Aaron has caused a lot of anger at gamefaqs.

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

^ agree. mm, i thought u hated the idea of people following the masses, yet you\'ve just basically done exactly that.  He wrote his opinion, how is that wrong again?    I found it amusing seeing people whine about a review. It was quite entertaining. When i read gmanjoe\'s "mom"  i can\'t help but laugh out loud.


nerds...


found a smilyface that suit em    :hissyfit:

all reviewers have an obligation to review every game with utter indifference which he simply did not do.
he compares it to past titles, assuming he\'s played them, and then bitches about features that has made the franchise what it is?
the best thing he could do to save journalistic integrity is to right a follow-up.
what a way to get net-awareness right?

at any rate, gamespot\'s reviews always suck.
mainly since they don\'t show weighted criteria like graphics, sound, replayability, etc.
just some dude playing the games and giving whatever we feels as a score.

[Paul2]

how do you know for sure he did that just to get attention?  It\'s possible he did that based on his opinion?

from gamespot\'s review policy

"Wait, reviews are just opinions. Right?"
Actually, we don\'t think so.  While our reviews, of course, do contain an element of subjectivity to them, we see the process of reviewing games as one that primarily involves the reporting of facts.

right.......
what about the fact that RCF is one the best PS3 exclusives in quite some time.
aaron piled up tiny complaints to give a mediocre review, but has FAR more repercussions than just a bunch of dudes on some forum (this one included)


they gave conan a 7.5 review......:rofl:

he compares it to past titles, assuming he\'s played them, and then bitches about features that has made the franchise what it is?
the best thing he could do to save journalistic integrity is to right a follow-up.
what a way to get net-awareness right?

If this is the case, no one should ever mention the fact that a game is a sequel. We shouldn\'t complain that certain franchises are not developing with each installment, simply because they are "features that made the franchise".

the best thing he could do to save journalistic integrity is to right a follow-up.

WRONG !!!
The best thing he can do is stand by his opinion. If he backtracks now, simply to give into the masses, then he truly loses any intergrity in his reviews, because then, a reader knows he isn\'t fully behind his own opinion.

right.......
what about the fact that RCF is one the best PS3 exclusives in quite some time.
aaron piled up tiny complaints to give a mediocre review, but has FAR more repercussions than just a bunch of dudes on some forum (this one included)

You act like this review is going to end his career. It\'s not. He gave a highly acclaimed game a medicore review  - big deal. The forum nerds will get over it and he\'ll continue to write reviews for Gamespot. This isn\'t the end of the world for Aaron.

they gave conan a 7.5 review......

Did Aaron? No? Does it compare directly to R&C? No? Then what is the point of bringing this up? What one reviewer may like, doesn\'t mean another will. This goes for anything. You may hate the Conan game, but another reviewer may find it slightly above average and rate it according to that opinion.

just some dude playing the games and giving whatever we feels as a score

....Which is exactly what a review is. It is "some dude playing the games and giving whatever HE feels as a score". This translates from \'net reviews and actual magazine reviews.

I\'d much rather see Aaron take some heat for giving his honest review, as opposed to hearing later on that he gave the game a great score beause he was suppose to.

[Paul2]

once again Raz, you are on fire.

You brought out some really good points once again.  props to you.   :applause:

Raz is a gamefag! Burn him!

Here is an example, watch some gourmet food shows, those chefs taste something and say if it\'s crap or not - but what are they doing when they review this food? They are giving us their opinion on it. They may not like this food, but I may friggin\' love it.  Or it could be the other way around. This translates into any kind of review and it\'s exactly why two things are important when thinking of reviews.

1: Don\'t base your opinion on reviews.  Sure, you can read them to get a quick feel, but you don\'t know if you\'ll like it or not, until YOU try it.  Remember that this guy is only giving you his opinion of the item he is reviewing.

2: If you do use reviews, read a bunch and find a reviewer that has similar taste and nitpicks that you do with the games or movies.  

All these forum nerds and what not who want to burn Aaron at the stake have one problem..  To much time on their hands.  Don\'t like his review? Don\'t read it.  Don\'t sit here and try to point out how he is "wrong" - when in reality he isn\'t wrong, he can\'t be wrong, because he done his job. He gave his opinion on the game he was given to review.  It may be wrong to you, but for him and most likely some others, his review was right on the money.

Well I sure wouldnt want someone who doesnt like chinese food to be a reviewer of chinese cuisine recipes. Some forms of art suffer from more subjectivity than others too.

The reviewer should give an opinion objectively taking into consideration at the same time that people dont read the review to learn about his personal tastes. They read the review to see if the game serves their tastes. If the review begins to feel too individualistic, you just know that you arent reading an objective review. You are reading about some random guy\'s personal taste.

Reading his review I do see some of his critics a little too vague, some are irrelevant with the quality of a game and others are not explained at all on "why or what made you think that".

I feel that his review is not well done. The overreaction though of people who read his review is funny

And if his review something but praise about the game and gave it a 10/10, there would be no big deal. In fact, his review would of been the first posted and drooled over, even if all he wrote was.

\'This game owns..10/10!!"


Fact is, the only reason any of you are making a deal out of this review, is because it goes against what you THINK he should of wrote.

You think Ratchets 7.5 is funny? THIS is funny: http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/sports/tonyhawksproskater3/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&tag=summary;review

Gamespot.. yeah.

[Evi]

Wow...who gives a fuck?


On a side note, I don\'t think I\'ve been to GameSpot in years.

Did I make a deal out of it?

If he gave a 10/10 and everyone else gave it a 7.5 then again his review would have shown some form of bias again and people would have felt it too.  

If he gave it a 10/10 and everyone else gave it a 9/10 then even if his review is biased it wont matter. It cant deviate positively a lot away from the 9 general average. The maximum deviation is +1. No big deal.

I personally have not played the game

his review was right on the money.

how would know his review is right on the money when you haven\'t played it?
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
i hope you\'re investing serious time into this argument.

Fact is, the only reason any of you are making a deal out of this review, is because it goes against what you THINK he should of wrote.

wrong again, people are disputing his review because it goes against what the rest of the professional review community thought of the game.
this isn\'t a cult favorite, this is a proven franchise.
one dude poorly reviewing a great title because of not being subjective, which can have an effect on its sales.
a travesty

[§ôµÏG®ïñD]

all credibility you had with me mm just went out the window.

You\'re a "jump on the band wagon" type of person.  Shame...


ps. who gives a shit what the rest of the professional review community wrote. He was writing a review on his experience with the game. What is so hard to understand about that?