Current Events > Let's talk about that gamespot review of Cyberpunk...

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxkBI2B2LnU

go watch it.

seriously.

you can't tell me that is not anal crap piss poor judgment of a critic right there.
'Oh, I saw lots of side quests but I just...I just didn;t wanna do it.'
'The main quest is super long and the side quests are optional, but anyway here's a negative score 'cos there's too much to do'
'That poster I saw OFFENDS me'
'Oh, btw here's the entire spoilers to the game's ending. Whoops.'

How does gamespot always manage to find the worst reviewers for the best games? I swear they're doing this on purpose for PR

fucking bullshit. i waited NINE years for this game and it's supposed to be PERFECT. any reviewer that doesn't give it a 10/10 is dead to me.

---

TwoDoorPC posted...

fucking bullshit. i waited NINE years for this game and it's supposed to be PERFECT. any reviewer that doesn't give it a 10/10 is dead to me.

no one is complaining the game needs to be perfect. They're complaining on how it was NOT reviewed fairly.
Can you like, not tell the diff?

if u hate it so much why ask people to give it clicks

CEman logic

---

yeah, and if they're not giving this perfect game perfect scores it is not being reviewed fairly and correctly.

---

In fact there's plenty of good AAA games that has a fair minor share of bad reviews. But no one complained because these negative reviews still pointed out good flaws and justification.

Giving a game a low score because of stupid s*** like what I pointed is just plain absurd.
Imagine you spend a decade working on a project only for your professor to fail you because he didn't like your face

1 minute ver
https://youtu.be/1X1EI2fckuc

---

How many topics on this review do we need?

---

TwoDoorPC posted...

yeah, and if they're not giving this perfect game perfect scores it is not being reviewed fairly and correctly.

oh my god.
since when did I even mention 'perfect'?
your strawman argument is incredible.

I don't mind a 7/10 or even a 5/10 review so long as the reviewer can justify the scores reasonably. Which part of that logic do you not comprehend?

BoyOfBattle posted...

if u hate it so much why ask people to give it clicks

CEman logic

'cos it's good to let people know how much of an unreliable reviewer gamespot is. This isn't the first time they have done this.

thanks. i'm enjoying your ego being so fragile that you immediately think i'm parodying you.

---

A person who works for a company has an opinion about a piece of entertainment media I haven't experienced

And here's what I think about that

---

I cannot express my ANGER right now TC. Continue the crusade.

---

Can you jump off of a roof with the swagger of a black teen?

---

Mackorov posted...

'Oh, I saw lots of side quests but I just...I just didn;t wanna do it.'
'The main quest is super long and the side quests are optional, but anyway here's a negative score 'cos there's too much to do'

These are valid criticisms btw

---

pinky0926 posted...

A person who works for a company has an opinion about a piece of entertainment media I haven't experienced

And here's what I think about that

you don't need to play the game to read a review and judge it as reasonable or not.
It's like reading a movie review and the critic complains the movie sucks because he doesn't like Jennifer Lawrence as an actress.

also ironic and more legitimate to say you're defending a reviewer when you yourself havent played the game.

Gamers are shook that CDPR isn't that good at making games as they believed they are.

---

I can't say I'm a fan of J Law's acting. Although I did like Silver Linings Playbook. But in X Men? Trash.

---

Mackorov posted...

you don't need to play the game to read a review and judge it as reasonable or not.

It's like reading a movie review and the critic complains the movie sucks because he doesn't like Jennifer Lawrence as an actress.

Actually I would find that review very inciteful because it would establish some much needed context to who the reviewer is and where their biases lie. Just like how when I see dunkey hates a JRPG it doesn't mean the game sucks, because I know dunkey hates those things.

I think the problem here isn't that gamespot gave Cyberpunk a 7/10 (which btw, is still a good score). It's that for some reason Gamers (with a capital G) expect these big review houses to pat every game they like on the head and any deviation from a 9 causes this kind of reaction.

