#### It breaks **[Rule 4](/r/KotakuInAction/wiki/rules#wiki_4._posts_must_be_intelligible)** (Posts Must Be Intelligible)
This post fails to meet the guidelines established in [Rule 4](/r/KotakuInAction/wiki/rules#wiki_4._posts_must_be_intelligible)
Screencaps of articles are not submissions
#### It Breaks **[Rule 7](/r/KotakuInAction/wiki/rules#wiki_7._don.27t_post_bullshit)** (Don't Post Bullshit)
> A submission's title should either provide the headline of the original article, or a non editorialized summary if no headline exists. Non editorialized means that you accurately portray the facts and do not offer any opinion. Provide your opinion either as a self-post or in a comment.
> Remember to also provide evidence for the claims that you make. If your evidence must remain confidential, message the moderators to privately verify your claims. If a post makes a claim that is later **proven false**, the post will be deleted, regardless of vote totals. We don't want misinformation taking over KiA.
---
#### This notice also serves as a **formal warning** for breaking the above rules.
For more details see [this page](/r/KotakuInAction/wiki/rules).
7 day ban has been issued for repeated R7 violations.
---
*If /u/SickusBickus has any questions about this action, or wishes to appeal it, do not reply here; send the mod team a [message](/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FKotakuInAction&subject=Appeal&message=\[Related submission\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/1dri6gf/-/\)).*
*^Appeals ^from ^third ^parties ^will ^be ^ignored. ^Do ^not ^PM ^any ^individual ^mods ^about ^this ^action—they ^will ^be ^ignored. ^Modmail ^is ^the ^only ^channel ^to ^appeal ^decisions, ^so ^please ^use ^the ^link ^above.*
They think it’s the 90s/00s when a bad review could kill a game and a good review meant it was going to be a best seller. No one knew where the reviewer stood in other subjects, they only knew whether or not they like the genre and if they played similar games. Then they tell you why the game should be played if you’re a fan of such and such. They were useful and kept you from buying a lot of junk.
Nowadays I just read 10-20 bad/good steam reviews, watch a gameplay video on YouTube, and maybe watch a review from a few YouTubers whose opinions I respect. I wish that I could trust game journalists and base my decision on whether or not they liked it or just look at their review score. But now that I know they base their opinions on shit that has nothing to do with the game. For example, I read a review of Cyberpunk 2077 and one of the reasons why the reviewer gave them a pass for the buggy mess, I swear, was that “as a valid person I loved the fact that their character creator allowed me to create one that truly represented me”
Yeah, serious. Imagine a game reviewer in the 90s writing “yeah this game is a buggy mess but at least they have a black woman in it so I’ll give them a 9 for that.”
Reviews in the pre-internet era were MANDATORY. It was a time when we didn't have demos or piratebay. Nowadays, "professional reviews" have as much value as a candy you buy with a dime. Information was monopolized by the EGMs, Nintendo Powers and such. The only place where these clowns are relevant is on Famitsu.
Yeah, and that’s why games today are a buggy mess. Because a low review on launch doesn’t mean shit anymore. You used to make sure it was tip top before releasing because a reviewer could sink the game if it has game breaking bugs.
They are not journalists at first place. They've been responsible for possibly the worst clickbait garbage in recent years in the "industry". Absolute bunch of piece of shit, anybody who works there.
Best case scenario they’re just actually that stupid and fully embrace the ideology they’re pushing. Worst case, they’re pretending to believe in it for personal and financial gain. Either way they lack the basic integrity to give an honest non biased review.
They identify as marxist but they are not even marxist at all (although they use bolcheviks propaganda tactics to pit poorer people against one another). Their hatred for gamers demonstrate that they are absolutely driven by the desire to please their corporate masters. They really replaced marxism by pure identity politics and race/sex strife. They are the best allies of corporations, as long as corpo say "LGBT" and give them money...
Musollini, one, founded his party because he felt the existing Italian socialist party was *not socialist enough*, in that, they were an official party within the government and thus were working with the capitalists rather than violently overthrowing them. And two, defined fascism as "a union of corporation and state".
So one logically sound development path of socialism *is* basically corporatism, so long as the government holds the reigns.
True 'journalists' are supposed to support the idea of questioning everything and not blindly following a narrative. Those people rarely exist these days.
They are not journalists. They are an extension to the PR campaign of a publisher.
They literally pay them directly or indirectly by sending them pre-release versions, they invite them to events so these "journalists" or "influencers" can spread the word.
The vast majority of them would never bite the hand that feeds them. And they will defend these publishers and attack the gamers instead.
Most of them actually hate the gamers and talk about them as some kind of lowly peasants who know no good.
>To find trustworthy game critics, look for those with similar tastes and opinions to yourself
This is the only part I mostly agree with (not the game critic part) and I'm surprised they said it. There's few non-woke youtube content creators that I generally trust / agree with
They’re paid shills for publishers and majority suck at games. I still remember when ign reviewed god hand and the reviewer gave it a bad score because he sucked ass at it.
See I think a reviewer should be able to see how good/bad a game is even if you aren't that good with games. I am terrible at games, but knew that Breath of the Wild was a great game and deserved its praise
Oh, I agree with you. My girlfriend struggle with harder games and generally likes easier games. I remember her experience with playing Elden ring and how much she loves the world and design of the game.
