Recommended For You

About the Author: Upper Echelon Gamers


  1. I don't buy games based on anyone's reviews to be honest. I never did and I don't believe I ever will. I look at a game, gather information about it (trailer, plot information, storyline, game mechanics, genre, etc) and I make my own opinion on a game. If I like what I see, I buy it. If not, I just wait for something worth buying.

  2. Just because they're "game journalist" doesn't mean they're any different than any other journalist. And you'd have to be stupid at this point to believe any journalist.

  3. General rule of thumb: If you are looking for a game review and before the game is out the website is heavily advertising it, the review is going to be skewed lol. Also say if IGN is dick riding a game for 2 weeks before release, then gives it a grate score, and sucks its dick then never talks about it 2 weeks after launch, thats another shit game.

  4. Once gaming news hit the internet, there wasn't any other way it could be. The race to get information as fast as possible gave publishers an easy in for bribery, and publishers have been smart enough to keep that bribery in the form of favors and not straight up money (a good way to look at it; when Kotaku and Polygon others were at their height, ask yourself why they ever had exclusive news. Why would publishers ever give them exclusive info when they could just put that info on their own websites? Why do they go to a middleman instead of using their own resources? The only answer is so that those websites will owe them in return.) The threat of cutting off those relationships is all that's ever been needed for every outlet to be biased in the game's favor.

    Now that youtube is eating game journalists' lunch and has been for some time, they've regressed into blaming their demographic for not being smart enough to give them the credit they feel they deserve for their 'efforts,' which, of course, hasn't worked.

  5. I agree with you! We should also note the SJWs who DON'T EVEN GAME Destroying games we all loved like mass effect and dragon age and many more…. also fuck EA

  6. Lots of Youtube reviews are also lies, but on a different level. Look at how many Youtubers were paid (some still are) to promote Fallout 76 by Bethesda. All went on to say how good the game was …… I think we've figured out who the shills are now.

  7. My problem isnt scores gamed by companies…its the forced political agenda. I am done with the mainstream and I do not watch nor listen to them anymore.

  8. Its the same with movies. Before the Last Jedi came out all the critics were saying that it was the best starwars since empire (and not the worst as it clearly was). I don't trust any critics at all these days. Their reviews mean nothing to me.

  9. 10:05 We saw that Pipebomb Throw btw. Anyways Good Video. Nowadays with the amount of Gaming Youtuber there are, it is relatively easy to find out if a game is really as good as mainstream outlets tell you, some are biased some are not, that's the glory of Comparison.

  10. user scores on sites like meta critic aren't always accurate either, sometimes a game that are liked by many people get lower scores than you'd expect, because some people might not like the game for stupid reasons, hate the company publishing it, the game not being bad but being a disappointment and not living up to the hype, the game having a terrible marketing campaign making people hate it before they played it, people who are just trolling and have never played the game, or people put the game down after one hour. you can say the opposite for reviewer scores, with games hated by everyone getting alright scores, so really, both user and review scores are unreliable in my opinion on websites like metacritic.

    so for example, with battlefield V, the marketing was as bad as you can get, so people are probably giving it a low score based on that rather than based on the quality of the game. I haven't played it, so I can't say if it's actually that bad, but I'm pretty sure that's what people are doing, even if the game IS actually terrible, I doubt they are rating the game itself.

  11. Just because there is no money legally and above board being passed around, that doesn't mean that no-one is receiving monetary incentives to post positive reviews on the hush hush.

    Also, as you said, the benefits given to these companies posting positive reviews do eventually translate into more revenue, so saying that they're paid to post positive reviews is absolutely spot on.

  12. Just don't visit "professional" mouthwhore game reveiew sites, also don't buy their print products if there are any. I'd rather watch a few authentic Youtubers (avoid the shills) and make an informed decision on where to spend my money. We're not (only) "gamers", first and foremost we're paying customers and as such deserve to be informed about the products we buy – or avoid.

  13. Its always been like this. Thats the main reason why i don't bother with reviews. I don't trust 1 person's subjective opinion to tell me what's good or not. I do my own research before buying games, which means i never buy anything on day 1, buts its worth it. The only reviewer that was consistently accurate (at least for me) was TotalBiscuit because in his reviews he had a large emphasis on the parts of the game that i was interested in, for example menu options, optimization and polish.

  14. One thing you only ever so briefly skim over and don't really touch on, is the need for these massive incentives for outlets. It truly seems these days that the publishers abuse the current system because they are aware their product is substandard.
    After all: a good game can get good reviews on its own merit. Bad games need to cheat to get good reviews.

  15. triple a gaming is just politics with greedy companies acting justified selling you free shit and when criticized they will claim you hated the game because they had a diversity hire or a gay character.

  16. What in hell ever gave you the impression that game reviews are prop…
    The fact that they are! (imagine all caps).

    Yeah, and ax murderers are required by law to not kill and be truthful –that's worked out well considering there's no death row or prisons –wait…
    (not hyperbole either –something to stimulate critical analysis).

    The law works assuming that game review publishers are honest –don't believe them all to be infallible or even honest and don't need to prove it as they do it themselves giving trash better than average reviews and then use bullsh1t excuses to claim typo or accidental misrepresentation as a disclaimer. Same sites give better than average games released by less than AAA publishers marginal or lower reviews against AAA throw away trash.

    Review sites are sold out in a controlled manner in order to get "early" "privileged" access to content –I believe it and while it's not currency it is obligatory and borderline, if not explicitly, exchange of services which is still considering payment; while exchange of service is not cold hard cash it IS payment. Schilling.

  17. Its way worse that this , did you see the so called games journalists from gamespot rated farcry 5 purely based on there own personal political views. they didin't like the face that the locals were not all racist bigots or white supremacists like they would like to believe . Or the npc that bashed Obama. they said it made them feel uncomfortable so rated it down.
    Thats NOT games journalism that games activism.
    Or what about other so called games journalist sites like polygon/ eurogamer, PCgamer, rockpaper shotgun,kotaku,
    that instead of talking about things like game play, story, visuals, immersion.
    Go straight to how many gender options there are for your character or how a game is trans-phobic,homophobic for not having enough trans/gay storylines.

    Games Journalism is Dead replaced with SJW Activists

Leave a Reply