For one thing, why do we paint the entire company because of what one guy who worked there said? Do you have everything in common with your colleagues? All like the same music the same amount?

If you wanted it to be an official company position and not the personal opinion of the person who reviewed it, warts and all, does it have any credibility at all?

also ironic and more legitimate to say you're defending a reviewer when you yourself havent played the game.

I'm saying he played it and didn't like it, that's his view. That's a pretty obvious fact isn't it? Or do you want to argue that point

---

7/10 isn't a negative score. It literally says "good". Anyway I only skimmed the review but it seemed ok to me. Thinking the games has too many superficial elements or choices that add nothing to the game are reasonable complaints. You can disagree with those complaints, but they are still valid complaints.

Mackorov posted...

It's like reading a movie review and the critic complains the movie sucks because he doesn't like Jennifer Lawrence as an actress.

Given how important actors are to a movie that seems like a reasonable complaint.

Bunch of people who haven't played a game upset with the opinion of someone who did.
---

pinky0926 posted...

Actually I would find that review very inciteful because it would establish some much needed context to who the reviewer is and where their biases lie. Just like how when I see dunkey hates a JRPG it doesn't mean the game sucks, because I know dunkey hates those things.

I think the problem here isn't that gamespot gave Cyberpunk a 7/10 (which btw, is still a good score). It's that for some reason Gamers (with a capital G) expect these big review houses to pat every game they like on the head and any deviation from a 9 causes this kind of reaction.

For one thing, why do we paint the entire company because of what one guy who worked there said? Do you have everything in common with your colleagues? All like the same music the same amount?

If you wanted it to be an official company position and not the personal opinion of the person who reviewed it, warts and all, does it have any credibility at all?

because they chose the person to review the game. And this is crucially important. If you choose someone who hates driving games to review a driving game, wtf do you expect? We see this sometimes in the movie critic industry too, like how critics always pan spoofs because they simply hate spoof movies in general.
Another example, I hate Pokemon. So if Gamespot ask me to review the Pokemon games and I'll give everything a 1/0 and defend myself by saying "it's my personal opinion, go suck it losers", you call that fair? Well, maybe some CE users too high up sucking gamespot's arse may think so, who knows

Actually I would find that review very inciteful because it would establish some much needed context to who the reviewer is and where their biases lie. Just like how when I see dunkey hates a JRPG it doesn't mean the game sucks, because I know dunkey hates those things.

first of all, please establish what the intention of a major game reviewer that thousands of people rely on is for?
Is it to inform audiences about the quality of the game in the most fair, unbiased way, or is it just your personal blog for venting narrow-viewed frustrations of your own? you tell me.

I think the problem here isn't that gamespot gave Cyberpunk a 7/10 (which btw, is still a good score). It's that for some reason Gamers (with a capital G) expect these big review houses to pat every game they like on the head and any deviation from a 9 causes this kind of reaction.

like I said before. Nobody expects that. Gamespot gave Miles Morales a 7/10 for example, while all other reviewers gave around 9/10 and honestly I agree with Gamespot's review there (eg. the complaint on how the sequel plays too similiarly to the first game). It all depends on the reasonable points raised in the review.

"This bleak dystopian world is too bleak and dystopian"

Lol, okay lady

---

I just want to know if I can romance the girl who looks exactly like my ex.

---

WTF, I thought this was a pretty good review. Her criticism was well reasoned. One of the main USPs has always been how this game is supposed to be very open like a table top RPG, and a lot of the critique was grounded in that.

---

scar the 1 posted...

WTF, I thought this was a pretty good review. Her criticism was well reasoned. One of the main USPs has always been how this game is supposed to be very open like a table top RPG, and a lot of the critique was grounded in that.

tell me how including freaking spoilers in the game review and without warning is OK?

btw again, this isn't the first time gamespot made this mistake in a review

Preorder cancelled

---

JE19426 posted...

7/10 isn't a negative score. It literally says "good". Anyway I only skimmed the review but it seemed ok to me. Thinking the games has too many superficial elements or choices that add nothing to the game are reasonable complaints. You can disagree with those complaints, but they are still valid complaints.