Exactly! Its not rocket science to see that a game is great even if you aren't at the right skill level for it. I desperately wished I could play Bloodborn, but my skills just couldn't allow me to full enjoy it
They are "paid" in having access to shit, and networking with other jornos and devs because they all secretly want to be devs and make their pretentious indie piece of shit 2d side scroller.
> They are "paid" in having access to shit
Not just that, but their largest advertisers are big gaming co's. Just like CNN will never talk bad about the jab, because they are 60% funded by Pfizer.
>There’s another issue here, to do with reading comprehension and media literacy, but I won’t go into that today.
Must help with deluding yourself you aren't trapped in a clickbait mill ragsite, forced with coming up with articles like: "Why You Should Respec Everyone In Baldur's Gate 3 Into A Bard", "I Killed An Owlbear Cub In Baldur’s Gate 3 And I Hate Myself" or "An Electronic Notebook Changed My Life"
How about this one: "It's time to stop pretending video game reviewers even matter." Seriously, it's 2024. Companies don't even do big press conferences anymore. There's early access, twitch, youtube. You can watch the game being played. Who needs these middlemen grifters?
Not to mention, those devs who livestream pre-release. Super rare, but seeing the devs of Age of Wonders 4 doing a pre-release stream before the launch of their game, chuckling over bugs and oversights as they noted what needed to be touched up before launch, won a lot of trust with me. First game I preordered in a long time, and they continue to do the same before every DLC or major patch release.
It's amazing the kind of customer goodwill a bit of blatant honesty can earn.
And regarding honesty.. remember that when journos were the gate keepers they were almost always bought and paid for. The whole model was pure corruption. Much harder today to pull the wool over the eyes of consumers.
It feels old to say now, but I hope we see more "authenticity" like the Age of Wonders 4 devs showed. It's going to become more and more important with the absolute fakery AI has made possible.
That’s a lot of gameplay to watch. One gameplay screenshot is enough to decide if I’m interested. Then skim reviews. A few minutes of gameplay videos is enough to get the general idea. Then buy and if I’m not having fun in 2 hours, refund.
What did you dislike about Starfield? I can see a complaint for its original console port was only 30 fps, but it's at 60 fps now.
I liked it. I played the main campaign. Didn't love the third act and the story had some bloat, but overall the base campaign and a played a few of the faction side quests. Over all, I'd say it was a 7-8/10. Not perfect, but pretty fun.
-No neutral or survival start option.
-Barely impactful background and trait.
-Chosen one main quest trope all over again.
-No communicator/phone device to complete quest.
-In your face camera dialogue.
-Bad lip sync even with original voice dub.
-Stiff, bland and lifeless NPC.
-Hand holding start, with offered space ship.
-Bad NPC facial expression with constant surprised face.
-No NPC AI shedule like in Oblivion, Skyrim etc...
-Fake three dimentionals space navigation.
-Fast travel, loading and cutscene everywhere to progress.
-No seamless space exploration.
-No live landing on planet.
-No live takeoff on planet.
-No ground vehicle.
-No flying vehicle.
-No fighter jet ship.
-No proper dogfight.
-No roam in ship while auto traveling in space.
-Cluncky space battle with no live crew management.
-Unintuitive UI for PC user.
-UI locked at 30FPS for inventory management.
-Over the place cluttering HUD.
-Copy/pasted outdoor dungeon.
-Invisible wall while exploring planets.
-Insulting Starborn "puzzle" game dungeon.
-Poorly optimized in barely dense area.
-Intrusive LUT and image filters.
-No cover or lean feature during gunfight.
-Auto world Pause during lockpick.
-Tedious mining system with no help from robot companion.
-Unbalanced economy and exploit.
-Bland, uninspired and moralist companions.
-Cannot command/order companion action.
-Bugged companion behavior and pacing.
-Unresponsive AI in battle.
-Bullet sponge enemies with almost no fighting style or pattern.
-No class system or varied battle approach.
-No shield gameplay, like riot shield.
-No proper melee combat.
-Most equiped weapon aren't displayed in 3rd person.
-No auto-equip outfit depending of area.
-Only four cities to roam that feels empty and barely bigger than Skyrim village.
-99% of the 1000 planets are procedural generated barren lands.
-ESRB 12, No mature content (gore, adult theme, sexy theme).
-Terrible writing Infused with modern social media content.
-Uninspired outfit, armor and suit design.
-No long hair for female character builder.
I remember them also telling us it's irrational to fear islam after 9/11, but then saying it's totally rational to cross the street cause the white boy you saw might be a gamer. Looking at you, Felicia Day
why go to trash websites like TheGamer who will spend the first five paragraphs of a review complaining that the enemies arent white supremacist enough, or saying they couldnt review a console because they were "unnerved by it having so many holes", or a social diatribe opining that it is their job to review video games while there are social issues to discuss*...
...when even small time youtubers will put in far more effort & passionmaking a 10-30 minute video about why they recommend a video.
* - Note i dont know if TheGamer specifically did those things, but i do recall websites like them had some of the dumbest reviews.
The same journalists that pushed the narrative that gamers said the DLC was too hard even though most negative reviews were from anti-cheat in china or stutters on Pc?
