When it came to the narrative and writing, features of the game Epic had clearly tried to focus on, reviewers either praised it or found some way to say that it didn’t matter. Here’s the subtitle for IGN’s Gears of War 3 review: “Does Gears of War 3 live up to the hype? Duh. I also saw an utterly boring title devoid of soul or style, embarrassingly marred by ham-handed attempts at emotional dreck. When I played Gears of War 3, I saw a slick shooter with a responsive engine appropriate to a long-honed blockbuster series. We tend to be quick to forgive, quick to see things from the developer’s point of view, and quick to hope for improvements in the sequel.įor a case study, we’ll zoom into Gears of War 3, and the realm of subjective opinion. Game critics, however, delve into that territory very rarely. The best tend to still be impossibly arrogant, but sharp enough that they’re hard to disagree with. They take other people’s artistic babies, things that people have worked years perfecting, and they rip them to pieces. The tacit message being sent here is that most of this stuff is awesome, it’s just a question of how awesome it is.Ĭritics are unpopular people. The vast majority of popular games fall somewhere between 8 and 10, and a competently executed blockbuster will almost never score below a 9.0.
Never mind that reviewing any piece of art out of 100 is a ridiculous endeavor, but look at the actual scores. Look at the score system from IGN – Google’s de facto champion of game reviewing.
0 kommentar(er)
