I think all reviews are equally important to help you paint a picture, and as for "trusting" a site - don't trust any of them - just judge each game and each review on its own.
"Usually, believe it or not, I go by what Game Informer says. Well, some of the guys anyway. Not all are fit to review a game (won't say who for fear of having rotten fruit thrown at me). They can be spot on at times."
Admit it Steph, Andrew Reiner is one of them, innit? :P
I admit, I too usually go by a selection of sources. And I always ask when people are playign on PSN, what it's like. That's pretty important.
Like, I don't really want Assassins Creed 2, but for AC1, me and my friends loved it so much, so I know I will have to get it. And the fact we were discussing the story of it, was pretty amazing.
/whistles /swears she'll never tell...
No-one. I like to play demos.
The only site that seems to fit my preferences fairly well is EG, and they're no-where near a perfect match.
I used to read stacks of reviews before purchasing but I ended up chasing around the 'Blockbuster' games which quite often just didn't suit my taste (GTA IV I'm looking at you...!)
Nowadays I rely more on the same stuff that helps my music hunt. i.e. who's working on it, who worked with who previously, what's the general vibe (i'm a sucker for the 'sega' aesthetic - blue skys, highscores an all)
I love reading reviews once I've bought a game though.
oh I'm also really fortunate in that I have a group of mates I see really often who are all very much up on games - we all have distinctly different tastes but we really help guide eachother to the best buys.
Good reviews rarely make me buy a game but bad reviews on a few websites will put me off one.
Hello all. :) Yep as many have stated, a variety of sources really. Like G1GA, as well as the usual site reviews that I read (eg EG :D ) I'll check out MetaCritic for a range of opinion.. Players' impressions on forums such as NeoGAF can be influential as well - Demon's Souls is one I'm interested in after hearing very positive reactions on forums.. But then again, my tastes are often very different, for example I loved Far Cry 2 but that seems to have generated very mixed impressions. Obviously demos as well, and friends' recommendations.
I tend to read some of the middling reviews to see where / why the game was marked down. I don't trust a particular source but I will trust a well written review. By that I mean one which makes it clear what the reviewers game preferences are and why they marked the game the way they did.
Demos are very important but not always clear deciding factor as they are some shite demos out there for some great games. Really surprised Nintendo do not do demos yet. Given that a big factor in Wii games is how they control it's crazy they refuse to bother. I'm sure a lot of third parties would want to put demos out.
Usually IGN and Eurogamer.
Hunam that's a really interesting point.
Reviews do much more harm than they do good.
really, no body!
i actually play the game if one of my friends Buy it
if i like it, i`ll Buy it for Sure.
if there isn`t anybody buy it, i go to Youtube and look to the
GamePlay and check the Sources like Gamespot OR IGN.
I never trust the big sites. Most of their reviewers nit pick at small crap, and show bias. If im truly interested in a game, ill mostly just get it. If im unsure then ill read a ton of reviews and user reviews.
One game that stood out fo me was Two worlds. It had its issues but everyone was giving it low scores calling it a poor mans oblivion. If you played it, it wasnt anything like oblivion, more like the Gothic series.
I really enjoyed it, it had its problems, but didnt deserve the really low scores it got.
I look at in-game footage if it shows promise I rent it, if it has multi-player and its good I buy it. Single player games are a waste of cash because they have no real replay value.
So in the end I trust my rental service to help me pick the games I want to play. Its only in rare occasions that I want to keep a single player game.
I go for vids. I find the GameTrailers reviews quite nice. Not for their ratings, but they leave me with an impression of whether I'll like the game or not.
noone but myself. 22 years playing have kinda teached me when to expect a good game, and when to avoid a piece of shit
I can usually tell if a game is going to suck based on who makes it + just following the production cycle. And then I just pick games that don't suck that interest me.
You must log in to post.
© videogaming247 Ltd.