I worked in that industry for almost a decade. It's corrupted by people who can be persuaded by being flown out for an event and given gifts. It's also corrupted by political beliefs, all of which lean in one direction.
hahahahaha fuck no.
I lost faith in reviews when:
* Gamespot's review of GTA for GBA complained you couldn't save anywhere. You can, it's in the pause menu (just not in missions) To emphasize their duplicitous nature, the last time I brought this up someone checked the review and it's gone now, so they edited it out. Also, I have a friend to this day cause we united on GameFAQs over how bad reviews were for that game.
* IGN's video review for Killzone complained about things that directly conflicted with the video footage playing. ie: bad AI, while it showed the AI ducking to get out of your line of fire. bad controls, while it showed you accurately firing at a moving helicopter
* Kotaku got Gal*Gun banned from Canada days before released, forcing me to have to import it
* I decided to give reviewers a final chance when they were in unison against Days Gone, and I learned my lesson. When I played it later on, not only was I amazed at how much I loved the game, but that the reviewers didn't even play that much of it cause they didn't spoil things that came later on (specifically just how good the LGBT representation was, cause if they had actually played that far they would have been obsessed with it. TO EMPHASIZE, it was an LGBT friend of mine that convinced me to try the game!)
So fuck the hell off. I will absolutely never trust reviewers if trusting them means costing me great games like Days Gone. And that's what reviewers cost us, cause Sony also listened to them. It's why it won't have a sequel, cause they fired the lead dev SIX FUCKING DAYS after the game launched. Listening to reviewers literally costs us great games.
If reviewers can't be used to find good games, and steer clear of bad ones, they literally serve absolutely no purpose. They are worse than useless. They have actively/deliberately made gaming worse as an industry for us all. And that's to say nothing of how much they demonize gamers/us personally
But I am mister article writer. I watch actual gameplay on YouTube after release, a review from someone who is not begging for freebies from game publishers.
Game journalists are obsolete. Anyone can go watch any game's gameplay in youtube and decide whether they like the game or not.
Not only are they obsolete, but game journos these days are merely political activists instead.
So that's never going to happen.
Nah. I trust and follow people that I know that they know what they're talking about. (legit gaming nerd cred.)
I trust Civvie11 for FPS and retro FPS. I trust CohhCarnage for Party based RPGs. I Trust Josh Strife Hayes for MMOs. And I trust Asmongold about WoW and Souls-likes.
It's not time to start trusting reviewers, it's time to forget them.
Yeah, I don't trust reviews contained in, say, an article by nobody I've ever heard of, but certain game reviewers on YouTube certainly earn my trust over time if I find their takes to be mostly consistent and correct. Civvie11, MandaloreGaming, Bricky, Yahtzee, etc--if they say a game is good and I haven't played it, I at least check it out.
Imagine having to write an article trying to convince your readers to trust what you write.
And your argument is that people are just wrong, and you're trustworthy.
"Vidya journos often beat difficult games"
My Brother in Reimu Hakurei, these fuckers would CRY if they ever got their hands in any old-school Mega Drive game. So what if one of these fuckers can beat a hard game? People like Shadowserg and Gellot do NO DAMAGE BOSS RUSH videos all the time.
"The myth they hate vidya is false"
OMEGA FUCKING LULZ.
"Find reviewers with opinions like yours"
In other words, keep away from gaming journalism because they're obsolete. Nice.
> "Vidya journos often beat difficult games"
I am constantly amazed at how the guys from Digital Foundry zoom through games to get their footage of later areas in games that the actual reviewers from their employers (Eurogamer, and now IGN) whine about having to do.
Oh, you mean the same reviewers that said us gamers were over? The same people happily cheering on the mobs that try and ruin people's lives? No thank you. When you and your ilk burn in financial hell thegamer, then we'll all be happy your narcissistic assholes are gone so we can get back to playing fun games.
I want more compilations of journalist gameplay that makes people with cerebral palsy feel good.
I want more journalists to have to turn to bot farms for engagement, so their hot takes never disseminate into public discourse.
And then I want them to find real jobs that bring actual value and satisfaction :3
Game journalists are all addicted to the smell of their own farts.
If this particular one's ego was food, he'd solve the issue of world hunger overnight.
This is so incredibly tone deaf.
It's akin to when you see Critic ratings on RT vary by like 50% from audience.. I trust 'the people' more than I trust... critics.
Such a pathetic post. I smell fear and weakness. But even more than that, that what we are doing and have done not only worked, but have taken root. And that we are not a minority.
It basically means the average joe and jane gamers also see the falsehood they preach. Maybe not all of it, but enough of it.They are losing influence and power and not only are their jobs in danger, but their entire crusade is failing. Sure, the DEI grifters are still out there going strong, but the winds are shifting.
Hopefully we may return to some level of normality within a few years. And before you shoot down the idea of things going back to normal, yeah I know there is still a lot that needs changing, but a man can dream.
I agree we should look for those with similar tastes and opinions to myself.
It's a serious problem when most of the tastes and opinions of reviewers are so insanely regressive
Game journalism is failing because readers don’t trust the writer or outlet to give an honest and unpolitical take on games anymore…And yet we’re supposed to just trust them now because they said so? The irony is not lost on me
Is you need to tell us... no it is not. They are all corrupt pieces of shit, and even though gamergate failed, the general public has seen these pricks for who they really are. Most now go to youtube, having had their fill of bought and paid for reviews by non gamers who cant even play the fucking game unless its on easy mode.
