Those of you crapping on MetaCritic and GameRankings do realize that those sites have NOTHING to do with the score they give, don't you? It's merely an average of all the other reviews.
"But review scores don't mean anything!" Didn't I call this several posts back? The Conduit doesn't get gushed over because it's merely a big fish in a little pond and this anti-review BS rears its head. None of you **** on reviews when Super Mario Galaxy cleaned up. If you look at the average Wii scores the best Wii games get killer scores. So these guys know what they're talking about when they review Zelda or Metroid but not Wii Music? That's idiotic. If they're so biased why do the Wii games that are excepted to get fanatastic review scores still do? And it's interesting that this anti-review stuff didn't exist the last two gens when Nintendo released GOTY candidates on a regular basis. The Wii is your "team" and you just don't want to hear any criticism of it.
Though looking at the GameRankings score, IGN's is the only one that I view with any credibility. Gamepro's review is idiotic and I don't trust the opinion of two official Nintendo magazines. GameRankings is really only useful after the game has come out and there are many reviews to pick through. Four reviews isn't a good sample size. To me The Conduit is currently getting a very respectable 86%.
It is about content.
"Commercial" reviews used to be good. Paid reviewers used to be experienced gamers you thought you can trust, and there were fewer of them with fewer press outlets in the earlier internet gaming press days, not counting the shards of the expanded IGN network.
These days, we're left to think, "how on earf did that get published?"
Reviews were favorable for a key handful of GameCube games, giving purchases a bright outlook. None of them expressed how i'd get foaming-at-the-mouth sick of Mario Sunshine and StarFox Adventures, despite beautiful ratings. Terrible aftertastes.
In more recent times, Brawl's personality actually sucks, and Mario Kart Wii's appeal has surprising longevity. But enough of my preferences.
We thought the Famitsu guys were a big deal, tough to please, until time showed they're just stuck in some weird Japano-RPG-centric shell.
Wii reviews have popped-up as places to insert op/ed Wii condescension pieces more, and less an actual product review. Old-school values (practice, discovery, mastery) haven't been valued/addressed by so-called old-school players (your gaming resume' only goes as far back as N64? gtfo), and reviewers are at loss dealing with "new" motion values and the "new" expanded audience customers.
Game Informer, in its infinite wisdom, published an Eternal Darkness review in June 2001. Something's not right.
Eurogamer reviewed Grand Slam Tennis and GamePro review Conduit based on pre-retail builds. There's something inherently wrong in NOT reviewing the finalized consumer product. And in GamePro's case the multiplayer feature wasn't evaluated at all, and the review was initially DEFENDED believing they had sampled the final product. Not to mention there was that ExciteBots review by some turd that was skillfully done after only ~15 minutes of play.
We can thank GameSpot for showing us how intimate its publisher relationships were during the Monica Kane and Lynch Lewinski scandal. $$$ for ***/100?? NOT BAD FOR A BUSINESS THAT RUNS ON NERDS WHO RIGHT ABOUT ELECTRONIC TOYS.
Oh right, Gerstmann, the guy sandwiched between Ms K and Mr L. The guy Wii Bowled from a fucking couch, using long vertical penis-yanking strokes. Why isn't it working? Stand up and jerk it properly, you greasy jelly roll. Funny enough, he provided the internet with the fairest, most accurate review of Twilight Princess. But with this kind of track record, +1 - 1 = can't really care about this press outlet anymore. So I blocked the domain in my router.
Last is IGN. They're not only reviewers, they're MARKETERS. What the hell? Using FUD and condescension to sway opinions; publishing flamebait to drive site traffic which brings in eyeballs to see the FUD; nabbing "exclusives" to spearhead hype for the products they deem are worthy. Writing the before/after pieces of a game product isn't enough? Go that extra mile to get readers to buy/not buy what they say? Yeah, **** off.
I actively disagree with everyone in these forums, but it is these visitors I observe to get the real, consumer-perspective low-down on games.
Topic: The Conduit (Read 497026 times)
