1
8

[–] greenwithasideofred 1 point 8 points (+9|-1) ago 

Are people so fragile that they can't handle someone not liking something that they like?

0
3

[–] Grospoliner 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

People with integrity don't like liars.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
2

[–] lordtyp0 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

If I remember right, the devs and people part of the process have their bonuses based on things such as metacritic. It means agenda reviews do harm to people beyond damaging franchises.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

2
2

[–] BajaNorth 2 points 2 points (+4|-2) ago  (edited ago)

The review seems rather accurate. The game seems predictable and old hat being the 4th in the series without much change like from Far Cry 2 to Far Cry 3. I honestly see the point that Darksouls 2 could be considered the worst game too. If a person doesn't like the pointless story in Darksouls and doesn't enjoy the way the game plays then they can think it sucks.

Seems odd that a person can't have an unpopular belief anymore without a petition being signed. Honestly, I don't think much of any game that exclusive to play station.

I think Halo was the only game which I liked that was exclusive in the generation after 64.

1
4

[–] SkepticalMartian 1 point 4 points (+5|-1) ago  (edited ago)

I honestly see the point that Darksouls 2 could be considered the worst game too

I don't. The Souls series is generally considered best in its class for ARPG games. Sure I could see not liking it due to its unforgiving difficulty, but worst game? You'd have to be a complete idiot to think that.

It's like the reviewer doesn't even play the games he's trying to review.

Honestly, I don't think much of any game that exclusive to play station.

Then you haven't played too many playstation exclusives. I can think of several excellent titles. I'm guessing you've never actually owned a playstation. Not that it matters - with the exception of Demon's souls and Bloodborne none of the other Souls games are platform exclusive. DS 1-3 all came out for the PC.

I think Halo was the only game which I liked that was exclusive in the generation after 64.

It all makes sense now.

1
1

[–] Cyber_Toon 1 point 1 point (+2|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Many people consider Sonic The Hedgehog 06 one of the worst games ever, and I enjoyed that game very much. I even thought it had a good story, while other people thought the story was horrible. You would have to be a complete idiot to have a different opinion than the majority? I have played none of those games, so I can't say anything about them, but a review is ultimately that persons opinion. If I reviewed Sonic the hedgehog 06, based off my experience, I would probably give it a high score, even though almost everyone gives it a low score. How is it wrong for someone to have a different opinion than yours? How are you so offended that he didn't think what you thought was a great game was a great game?

Also, who are you to dictate whether /u/bajanorth enjoyed PlayStation-exclusive games, or whether he believes Darksouls 2 is a good game? does he not get to have his own opinion just because it differs from your opinion, or the popular opinion? Even if I played those games, and enjoyed them, and thought they were great, I would respect that he thought they were bad games. To me it seems very disrespectful to demand someone take down their review, or even worse, give them threats for a review, just because they disagree with their opinion. He was legitimately commenting on the game, and legitimately didn't enjoy it. Props to him for sharing his unpopular opinion.

0
5

[–] Zaqwert 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Sounds like a troll reviewer who hates on popular game series for attention. Probably should just ignore him.

Troll critics are not new.

0
3

[–] ArsCortica [S] 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

The discussed WaPo review can be found here: http://archive.is/hKu8C

0
1

[–] Mr_YUP 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Story wise he's not wrong. Why do they care so much?

0
1

[–] Whizwicky 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Because they forget that it's not a reviewer's job to validate popular opinions; it's to tell us their experience with the game, positives and negatives, and whether or not they think the game is worth buying.

They also forget that not everyone has the same tastes.

0
0

[–] BeautifulInside ago  (edited ago)

The main problem is that score aggregators such as Metacritic are based on a faulty premise. The faulty premise being that whatever article is listed by <insert big publication> as a "review" will always be a review and not a mere piece of "critique". Critique such as this has its value (much like it has value for modern art), but it brings nothing to people who go to Metacritic to get an idea about the quality of a game.

The debate should not be about whether people have the right to express their own opinion, regardless of the megaphone they use to express them and regardless of how wrong and retarded their opinions are. The answer to that debate is quite evident.

No, the real debate is to determine whether that sort of article qualifies as a review at all. As someone who never played and was never interested in any Uncharted game I have no more information about the game than I had before reading. It is a completely objective fact about this article, that it provides no actual information about the product it is supposed to review.

0
0

[–] Frankensauce ago 

Agree completely. Reviews can be subjective for sure, but something like a "buyer's guide" or a "whats in the box" sort of publication should be objective, as the intent is not to criticize or acclaim, but to inform. Its by this same token that media should not insert political or personal agendas into say, a news story about a wildfire or hurricane.