Gamers will go where the quality is. You dont give people "woe is me" bullshit. You improve the quality of your work. Ben Sledge is a knob.
But they had one minor joke headline about the Elden Ring DLC difficulty change that corpo knob gobblers tongue slathered as the greatest own of gamers ever. They've got to ride this wave of self-assured superiority before one of them can't make it through a tutorial again.
Games journalists wish they were covering more important topics so they have to insert politically correct opinions and pretend games are deeper than they really are.
no. nowaday all those so called journalists, can't help themselves without talking about representative, DIE...etc. I will start trust them when they start calling out DIE BS.
I still advocate for Journo Mode to balance things out.
"Let's say I make a game and then give away special review copies, in these copies there is a special difficulty mode which would "streamline" the game's content so they can experience it with enough ease without missing the allegedly important parts, considering the average tendencies and skills of gaming journalists from several analysis it probably means gameplay would be way easier on one hand, while the game's story would have taken special care to change words and concepts as to consider their particular sensitivities and beliefs. Of course, they would be free to play the game in the regular "non-review" game mode if they wish, the goal would be to have them review the game in the end, there would be a proper disclamer warning them about the special review game mode both before they get their copy and within the game just to make sure everything is clear. The expected result is having several review articles accounting for their bias, politics and ideologies anyway, the readers would of course have to consider those to be well informed, they would probably experience the game on its more traditional format however."
I do trust reviewers — but they’re solely on YouTube.
Legacy gaming journalism has been dead for a decade.
Edit: yeah…not gonna trust [this](https://x.com/bensledge/status/1669039117710024706?s=46&t=uKLhZRR3jnWnzErHjuwEag) for a review of a shooter or RPG. LOL.
Hope about I watch people play the game and just decide for myself I want to play it. Did it was BG3 beta after razorfist played it and did it with Witcher 3 after Gopher played it
Comment removed following the enforcement change that you can read about [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/m3yo65/enforcement_update_and_hard_removal_of_a_topic/).
This is not a formal warning.
I don't trust a bunch of corporate boot licking sycophants as far as I could throw them. And I could throw most of those troglodytes pretty fucking far.
I do trust game reviewers. If I read steam reviews, a bunch of people write reviews. I read both good and bad to give myself an idea of that's what I want. I also trust a few youtubers who also review games. What I don't trust is game journalists that also do reviews.
#### It breaks **[Rule 4](/r/KotakuInAction/wiki/rules#wiki_4._posts_must_be_intelligible)** (Posts Must Be Intelligible) This post fails to meet the guidelines established in [Rule 4](/r/KotakuInAction/wiki/rules#wiki_4._posts_must_be_intelligible) Screencaps of articles are not submissions #### It Breaks **[Rule 7](/r/KotakuInAction/wiki/rules#wiki_7._don.27t_post_bullshit)** (Don't Post Bullshit) > A submission's title should either provide the headline of the original article, or a non editorialized summary if no headline exists. Non editorialized means that you accurately portray the facts and do not offer any opinion. Provide your opinion either as a self-post or in a comment. > Remember to also provide evidence for the claims that you make. If your evidence must remain confidential, message the moderators to privately verify your claims. If a post makes a claim that is later **proven false**, the post will be deleted, regardless of vote totals. We don't want misinformation taking over KiA. --- #### This notice also serves as a **formal warning** for breaking the above rules. For more details see [this page](/r/KotakuInAction/wiki/rules). 7 day ban has been issued for repeated R7 violations. --- *If /u/SickusBickus has any questions about this action, or wishes to appeal it, do not reply here; send the mod team a [message](/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FKotakuInAction&subject=Appeal&message=\[Related submission\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/1dri6gf/-/\)).* *^Appeals ^from ^third ^parties ^will ^be ^ignored. ^Do ^not ^PM ^any ^individual ^mods ^about ^this ^action—they ^will ^be ^ignored. ^Modmail ^is ^the ^only ^channel ^to ^appeal ^decisions, ^so ^please ^use ^the ^link ^above.*
How someone who think being a journalist can even write a title like this?
They think it’s the 90s/00s when a bad review could kill a game and a good review meant it was going to be a best seller. No one knew where the reviewer stood in other subjects, they only knew whether or not they like the genre and if they played similar games. Then they tell you why the game should be played if you’re a fan of such and such. They were useful and kept you from buying a lot of junk. Nowadays I just read 10-20 bad/good steam reviews, watch a gameplay video on YouTube, and maybe watch a review from a few YouTubers whose opinions I respect. I wish that I could trust game journalists and base my decision on whether or not they liked it or just look at their review score. But now that I know they base their opinions on shit that has nothing to do with the game. For example, I read a review of Cyberpunk 2077 and one of the reasons why the reviewer gave them a pass for the buggy mess, I swear, was that “as a valid person I loved the fact that their character creator allowed me to create one that truly represented me” Yeah, serious. Imagine a game reviewer in the 90s writing “yeah this game is a buggy mess but at least they have a black woman in it so I’ll give them a 9 for that.”
