Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus
Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
Let's face you were being more than stating the reviewer was harsh, you accused them of playing the victim card and fearing the wrath of people who disagree.
That really has nothing to do with whether or not he played the game. If anything that's actually something he can judge, seeing as it only requires one to read this thread.
Well he did defend the game as well, but really that comment was more directed at why I thought he (and others) stepped over the line in regards to the reviewer. That is an insult, playing and simple, which I don't think the reviewers here deserve. As was mentioned previously in this thread, these kinds of insults and such seem to always be directed at those reviewers that give a game a lower score than the NWR community thinks it deserves. It turns into something more than disagreement, but questioning the integrity of the reviewer to accept criticism or that they have some agenda.
Well, that's really a risk you accept. I think some comments have been made that really raise questions about the review. Some were, indeed, way too harsh. But, as a reviewer, that's always the consequence of a negative review. If he wanted to avoid comments he could've written a really apologetic review and probably avoided them. Or he could've just written a straight forward review, which would've gotten flak for the scores but not a ton. Instead he wrote a very sarcastic, very snide review. I personally think if you're going to give a game a 3, you might as well be snide and amusing (I don't think the review actually is amusing, but the attempt is made). However, you need to know that the nastier you are to a game then anyone who likes that game is going to be just as nasty back.
Show Posts
)
