The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
I for one do not. if you ever read the official console magazines they always rate the games they created at over 90 per cent. And some of them realistically deserved to be less than 50 per cent in my view. I know they're only doing this so they entice these people to buy in the game's but i think there should be an act against a less where they cannot give biased marks to help persuade the public to buy the game. I got caught out with Mario 64 I know some people think is a brilliant game by thought it got boring very quickly and it is not what has deserved the rating it got in the magazines at all. I am now extra careful when I choose my games unless I am 100 per cent sure that I'm going to like the game I always try and rent the game first before buying it because I don’t agree with the magazine reviews. Why do people waist £3/£4 on a game magazine that is not any different to what is said on the Computer game websites that are not biased.
Magazinne revviewsers are retarrdsss...
(Are you alright Grix?)
Perffecktly fine, thankyouverymuch... I just thiinnk, that the peeopple thatt think thhat Zellder, thatt ggame on thee N63, is woirth 97%, musst be, reetards.
(I don't think you are up to typing today Grix.)
Noo, I am knot.
(I better take over then.)
Yess. Ill just slleep here then.
(Ok. As Grix seems to be, rather ill, I'll resume normal repling for tonight.)
(I do agree, with what Grix was trying to say though, if a game has been hyped by Nintendo, then the game will be reviewed at a score higher than EVER BEFORE!!! It is a shame, because £40 is a lot to pay for a game. And making all games seem as good as each other spoils the whole concept of actually buying a magazine in the first place.)
(Are you alright Grix?)
Perffecktly fine, thankyouverymuch... I just thiinnk, that the peeopple thatt think thhat Zellder, thatt ggame on thee N63, is woirth 97%, musst be, reetards.
(I don't think you are up to typing today Grix.)
Noo, I am knot.
(I better take over then.)
Yess. Ill just slleep here then.
(Ok. As Grix seems to be, rather ill, I'll resume normal repling for tonight.)
(I do agree, with what Grix was trying to say though, if a game has been hyped by Nintendo, then the game will be reviewed at a score higher than EVER BEFORE!!! It is a shame, because £40 is a lot to pay for a game. And making all games seem as good as each other spoils the whole concept of actually buying a magazine in the first place.)
If you trust the Nintendo Official Magazine, you'll beleive anything. They rate all Nintendo games highly because:
a) Nintendo games are generally brilliant, and
b) They think they know a lot more about games than they actually do
However, in theory, they should not be biased at all. The companies are not connected to the games manufacturers at all, but are just magazine producers that obtain a licence. This also offers them exclusive news, etc., but the reviewers are independant from the games industry.
a) Nintendo games are generally brilliant, and
b) They think they know a lot more about games than they actually do
However, in theory, they should not be biased at all. The companies are not connected to the games manufacturers at all, but are just magazine producers that obtain a licence. This also offers them exclusive news, etc., but the reviewers are independant from the games industry.
I was saying that official mags don't like seeing rubbish games, they just give poor remarks when it comes to it .
elitesnipe_beta wrote:
> At least they hate the rubbish games!
Dear esb,
please define rubbish while incorporating that word with games. The games companies dont set out to make "rubbish games", these games are just freak accidents (I am in no way biased against the freaks of Britain aka Whote Hart Lane pupils).
> At least they hate the rubbish games!
Dear esb,
please define rubbish while incorporating that word with games. The games companies dont set out to make "rubbish games", these games are just freak accidents (I am in no way biased against the freaks of Britain aka Whote Hart Lane pupils).
At least they hate the rubbish games!
Games they create? The official mags do not create games, and are not involved in the creation of games. They simply pay a company to use the 'official' title, and get the occasional snippets of 'inside information'.
I can't speak for the others, but the official UK PlayStation magazine has slated many Sony products over the years.
Games are too much of a personal choice to take any magazine rating seriously, as no-one can be completely objective; you personal preferences will always influence your opinion of a game. If you like racing games, you're likely to rate something like GT2 quite highly. If you detest them, you'll rate it lower than usual.
You're always likely to get a review that's biased one way or the other, whichever member of the magazine staff reviews it.
I have read many reviews that make a game sound very interesting to me, only to have an average rating of, say, 5/10. I think it would be better for reviews just to tell the facts about the software in question, and not bother with a rating at all.
I can't speak for the others, but the official UK PlayStation magazine has slated many Sony products over the years.
Games are too much of a personal choice to take any magazine rating seriously, as no-one can be completely objective; you personal preferences will always influence your opinion of a game. If you like racing games, you're likely to rate something like GT2 quite highly. If you detest them, you'll rate it lower than usual.
You're always likely to get a review that's biased one way or the other, whichever member of the magazine staff reviews it.
I have read many reviews that make a game sound very interesting to me, only to have an average rating of, say, 5/10. I think it would be better for reviews just to tell the facts about the software in question, and not bother with a rating at all.
I for one do not. if you ever read the official console magazines they always rate the games they created at over 90 per cent. And some of them realistically deserved to be less than 50 per cent in my view. I know they're only doing this so they entice these people to buy in the game's but i think there should be an act against a less where they cannot give biased marks to help persuade the public to buy the game. I got caught out with Mario 64 I know some people think is a brilliant game by thought it got boring very quickly and it is not what has deserved the rating it got in the magazines at all. I am now extra careful when I choose my games unless I am 100 per cent sure that I'm going to like the game I always try and rent the game first before buying it because I don’t agree with the magazine reviews. Why do people waist £3/£4 on a game magazine that is not any different to what is said on the Computer game websites that are not biased.