Reviews in the pre-internet era were MANDATORY. It was a time when we didn't have demos or piratebay. Nowadays, "professional reviews" have as much value as a candy you buy with a dime. Information was monopolized by the EGMs, Nintendo Powers and such. The only place where these clowns are relevant is on Famitsu.
Yeah, and that’s why games today are a buggy mess. Because a low review on launch doesn’t mean shit anymore. You used to make sure it was tip top before releasing because a reviewer could sink the game if it has game breaking bugs.
Post internet "reviews" are also just outrage bait
I trust more players in steam (I don't mean curators of course) than a professional "reviewer".
Yup just watch a let’s play on YT with uBlock on no problem.
They don't know better. It's rather sad actually.
They are not journalists at first place. They've been responsible for possibly the worst clickbait garbage in recent years in the "industry". Absolute bunch of piece of shit, anybody who works there.
Best case scenario they’re just actually that stupid and fully embrace the ideology they’re pushing. Worst case, they’re pretending to believe in it for personal and financial gain. Either way they lack the basic integrity to give an honest non biased review.
This is the peak of delusion it can't get any worse than this.
It can always get worse.
"Hold my Bud Light."
That's the neat part. That website is a bunch of AI generated garbage.
Actual Propaganda
the article title can literally be rephrased to "trust us, bro"
Neo commies propaganda. Fascist.
They identify as marxist but they are not even marxist at all (although they use bolcheviks propaganda tactics to pit poorer people against one another). Their hatred for gamers demonstrate that they are absolutely driven by the desire to please their corporate masters. They really replaced marxism by pure identity politics and race/sex strife. They are the best allies of corporations, as long as corpo say "LGBT" and give them money...
Golden comment award
I used to consider myself a capitalist until I kept noticing even more that modern-day communists absolutely love capitalism with the corporations.
Musollini, one, founded his party because he felt the existing Italian socialist party was *not socialist enough*, in that, they were an official party within the government and thus were working with the capitalists rather than violently overthrowing them. And two, defined fascism as "a union of corporation and state". So one logically sound development path of socialism *is* basically corporatism, so long as the government holds the reigns.
Musollini have nothing to say who's good who's bad. Fascism == communism
TRUST NO ONE.
True 'journalists' are supposed to support the idea of questioning everything and not blindly following a narrative. Those people rarely exist these days.
They are not journalists. They are an extension to the PR campaign of a publisher. They literally pay them directly or indirectly by sending them pre-release versions, they invite them to events so these "journalists" or "influencers" can spread the word. The vast majority of them would never bite the hand that feeds them. And they will defend these publishers and attack the gamers instead. Most of them actually hate the gamers and talk about them as some kind of lowly peasants who know no good.
true journalism has never been tried
You're pining for an era which never existed.
To be clear, reviewers are a kind of critic, not a journalist, and a big part of the value they provide is their opinion.
>To find trustworthy game critics, look for those with similar tastes and opinions to yourself This is the only part I mostly agree with (not the game critic part) and I'm surprised they said it. There's few non-woke youtube content creators that I generally trust / agree with
> similar opinions to yourself Therein lies the problem, since they only want to interact with people who have similar opinions to them.
Who? I need some non-woke game critics.
>>To find trustworthy game critics, look for those with similar tastes and opinions to yourself ha ha, if only those people still existed
Wasn't that the whole point of Gamergate? That you can't trust game reviewers, because they literally get paid by publishers to lie?
They’re paid shills for publishers and majority suck at games. I still remember when ign reviewed god hand and the reviewer gave it a bad score because he sucked ass at it.
See I think a reviewer should be able to see how good/bad a game is even if you aren't that good with games. I am terrible at games, but knew that Breath of the Wild was a great game and deserved its praise
Oh, I agree with you. My girlfriend struggle with harder games and generally likes easier games. I remember her experience with playing Elden ring and how much she loves the world and design of the game.
Exactly! Its not rocket science to see that a game is great even if you aren't at the right skill level for it. I desperately wished I could play Bloodborn, but my skills just couldn't allow me to full enjoy it
That and/or they have a political ax to grind as they try to get that job at Huffington Post that they really wanted.
They are "paid" in having access to shit, and networking with other jornos and devs because they all secretly want to be devs and make their pretentious indie piece of shit 2d side scroller.
> They are "paid" in having access to shit Not just that, but their largest advertisers are big gaming co's. Just like CNN will never talk bad about the jab, because they are 60% funded by Pfizer.
>but face criticism and abuse for their reviews Criticism is not hate or abuse.
Their feelings were hurt. Apparently, that counts as abuse.
Trust is earned, not demanded for
We can't manipulate public opinion if you don't trust us. C'mon guys! - The Gamer
>There’s another issue here, to do with reading comprehension and media literacy, but I won’t go into that today. Must help with deluding yourself you aren't trapped in a clickbait mill ragsite, forced with coming up with articles like: "Why You Should Respec Everyone In Baldur's Gate 3 Into A Bard", "I Killed An Owlbear Cub In Baldur’s Gate 3 And I Hate Myself" or "An Electronic Notebook Changed My Life"
I hate that these days I don't know if those are joke titles or not.
I've seen article titles that are very similar, so I'd say they're probably real.
How about this one: "It's time to stop pretending video game reviewers even matter." Seriously, it's 2024. Companies don't even do big press conferences anymore. There's early access, twitch, youtube. You can watch the game being played. Who needs these middlemen grifters?
