GameInformer

Take a deep breath buddy...remember that is their opinion and you have your own.

And by the way Romars I didn't say you were full of it, I was only making a point. I played a game that was lowely scored and I waisted 60 dollars because it was bad.

yeah GI.com lacks past reviews; you have to either use gamespot.com or metacritic.com and see their summary of the review along with the score (even then their databases aren't 100% either).

Hopefully that's fixed eventually...

If anything though, I was more in defense of GI because of the title of the post itself more so than the criticisms of their reviews you've stated.

A 6.75 is not "trashing" at all. Paper Mario (as well as most of the other games that got this score) is a good game, but it's nothing more than just good, and therefore it got an average score. Check their ratings description at the bottom of the review section of each issue:

"7- Average. The game's features work, but are nothing that we haven't seen before. A decent game from beginning to end."

Doesn't sound too bad to me.

Every reviewer has different criteria for rating a game, the same as every gamer has different criteria. i use ratings as more of a guideline, along with other reviews and my own research, to determine a games worth to me, specifically. and remember, one mans trash is another mans treasure.

Ignore the scores.  I read GI for intelligently written reviews (among other things), precisely because I get the general impression that professional reviewers + publication deadlines = many games go unfinished prior to having to submit a write-up.  I don't care what formal education, background, or years of experience these fine folks have in this line of work, you absolutely cannot form a complete opinion of a game in a single playthrough, let alone a rushed, "almost beat it" run.  I won't dare to outright accuse, since it is conjecture on my part, but at the same time what I'm really looking for in the information that I feel I can trust is functionality, performance, and above all fun.  You can usually tell (even if the reviewer felt he or she had to pan the game based on numerous elements) whether or not they enjoyed the game even if they don't say so outright.

This is only a fraction of the information I use before deciding whether or not to buy a game, though.  Since I very seldom purchase new software anymore, I have the luxury of absorbing much more information than just the first impressions reviewers publish, including sales figures, aggregate scores, and most importantly forum buzz.  If folks on the interwebz with like-minded opinions are still talking about a game a year or two after launch (about the time I'm usually ready to buy it), then I can generally rest assured that I'm going to enjoy it, too.  In this way, I haven't bought a bad game since the days of N64, and I usually end up paying a great deal less by either finding the game in a clearance bin or used.

@Imbalance,

For the sake of discussion, couldn't be argued that forming an opinion on a single, rushed, "almost beat it", palythrough is a fair opinion because that's how average gamers play their games anyways?

i wouldnt say so much it was trashing it, but silent hill: shattered memories got a lower score than the darkside chronicles did. i feel like those scores shouldve been switched.

Yes, you're right. Nobody can expect anybody to perform to perfect standards with rushed deadlines and opinion differences. A six doesn't mean a bad game, but how many games have you decided not to buy becuase their score wasn't an 8?  I can tell you I've passed up plenty.

When I play a game I really liked and then I find out someone gave it a bad score, it makes me angry. I started this thread right after I found out Paper Mario2's score.

In all honesty, this thread was seriously created just so I could shed light on these games I liked. I personnaly trust myself to be able to identify between good games and games I liked that were subpar, but everyone's oppinions vary sometimes wildly as I've learned.

But I believe if alot of gamers like something, then it must be doing something right.

@playerofgames11 - correct. these are only reviewers opinions. noone is keeping you from still playing these titles, and I'm sure GameInformer has led you to enough titles for you to allow them a slip up or two ( in your opinion. )

littlejoe:

@Imbalance,

For the sake of discussion, couldn't be argued that forming an opinion on a single, rushed, "almost beat it", palythrough is a fair opinion because that's how average gamers play their games anyways?

Sadly, you're absolutely right.  It's worth pointing out that such reviewers are finely tuned to their audience, and I do recall seeing a statistic recently that puts gamers who finish games in the minority by a landslide.  I guess I have to admit that it doesn't necessarily reflect poorly on the writer or the publication if they haven't given a game its full due, and that my wholistic approach for truffling out the true gems over time will not serve the majority of gamers.  It's an age when only the new is worthy, and if you don't get a game while it's hot you get left behind.

In my case, I'm cursed with both patience and an attention span, so that's all fine with me. ;)

@Romars

This is like movie crittics.  Sometimes they give a good movie a bad review or give a bad review for a good movie.  This is why I RENT games and movies first before making a purchas decision.  You can't always count on crittics.  Even if they think a game/movie is good/bad, you might like/hate it in contrast to the opionons of crittics.

GI will be forever known as the game site that trashed PM and the Thousand Year Door.  I find that hilarious.

I don't care what reviews a game I like gets, and I generally have a pretty strong idea whether or not I'm interested in a game before reading the reviews. Generally speaking I have been more likely to disagree with a high score than a low one, and if I do rate a game higher, it's by less than a whole point (in the GIO points system); like Darksiders I would have bumped up maybe by .5, but I don't care that they didn't dig it as much as I did. Also you have to understand that reviewers are rating a game based on its own merits, sure, but also some accounting for every other similar game/previous iteration that a given reviewer has played/reviewed is also taken into consideration when rating; as a consumer of games and not an employing of a gaming mag or other industry person, you, I, we, have much less access to the wide array of games coming out in a single month on a single console, let alone all the games in the history of all the current consoles (which granted a single reviewer probably hasn't played either, but they have much wider access without having to pay to play nevertheless).

There are some niche titles, which appeal to me that never get good ratings (like the Way of the Samurai series); but I have to take into account that these games won't appeal to 90% of people as they do me, and the fact that many such titles I often get at a much reduced price (as a used or highly rebated copy). That such games get low scores not only doesn't surprise/ upset me, but is to be expected; and obviously has no real bearing on my enjoyment. 

I really have nothing to add. You all make really good points. I'm glad to see this thread get out of the' you really shouldn't be saying anything bad about GI' space.

Games, in my opinion should vary by vast degrees. The downside being that someone will always find something to like and something they hate. We need to strive to identify that when we dislike something Is it because its simply not to our taste? Or wether it is just bad.

In that respect I can't judge GI, I don't know the intracasies of there job. I know they play more games then any normal gamer. But when you find your opinion to be unpopular, you should not be hostile about it. GI isn't, I honestly have no real complaints about them. I really had no interior motives to slander them with this thread.