What do you personally look to get out of a video game review?

aside from me judging on gameplay, its a mixture of all sources really, game journos ratings, user reviews, friend reviews, all of that
They all combine together to show my overall opinion of if i should get the game or not, but its about 60% if i personally think the gameplay looks good or not

this is also a really good point of view

Addendum: if you want to read a magazine about games, Edge and Wireframe are all you need.

You had me going there for a second. Quality shitpost. 10 on 10.

Pretty much this.
I just want to know if the has piece of shit bugs.

Sorry, I meant that. Those people worked AT IGN and Gamespot. Gboard

>"journalist" reviews

why do you people constantly call critics "journalists".

Can you not form a sentence without using one of your buzzwords to tip off others what they're supposed to think?

Attached: comawn.png (475x477, 293K)

Pirate it then buy if your enjoy it, easy.

>Prove me wrong.
there are too many games released for any one person to parse for a hobby, so people with similarly aligned tastes who do so for a job can and will make you take notice of games you otherwise would have overlooked.

IGN's Taste is literally exactly the fucking same as it was over 15 years ago

>then """"""buy"""""if your enjoy it

You mean wait for an 80% sale to come around or buying a 90% discounted key from a reseller.

>who do so for a job
There's too much unnecessary baggage and ulterior motives in game journalism to be able to parse out a reasonable opinion. Not even mentioning the internal burn out even the best of writers feel when they're subjected to a deadline, having to actually play and be competent in a game until you finish it, and then immediately getting sent to review an entirely new game the next day that influences these garbage reviews way too much.

However, tech/port reports are purely objective with the only added thing you need to do is to cross-check between other bug reports to see if they're prevalent across all machines.

I honestly haven't looked at a review for any videogame in 10-15 years (Unless it was solely for entertainment, like Yahtzee or AVGN or something.), maybe longer. I know my taste well enough that I usually just watch a little gameplay and know whether I'll like a game or not based on that alone. I don't need a bunch of trannies and women who hate videogames to tell me why it's offensive to them, either.

Same. Sometimes I can just watch a trailer.

Reviews are opinion and opinions are subjective

Everything related to gameplay is hard to convey in a written review. When I read a reviewI generally try to find infos about how long the game runs, is it optimized, buggy, how many game mechanics there are, are the characters animated or do they look like robots with flapping mouths, that kinda thing.

Then if I'm still unsure I will go on YouTube, find a random playthrough and just randomly watch small parts of it (maybe 2 minutes of gameplay top).

>Zero Punctuation
>Jim Sterling

I'm not biting.

look at the gameplay, no need for some critic to babble in my ear

>game """journalism"""
>in 2019
>needing a game """"review""""
Wtf? Just type the name of the game on youtube and watch the gameplay.

Really? Because I don't remember reviews like their Call of Duty: WWII review, which was essentially: Pros: It features minimal white male characters. Cons: Only 2 genders, 15 years ago.

This. Journo's are proven to be corrupt as shit and reviews are usually paid for anyway. Just decide for yourself. Don't let other people tell you what to think. Especially dishonest people, trying to sell something.

I haven't taken a journos opinion on fucking anything in years. Last I remember doing so was Rock Paper Shotgun, before they turned to shit. And that was a long time ago.

>Youtube reviewers
Nah. They're too positive, too eager to prop up indies and slap down AAAs on principle. As compared to slapping indies for shit games, and then slapping AAAs for shit games.

I'll look at user reviews to see if the game is broken or goes to shit after a while, watch some gameplay to see if it's for me if I'm not sure, and maybe play a demo to make sure the damn thing runs.

Attached: COW.jpg (1173x1300, 100K)

I only trust the ones that have a similar taste in vidya with me and even then there have been times where it is obvious shilling.

Gameplay vids entirely depend on who is playing them. Unskilled footage will make a game look worse than it is for example.

>Unskilled footage will make a game look worse than it is for example.
Yeah, but you can tell. If someone is missing their shots, walking everywhere, not checking their inventory in an RPG, it sticks out like a sore thumb. I don't think anyone counts that as a strike against the game.

I was thinking about platformers when I typed that. Most of the time bad gameplay footage of a platformer makes the controls seem stiff, loose or overall delayed. But you're right, it's not a thing that affects most genres.

