The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Do you think that reviews which paint a very pretty picture of a game, are more likely to win, than those which take objective criticism of a game?
Well, that depends.
There are some negative reviews for things, depends on how valid they are I think.
A decently argued reason for why something is bad cannot be faulted.
There are some negative reviews for things, depends on how valid they are I think.
A decently argued reason for why something is bad cannot be faulted.
Goatboy wrote:
> But a purely negative review is useless.
You should try to find
> something you liked about it, and if you cant, at least make a
> negative review constructive instead of just
IT sucks, I hate
> it.
I agree, the old "IT sucks, I hate it" is no basis for a good review. But even constructive criticism seems to be taboo.
> But a purely negative review is useless.
You should try to find
> something you liked about it, and if you cant, at least make a
> negative review constructive instead of just
IT sucks, I hate
> it.
I agree, the old "IT sucks, I hate it" is no basis for a good review. But even constructive criticism seems to be taboo.
But a purely negative review is useless.
You should try to find something you liked about it, and if you cant, at least make a negative review constructive instead of just
IT sucks, I hate it.
You should try to find something you liked about it, and if you cant, at least make a negative review constructive instead of just
IT sucks, I hate it.
This may be the case as SR are trying to SELL their products. I can't blame them if they do this but critisim is a point which should not be ignored espically in a review of a game, someone wants the 'honest' opinion.
Do you think that reviews which paint a very pretty picture of a game, are more likely to win, than those which take objective criticism of a game?