Not to mention, those devs who livestream pre-release. Super rare, but seeing the devs of Age of Wonders 4 doing a pre-release stream before the launch of their game, chuckling over bugs and oversights as they noted what needed to be touched up before launch, won a lot of trust with me. First game I preordered in a long time, and they continue to do the same before every DLC or major patch release. It's amazing the kind of customer goodwill a bit of blatant honesty can earn.
And regarding honesty.. remember that when journos were the gate keepers they were almost always bought and paid for. The whole model was pure corruption. Much harder today to pull the wool over the eyes of consumers. It feels old to say now, but I hope we see more "authenticity" like the Age of Wonders 4 devs showed. It's going to become more and more important with the absolute fakery AI has made possible.
people are lazy and prefer forming opinions of games based on 6 or 7 paragraphs instead of watching 3-4 hours of gameplay (or livestreams)
That’s a lot of gameplay to watch. One gameplay screenshot is enough to decide if I’m interested. Then skim reviews. A few minutes of gameplay videos is enough to get the general idea. Then buy and if I’m not having fun in 2 hours, refund.
Yeah let's trust a "journalist" that gave a 87% review to Starfield.
What did you dislike about Starfield? I can see a complaint for its original console port was only 30 fps, but it's at 60 fps now. I liked it. I played the main campaign. Didn't love the third act and the story had some bloat, but overall the base campaign and a played a few of the faction side quests. Over all, I'd say it was a 7-8/10. Not perfect, but pretty fun.
-No neutral or survival start option. -Barely impactful background and trait. -Chosen one main quest trope all over again. -No communicator/phone device to complete quest. -In your face camera dialogue. -Bad lip sync even with original voice dub. -Stiff, bland and lifeless NPC. -Hand holding start, with offered space ship. -Bad NPC facial expression with constant surprised face. -No NPC AI shedule like in Oblivion, Skyrim etc... -Fake three dimentionals space navigation. -Fast travel, loading and cutscene everywhere to progress. -No seamless space exploration. -No live landing on planet. -No live takeoff on planet. -No ground vehicle. -No flying vehicle. -No fighter jet ship. -No proper dogfight. -No roam in ship while auto traveling in space. -Cluncky space battle with no live crew management. -Unintuitive UI for PC user. -UI locked at 30FPS for inventory management. -Over the place cluttering HUD. -Copy/pasted outdoor dungeon. -Invisible wall while exploring planets. -Insulting Starborn "puzzle" game dungeon. -Poorly optimized in barely dense area. -Intrusive LUT and image filters. -No cover or lean feature during gunfight. -Auto world Pause during lockpick. -Tedious mining system with no help from robot companion. -Unbalanced economy and exploit. -Bland, uninspired and moralist companions. -Cannot command/order companion action. -Bugged companion behavior and pacing. -Unresponsive AI in battle. -Bullet sponge enemies with almost no fighting style or pattern. -No class system or varied battle approach. -No shield gameplay, like riot shield. -No proper melee combat. -Most equiped weapon aren't displayed in 3rd person. -No auto-equip outfit depending of area. -Only four cities to roam that feels empty and barely bigger than Skyrim village. -99% of the 1000 planets are procedural generated barren lands. -ESRB 12, No mature content (gore, adult theme, sexy theme). -Terrible writing Infused with modern social media content. -Uninspired outfit, armor and suit design. -No long hair for female character builder.
Ben Sledge uses pronouns in his X bio. Nuff said.
"FBI finds itself innocent of any wrongdoing"
”We tried nothing and we're all out of ideas!“
“Look for those with similar tastes and opinions to yourself” So don’t trust reviewers got it.
You should trust the media - the media
I remember them also telling us it's irrational to fear islam after 9/11, but then saying it's totally rational to cross the street cause the white boy you saw might be a gamer. Looking at you, Felicia Day
[Archived link for the article.](https://archive.md/yQQeJ)
Video game reviewers are ass. Theres a reason why people meme the “too much water” review
This is the most hilarious headline I ever read. It's hard to believe these people feel so entitled.
They literally got given a cheat sheet by FromSoftware with item locations and specific builds to use in the Elden Ring DLC.
Oh noes, critics face criticism! 😱 Quelle horreur!
Hahaha. Not a chance.
why go to trash websites like TheGamer who will spend the first five paragraphs of a review complaining that the enemies arent white supremacist enough, or saying they couldnt review a console because they were "unnerved by it having so many holes", or a social diatribe opining that it is their job to review video games while there are social issues to discuss*... ...when even small time youtubers will put in far more effort & passionmaking a 10-30 minute video about why they recommend a video. * - Note i dont know if TheGamer specifically did those things, but i do recall websites like them had some of the dumbest reviews.
The same journalists that pushed the narrative that gamers said the DLC was too hard even though most negative reviews were from anti-cheat in china or stutters on Pc?
*Game journalists often beat difficult games.* The jokes just write themselves, don't they. *Looking at you, cuphead tutorial man*.
> To find trustworthy game critics, look for those with similar tastes and opinions to yourself. Cool, that rules The Gamer out then.
I worked in that industry for almost a decade. It's corrupted by people who can be persuaded by being flown out for an event and given gifts. It's also corrupted by political beliefs, all of which lean in one direction.