If it's a mainstream game, you can judge based of marketing alone. If it's a niche game, you're best off going into a niche thread and asking people. I'm not basing my purchase of weird small JRPGs based on metacritic score, that's retarded, most of those critics are new to the genre they're "reviewing". In short, game critics are useless to me and if the all die the world will be better

Yes, they literally rehash the same exact games every time just in different order

Attached: Screenshot_2019-07-14 h6lUc5V jpg (JPEG Image, 1920 × 1920 pixels).jpg (1622x840, 758K)

We're better off leaving it to the robots at this point.

Like legitimately, that new slider recommendation system Steam just came out with actually introduced me to five new obscure as fuck games I would have never found from regular game journos or even Yea Forums for that matter.

Critics don't know shit about games they're reviewing and based their scores off the hype. For example, the score for Yakuza has just been progressively going up as awareness of Yakuza has been increasing. Apparently 3 was the best game of the original trilogy and 4 was a letdown after 3 but still better than 2. Hah?

Attached: Clipboard01.jpg (624x1046, 165K)

Journalist reviews are beyond worthless.
The only people worth paying attention to are streamers or youtubers, and even then they need to be some sort of established specialist.

I look very specifically for rationalized criticism of gameplay or highlighting of technical problems. If there's any critique of themes or characters then I know the reviewer is some idiologue fuckhole and I can immediately close the tab.

But then, the only reason to find a review is for a publisher or developer you haven't encountered before who's track record you're unfamiliar with. Western AAA titles from the likes of ubisoft and ea are universally garbage. The last review I watched that made me consider purchase was gman's Amid Evil review.
And I only became aware of him because of controversy after he was dropped as an ea community contributer due to a less than glowing Anthem review.

>If you are a degenerate, soulles fuckstain of a human being there are always dogshit cretins like Worthabuy, Joseph Anderson and Matthewmathosis for you to watch

Jesus I hate these people. Why do some people think longer = better? I watched exactly one (1) Joseph Anderson review, the Mario Odyssey one, to see (a) what the hype was and (b) how the hell you can make a two-hour-long review. Turns out the viewers are just morons and the reviews are bloated and unfocused.

This genius spends the first 10+ minutes talking about Dark Souls and Nioh. In a Mario review. That should tell you all you need to know about these "deep" ""video essayists."" He could have made that point in one sentence. Then he spends an equally inordinate amount of time going through the entire Mario series. Which, again, to the extent it's even necessary, could have been summarized very quickly. Then he goes through every type of star in the most drawn-out fashion possible. Any valid points he may have had were outweighed by the substantial filler, redundancies, and irrelevant comparisons. He should review Mario Odyssey, not Dark Souls and Yoshi spinoff games.

I don't know who watches this shit.

tl;dr

>purchasing games

Jesus why are people so obsessed with Half-Life 2?

What was the portal 2 of 2018? I'd like to play that

People listen to it, it's like radio

What was the game breaking bug? Or am I missing something here?

I don't really look up reviews at major publications anymore. Media in general has become far more muddled that you can't rely on major new outlets anymore. I try to be thorough by researching the average critics and user scores, read users' criticism to make sure its not biased in either side of the spectrum (overly positive or negative) and evaluate their qualms, skim/watch gameplay footage if necessary, some times youtubers make a thorough assessment. It's become more tedious, but if you want a relatively objective opinion you have to research it yourself.

The aggregated stream of information has made it difficult to trust a single source. There's just too many ways to manipulate information. Generally it seems like truth has dissolved into an ocean of information overload. It essentially boils down to your own judgement and common sense.

Attached: 12.jpg (1300x310, 62K)

>niche game
Ask Yea Forums
>indie game
Read steam reviews
>AAA game
Watch trailers
>retro game
Ask /vr/
>Exclusive game
You're fucked, there's no way to know if it's good because everyone talking about it is either payed or invested or triggered. Guess you'll just have to buy it

youtube.com/watch?v=WQewHDQHCgU
reviewers are fully retarded who won't touch videogames themselves, go to 2:37 on this video

based BotW

Damn they straight up stole the entire RPG thing from BotW.