Given how important actors are to a movie that seems like a reasonable complaint.

I mean the critic not liking the actor herself and not her performance in the movie.

Mackorov posted...

because they chose the person to review the game. And this is crucially important. If you choose someone who hates driving games to review a driving game, wtf do you expect? We see this sometimes in the movie critic industry too, like how critics always pan spoofs because they simply hate spoof movies in general.

But he liked the game, and likes those kinds of games clearly, so what's the problem? Is it just that he didn't like it as much as you presume you will?

Should they keep getting people to write reviews until they can pick the 9/10 guy to publish?

Another example, I hate Pokemon. So if Gamespot ask me to review the Pokemon games and I'll give everything a 1/0 and defend myself by saying "it's my personal opinion, go suck it losers", you call that fair? Well, maybe some CE users too high up sucking gamespot's arse may think so, who knows

Again he liked the game and the genre...

first of all, please establish what the intention of a major game reviewer that thousands of people rely on is for?
Is it to inform audiences about the quality of the game in the most fair, unbiased way, or is it just your personal blog for venting narrow-viewed frustrations of your own? you tell me.

You aren't relying on this review and neither is anyone, lol

People don't watch game reviews to decide if they want to play the game, they watch them to get hyped. This phenomenon has actually been proven too. You are gonna buy the game even if gamespot gave it a 3/10, the only thing that will change is whether you like gamespot or not.

Do you not see the incredible amount of funny in expecting REVIEWS of art and entertainment to be unbiased?

like I said before. Nobody expects that s***. Gamespot gave Miles Morales a 7/10 for example, while all other reviewers gave around 9/10 and honestly I agree with Gamespot's review there (eg. the complaint on how the sequel plays too similiarly to the first game). It all depends on the reasonable points raised in the review.

So which point was unreasonable?

---

Please give views to this thing I don't like so they get positive reinforcement by the only metric they care about. ~ op

---

Gamers' obsession with numerical review scores is frustrating. Some people need their game to have the best score and to argue with others that their game is trash because theirs has bigger numbers.

Reviews exist to guide you whether a game might be interesting to you or not. You can disagree with a review; you feel they put too much emphasis on something you don't care about, something they listed as negative sounds interesting to you, etc. That does not mean the review is wrong. That does not mean you are wrong. You have different opinions, it happens. Check out some others and they might align with your views better.

Hell, maybe when you'll actually play the game you'll feel that reviewer made some good points. Or that they were completely wrong.

pinky0926 posted...

But he liked the game, and likes those kinds of games clearly, so what's the problem? Is it just that he didn't like it as much as you presume you will?

Should they keep getting people to write reviews until they can pick the 9/10 guy to publish?

Again he liked the game and the genre...

You aren't relying on this review and neither is anyone, lol

People don't watch game reviews to decide if they want to play the game, they watch them to get hyped. This phenomenon has actually been proven too. You are gonna buy the game even if gamespot gave it a 3/10, the only thing that will change is whether you like gamespot or not.

So which point was unreasonable?

lol ok I stopped reading the first line the moment you said 'he'. You clearly haven't even read the damn review and yet already arguing.

Incredible.

Oh look this topic again.
---

Mackorov posted...

lol ok I stopped reading the first line the moment you said 'he'. You clearly haven't even read the damn review and yet already arguing.

Incredible.

What a stunningly irrelevant point

I read the article and didn't pick up the name at the top. So I guess the takeaway here is that you are concerned with who wrote the review even more than I am?

---

People don't watch game reviews to decide if they want to play the game, they watch them to get hyped.

please show me the statistics and evidence for that. thanks.

pinky0926 posted...

What a stunningly irrelevant point

I read the article and didn't pick up the name at the top. So I guess the takeaway here is that you are concerned with who wrote the review even more than I am?

So you didn't even pick up who reviewed it yet can say this reviewer knows the genre and these kind of games?