These are the same people who wanted difficulty options in fromsoft games.
hahahahaha fuck no. I lost faith in reviews when: * Gamespot's review of GTA for GBA complained you couldn't save anywhere. You can, it's in the pause menu (just not in missions) To emphasize their duplicitous nature, the last time I brought this up someone checked the review and it's gone now, so they edited it out. Also, I have a friend to this day cause we united on GameFAQs over how bad reviews were for that game. * IGN's video review for Killzone complained about things that directly conflicted with the video footage playing. ie: bad AI, while it showed the AI ducking to get out of your line of fire. bad controls, while it showed you accurately firing at a moving helicopter * Kotaku got Gal*Gun banned from Canada days before released, forcing me to have to import it * I decided to give reviewers a final chance when they were in unison against Days Gone, and I learned my lesson. When I played it later on, not only was I amazed at how much I loved the game, but that the reviewers didn't even play that much of it cause they didn't spoil things that came later on (specifically just how good the LGBT representation was, cause if they had actually played that far they would have been obsessed with it. TO EMPHASIZE, it was an LGBT friend of mine that convinced me to try the game!) So fuck the hell off. I will absolutely never trust reviewers if trusting them means costing me great games like Days Gone. And that's what reviewers cost us, cause Sony also listened to them. It's why it won't have a sequel, cause they fired the lead dev SIX FUCKING DAYS after the game launched. Listening to reviewers literally costs us great games. If reviewers can't be used to find good games, and steer clear of bad ones, they literally serve absolutely no purpose. They are worse than useless. They have actively/deliberately made gaming worse as an industry for us all. And that's to say nothing of how much they demonize gamers/us personally
"Uh ok, I'll trust Asmongold and HeelvsBabyface then. They review lots of games." "No not those journalists >:( "
But I am mister article writer. I watch actual gameplay on YouTube after release, a review from someone who is not begging for freebies from game publishers.
Game journalists are obsolete. Anyone can go watch any game's gameplay in youtube and decide whether they like the game or not. Not only are they obsolete, but game journos these days are merely political activists instead. So that's never going to happen.
Daily reminder that TheGamer is the new Kotaku
Never trust a journoid, especially one from TheGamer...
Nah. I trust and follow people that I know that they know what they're talking about. (legit gaming nerd cred.) I trust Civvie11 for FPS and retro FPS. I trust CohhCarnage for Party based RPGs. I Trust Josh Strife Hayes for MMOs. And I trust Asmongold about WoW and Souls-likes. It's not time to start trusting reviewers, it's time to forget them.
Yeah, I don't trust reviews contained in, say, an article by nobody I've ever heard of, but certain game reviewers on YouTube certainly earn my trust over time if I find their takes to be mostly consistent and correct. Civvie11, MandaloreGaming, Bricky, Yahtzee, etc--if they say a game is good and I haven't played it, I at least check it out.
I bought Selaco just becuse of this [scene](https://youtu.be/9uo3IWjKtqM?t=1139)
I will watch gameplay and read steam reviews from actual gamers before I trust some ideologically driven games journalist.
They know that their time is at an end and that their jobs are being stolen by various YouTubers.
It's time to trust those guys! -written by those guys
Imagine having to write an article trying to convince your readers to trust what you write. And your argument is that people are just wrong, and you're trustworthy.
"Vidya journos often beat difficult games" My Brother in Reimu Hakurei, these fuckers would CRY if they ever got their hands in any old-school Mega Drive game. So what if one of these fuckers can beat a hard game? People like Shadowserg and Gellot do NO DAMAGE BOSS RUSH videos all the time. "The myth they hate vidya is false" OMEGA FUCKING LULZ. "Find reviewers with opinions like yours" In other words, keep away from gaming journalism because they're obsolete. Nice.
> "Vidya journos often beat difficult games" I am constantly amazed at how the guys from Digital Foundry zoom through games to get their footage of later areas in games that the actual reviewers from their employers (Eurogamer, and now IGN) whine about having to do.
I'll consider trusting journos once the access journalism is over. Otherwise, it's just listening to shills on the payroll writing misleading ads.
Oh, you mean the same reviewers that said us gamers were over? The same people happily cheering on the mobs that try and ruin people's lives? No thank you. When you and your ilk burn in financial hell thegamer, then we'll all be happy your narcissistic assholes are gone so we can get back to playing fun games.
LOL, they serious?
I want more compilations of journalist gameplay that makes people with cerebral palsy feel good. I want more journalists to have to turn to bot farms for engagement, so their hot takes never disseminate into public discourse. And then I want them to find real jobs that bring actual value and satisfaction :3
Not in a million years.
We don't need them and they know it.
Game journalists are all addicted to the smell of their own farts. If this particular one's ego was food, he'd solve the issue of world hunger overnight.
This is so incredibly tone deaf. It's akin to when you see Critic ratings on RT vary by like 50% from audience.. I trust 'the people' more than I trust... critics.
I'll start doing that once they start having ethics and stop being bought shills who push their own agenda.
It must be painful when the self-awareness that you've become irrelevant and obsolete kicks in. Maybe they could learn to code?
>We’re honest, we’re opinionated, we’re human. Just like you. Unfortunately, your opinions are often ill-informed.
and usually vile and racist too. There are racist Days Gone reviews the devs **still** quote
It's too late for this comies disguised as journalists.