>friends
lol

Whats wrong with this?
You telling me ayy lmao weed man game is a hidden 10/10 masterpiece to define the century?

>management sim aspects are complex and intuitive
Maybe it is, or maybe both their pros and cons are completely wrong and it's being used as evidence as their gross incompetence.

The dude in the OP's game-breaking bug literally made him lose his entire progress. Early versions of Prey could corrupt your entire save-file before they patched it.

I'd say a 4.0 score is pretty fucking generous for a straight up non-functional product.

I rarely based a game purchase on a review but sometimes I look what two youtube channels has to say, a do a quick only on the easyallies score and I watch the ACG review

Attached: irydxaitfq111~2.jpg (768x501, 101K)

I dont look up reviews. Combing through promotional material to see if they showed gameplay is usually enough, but Ill still look for it from other sources.
I dont even look at 90% of AAA titles because the people buying whatever schlock EA/ACTI/UBI etc are pumping out have garbagejuice tastes

How are they wrong?
Maybe the mechanics them self are good? Did you play it?
And yeah, usually story based indies have awful writing, and from what i saw in the trailer for this game it focuses on a narrative and character interactions too.
And yeah, skimming the problems of drug trafficking, weed being often an entry drug or even how every pothead turns into a 60 iq retard is something i expect this game will avoid touching.

All of the negative points are in regards to the plot.

Why do people trust blindly in reviews when it comes to games, movies and everything else?

Attached: 1560052313031.jpg (610x357, 87K)

Rules for game journalism

>do not trust the opinions of americans, they are way too likely to have an agenda because of sjws

>do not trust their opinions on japanese games that are too weeby unless its clear the reviewer is a weeb himself

>if a game scores 90+meta always read the reviews with scores in between bad and good

>always be aware of certain biases reviewers have aka is it zelda pokemon or mario expect hard nostalgia dicksucking is it a action game with complex controls (lmao complex for journos that is) expect reeeeeeing that it's too hard etc

I don't read or watch reviews

Word of mouth is enough

Sterling might be obnoxius cunt but he knows his shit.

Unfortunately he uses his knowledge to lie for rage views.

i have never taken reviews seriously

>Obviously you can only formulate an opinion by playing it yourself.
wrong, kiddo, ive been around the block enough times to instantly tell if a game is worth playing or not from a few seconds of gameplay footage

I use to when I was younger. But stopped for some reason. Probably when I started going on Yea Forums or maybe even earlier.

Why would anyone listen to favors-sharing journalists, when you can just listen to other gamers?

You have the ability to get every piece of information yourself. The age of journalism is over.

Right there with you. Absolutely no idea how people in this hobby can't do this yet. I haven't looked at a review in almost a decade at this point.

I check scores sometimes but watching gameplay or trying it is how I decide

>dunkey

Attached: 1524017092342.png (380x383, 14K)

I may be wrong but the trailer seems to show the game has a lot of character interactions, so it should be rated?
And the real nature of drug trade and organized crime and health effects of drugs is in no way story related, its one of teh most important part of whats going on behind the scenes.
Its like making a prohibition themed game and ignoring alcoholics, alcohol related violence and how almost every criminal group had it hands in it.

In real life the moment you wanted to sell weed on large scale you and your dealers would be cut up by some spics sooner or later.

journalist is an all encompassing term for someone who provides information to the public

How could you forget Greg? Best guy Gamespot ever had

Attached: 2169352-24594_371766532819_507392819_4193735_2600888_n[1].jpg (600x600, 72K)

>They're too positive, too eager to prop up indies and slap down AAAs on principle. As compared to slapping indies for shit games, and then slapping AAAs for shit games.
That comes down to who you're watching, really.

You can't trust any of them, they're all either ideologically motivated or bought.

Not every single one. Vast majority, yes. But like I said, that comes down to who you watch.

Every single one. The only reason you're not ready to admit it is because you haven't found out the ideology or jew behind whoever you're watching yet. Anyone who takes to youtube or a blog site to tell you what to like is a paypig to someone, or wants to change society to befit them.

Yet again, that's on who you're watching. You're the one watching /pol/ shitters give you your opinion.

You do realize there are tens of thousands of reviewers on youtube right?