Mackorov posted...

tell me how including freaking spoilers in the game review and without warning is OK?

btw again, this isn't the first time gamespot made this mistake in a review

I don't really know which part of the review was a spoiler, and I didn't really come away from the review knowing much about what happens in the game. But absolutely, if you include spoilers in a review you should be upfront about it, I'm happy to concede that. That's not really your only complaint though, and it's not even a complaint that I addressed (because I thought it was a valid complaint, and I couldn't speak on the merits of it).

---

Mackorov posted...

People don't watch game reviews to decide if they want to play the game, they watch them to get hyped.

please show me the statistics and evidence for that. thanks.

No. No they don't.
---

Mackorov posted...

please show me the statistics and evidence for that. thanks.

https://www.dailydot.com/parsec/metacritic-scores-game-sales-gdc-2015/

Jury is out but we can be sure that this score won't affect whether you will buy the game.

What are you actually mad about here? Be honest. Are you worried you won't enjoy the game, or that CD Project Red might not get the revenue they might have had with a 9/10 review? What's your grievance on this level.

Mackorov posted...

So you didn't even pick up who reviewed it yet can say this reviewer knows the genre and these kind of games?

I read the review, yes. It was clear from reading it this person is passionate about the game, the RPG genre, and (critically important bit coming up) did still enjoy the game. But they had reservations about how certain things worked, and honestly I didn't think anything they wrote was unreasonable.


---

Mackorov posted...

I mean the critic not liking the actor herself and not her performance in the movie.

I know what you meant, and I stand by my previous statement. Actors are an important part of a movie, and your enjoyment of the actors in it will effect your enjoyment of the movie they are in.

Mackorov posted...

You clearly haven't even read the damn review, don't even know the history of this reviewer and yet already arguing and trying to defend her.

Why part of the reviewers history is such an issue? Looking through the list of scores for their reviews on gamespot seem to indicate they enjoy both story based games and rpgs, seems a reasonable choice for a reviewer for an rpg.

myzz7 posted...

1 minute ver
https://youtu.be/1X1EI2fckuc

Lol this is hilarious

---

Frankly the part I have the most doubts about in that review is her claiming that "Keanu Reeves did a good job"

---

scar the 1 posted...

Frankly the part I have the most doubts about in that review is her claiming that "Keanu Reeves did a good job"

Why? I mean CDPR obviously hired Keanu Reeves to play Keanu Reeves, how hard can that be?

I thought it was understood that game reviewers are largely terrible at videogames and their opinions aren't worth listening to? When did we step back from that?

---

JE19426 posted...

Why? I mean CDPR obviously hired Keanu Reeves to play Keanu Reeves, how hard can that be?

That's... a good point. But I'm not sure he'd be very good at even that.

---

Vyrulisse posted...

I thought it was understood that game reviewers are largely terrible at videogames and their opinions aren't worth listening to? When did we step back from that?

It's more fun to be angry

---

JE19426 posted...

Why? I mean CDPR obviously hired Keanu Reeves to play Keanu Reeves, how hard can that be?

True but can we take a sec to discuss Keanu Reeves and how he has phoned in every performance since Bill and Ted but for whatever reason he's the biggest action star in the world

---

Mackorov posted...

please show me the statistics and evidence for that. thanks.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/400-current-events/79162274

---

Vyrulisse posted...

I thought it was understood that game reviewers are largely terrible at videogames and their opinions aren't worth listening to? When did we step back from that?

"Gamers" have always insisted that reviewers know less than nothing about games while simultaneously losing their fucking minds whenever one says something they don't like.

---

Blightzkrieg posted...

"Gamers" have always insisted that reviewers know less than nothing about games while simultaneously losing their fucking minds whenever one says something they don't like.

Well I'm talking about universally. I disregard positive reviews from game journos too. They are terrible at games and often play on the easiest setting and just push through main story beats.

They kinda have to since they probably have a million reviews to get through so they don't have time to properly dive into every game and huge RPG's even less so.

---