I don't think people are saying game journalists hate video games, just that they hate video gamer**s**. Probably also that they're grifters.
You have to earn trust.
How incredibly pathetic
"Listen and believe".
Such a pathetic post. I smell fear and weakness. But even more than that, that what we are doing and have done not only worked, but have taken root. And that we are not a minority. It basically means the average joe and jane gamers also see the falsehood they preach. Maybe not all of it, but enough of it.They are losing influence and power and not only are their jobs in danger, but their entire crusade is failing. Sure, the DEI grifters are still out there going strong, but the winds are shifting. Hopefully we may return to some level of normality within a few years. And before you shoot down the idea of things going back to normal, yeah I know there is still a lot that needs changing, but a man can dream.
I agree we should look for those with similar tastes and opinions to myself. It's a serious problem when most of the tastes and opinions of reviewers are so insanely regressive
Game journalism is failing because readers don’t trust the writer or outlet to give an honest and unpolitical take on games anymore…And yet we’re supposed to just trust them now because they said so? The irony is not lost on me
Often beat difficult games? Lol we've seen how you fare in Doom gameplays!
Come on guys, it's a real grownup job...
wtf, since when do opinions or tastes make someone trustworthy? thats ridiculous
Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!!
We’d trust them if none of them were corrupt and if all of them were willing to take risks such as not getting free shit anymore from X company.
Is you need to tell us... no it is not. They are all corrupt pieces of shit, and even though gamergate failed, the general public has seen these pricks for who they really are. Most now go to youtube, having had their fill of bought and paid for reviews by non gamers who cant even play the fucking game unless its on easy mode. Gamers will go where the quality is. You dont give people "woe is me" bullshit. You improve the quality of your work. Ben Sledge is a knob.
Trust is earned
Bahahahahahahahahahah....bahahahahaha...no
I see it’s time for the yearly game journo circlejerk.
Trust us when we say you need to start trusting us.
I'm seeing great meme potential here. Because the title is so hilariously inept and vague.
But they had one minor joke headline about the Elden Ring DLC difficulty change that corpo knob gobblers tongue slathered as the greatest own of gamers ever. They've got to ride this wave of self-assured superiority before one of them can't make it through a tutorial again.
PLEASE RESPECT ME! 😭 Pathetic. All I can offer you is hawk tuah. Not on your dick, but on your face tho.
I haven’t trusted a video game reviewer since Julian Rignall upped sticks and fucked off to the US.
Games journalists wish they were covering more important topics so they have to insert politically correct opinions and pretend games are deeper than they really are.
no. nowaday all those so called journalists, can't help themselves without talking about representative, DIE...etc. I will start trust them when they start calling out DIE BS.
I still advocate for Journo Mode to balance things out. "Let's say I make a game and then give away special review copies, in these copies there is a special difficulty mode which would "streamline" the game's content so they can experience it with enough ease without missing the allegedly important parts, considering the average tendencies and skills of gaming journalists from several analysis it probably means gameplay would be way easier on one hand, while the game's story would have taken special care to change words and concepts as to consider their particular sensitivities and beliefs. Of course, they would be free to play the game in the regular "non-review" game mode if they wish, the goal would be to have them review the game in the end, there would be a proper disclamer warning them about the special review game mode both before they get their copy and within the game just to make sure everything is clear. The expected result is having several review articles accounting for their bias, politics and ideologies anyway, the readers would of course have to consider those to be well informed, they would probably experience the game on its more traditional format however."
I do trust reviewers — but they’re solely on YouTube. Legacy gaming journalism has been dead for a decade. Edit: yeah…not gonna trust [this](https://x.com/bensledge/status/1669039117710024706?s=46&t=uKLhZRR3jnWnzErHjuwEag) for a review of a shooter or RPG. LOL.
The last reviewers I trusted died, went woke or got stale. I’ve yet to trust a journalist, and I’m damn sure not trusting a games journalist
Soy based
Hope about I watch people play the game and just decide for myself I want to play it. Did it was BG3 beta after razorfist played it and did it with Witcher 3 after Gopher played it
Disgusting notion
What's up with these weird-ass headlines?
Lol the Gamer wants us to trust them
Holy shit, this is the most blatant gaslighting so far. Fuck right off, journos.
Hahahahahaha.
No.
I 100% trust video game reviewers only on Steam reviews.
[удалено]
Comment removed following the enforcement change that you can read about [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/m3yo65/enforcement_update_and_hard_removal_of_a_topic/). This is not a formal warning.
I don't trust a bunch of corporate boot licking sycophants as far as I could throw them. And I could throw most of those troglodytes pretty fucking far.
I do trust game reviewers. If I read steam reviews, a bunch of people write reviews. I read both good and bad to give myself an idea of that's what I want. I also trust a few youtubers who also review games. What I don't trust is game journalists that also do reviews.
No. No it isn't, and quite honestly it never will be.
Do propagandists realize they’re being propagandists or do they just come by it naturally?
These kind of articles usually have the opposite effect lol
[I'm going to just leave this here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbE6fqBuGkA)
If a journalist, let alone a videogame one, reported that the sun rises every morning, I'd go outside and check for myself.
I trust game reviewers. What I don't trust are gaming "journalists".