>video game reviews should be objective
>videogame reviews
that's where i stopped reading
if you really need a 2 hour video to guide you if you should by a game or no, you need serious help
just buy the fucking game, if you don't like it, refund.
>>321753116
Fuck off you retarded valvedrone
>>321753116
>videogame review
>2 hour video
What the fuck
"Objective" is a meaningless buzzword. They should, however, have clear priorities most people can relate to. As a reviewer you should be professional enough to be able to tell that something you might personally find objectionable doesn't detract from a games quality overall and shouldn't have an impact on its score.
>>321753527
That's bullshit. Some people are more annoyed by certain things than others. The reviewer shouldn't be worried about how many people are gonna get annoyed by something, he should just state his thoughts out, what he liked and what he disliked about the game, and form the score out of that.
>>321753527
>personally objectionable
so if for example I played a titty ninja game and found the constant fan service detracted from my experience I should completely ignore it?
>>321754491
You can mention it in your review but I don't think it should have an impact on the score. Especially seeing how, in the case of a "titty ninja game", you should be well aware that it's something the target audience of the game is probably not gonna have a problem with.
>>321754846
Yeah but a review is your own opinion, you shouldn't be influenced by what other people think or are expecting.
You're given a game and asked "play through this game and tell us what you thought about it". If you played through a titty ninja game and found the fan service was a negative aspect, you comment on it, not doing so isn't honest.
>>321754846
What should affect the score then? A review score is a summation of the reviewers opinion on the game, if they dislike a major part of the game surely that should be reflected?
>>321754981
See, at the end of the day every review is an opinion but you should keep in mind that you are writing them for an audience that expects it to be relatable. There should be a point where you go over your review and ask yourself "Does this observation really matter to most of my readers?".
Of course in this particular case there's a lot of bias from both sides, seeing how many gaming outlets have been accused, in my opinion not entirely unrightfully, of indulging in what can only be called political punditry, which really does hurt the integrity of gaming criticism.
>>321755283
>>321753732
>>321754846
>score
Scores are cancer. Only literal retards can't read a short review and look at some gameplay to decide if a game is for them.
>>321754981
Considering the titty ninja fans will probably ignore your review, knowing your opinion, why even write it?
>>321755664
It's your job.
If you get handed a game by the editor-in-chief and told "play this and review it" you can hardly say "no".
>>321752285
You can just watch gameplay now so I feel like you don't really need reviews anymore to make an informed decision Plus all games are shit these days anyway so it doesn't really matter which ones you buy
>>321755452
Keeping the titty ninja example going..
People who will buy that game won't read a review because they know what they want.
People who are on the fence for some reason or another will want to hear as much as they can about the game so talking about how much fan service is in it and how the person felt about that is fair game.
People who dismiss it as fap-bait won't read the review.
Reviews are mainly for people on the fence and they'll want to hear as much as possible about it.
>>321755283
Well, for one there are some fairly objective, or at least generally agreed upon points you can make about a game. Do the mechanics work well? Do the graphics look good? Is the soundtrack pleasant to listen to and does it help the atmosphere the game is trying to create? And of course: Is it well written? Which, contrary to what some people believe, can be judged by some standards that should be relatable to most readers. Other than that: You know, don't review a game, that's generally speaking just not the kind of game you enjoy.
>>321756059
Because if you review a titty ninja game what the people in the target audience will want to know is mostly: Is it a good titty ninja game? And if you dislike titty ninja games just for being titty ninja games your review won't mean much to anyone. Me, for example, I practically don't play multiplayer games at all. If someone asked me to review something like Rainbow Six: Siege or any given Call of Duty all I could do is apply the standards I would apply to a single player game which would be absolutely useless to anyone reading a review. Which is why I wouldn't do it. I'd go to my boss and tell him that I can't properly judge this game on its own merits and someone else, who's more qualified, should do it.
>Reviewer was in the games credits
Holyshit thats bad
>>321753732
>make review about a game in a genre I don't like
>always shit on evey feature that defines that genre simply because I don't like them
So this would be a helpful review to you?
