Which review sites do you trust?

Soldato
Joined
17 Dec 2006
Posts
8,190
Don't really trust any these days, I just use their scores as rough guides. I used to use Metacritic, but review scores are a bit messed up as Metacritic has to give a game a score out of 100, but some sites use a 5 star system, meaning one site might have give a gave 4/5 which is 80%, although if they used a 100% system they might have gave it 85 or 90.
 
Associate
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
715
Location
Wales, UK
None, they're all full of agendas. But good for a laugh sometimes

I go by,
real user comments (weeding out obvious fanboys/haters)
Research into the game
Gut instinct

Has rarely failed me...
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Feb 2006
Posts
29,263
Location
Cornwall
I use Metacritic and always read the lower score reviews first ;)

And I ignore everyone who gives a game 100% because I think they're more than likely numpties :p
 
Soldato
Joined
16 Mar 2004
Posts
13,490
Location
UK
Generally user feedback, along with sites like Metacritic for average scores. Do like reading Eurogamer once in a while though it's written pretty well.
 
Associate
Joined
7 Jun 2005
Posts
538
Location
Leeds, UK
I like Gamespot's good/bad/game emblems thing that they have going on; but as with all game review websites, I take it all with a pinch of salt. User feedback is where it's at.
 
Associate
Joined
14 Sep 2009
Posts
1,894
Location
Accrington, Lancashire
I compare the user on comments from metacritic, and other random sites as well.

i try to find what people think are the best and worst qualities of the game.

And i generally go off my feelings towards the game anyway.

I dont really trust any reviewers, a lot of them completely over rate games and then compare everything to them. ( MW2 Cough Cough*)
 
Associate
Joined
9 Feb 2010
Posts
291
Location
London
After reading these posts I wonder if someone out there would make a gaming website entirely devoted to user reviews. Meh could be promising.
 
Permabanned
Joined
28 Nov 2009
Posts
2,582
Location
İzmir
Several, then loads of user reviews.

With a fair helping of sober, common sense, and a dash of salt.

Don't believe the hype, of course, but also don't be so quick to dismiss the lower rated ones.
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Oct 2005
Posts
13,706
Location
Netherlands
None, I make up my own mind. They are WAY too positive over most games.

Or well, I sometimes agree with zero punctuation, but not always.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
11 Jan 2005
Posts
830
Location
London
Same, its best not to get a ride on the hype train from what I've found. Prime examples being AION, conan, warhammer online, vanguard etc all being pretty crap compared to the unmentionable top dog in mmo atm lol

Also agree. I cancelled my subscription to PC Gamer magazine after their 90%+ Far Cry 2 review. No way I was going to keep paying £5/month for a mag that can't even prioritise their readers over their advertisers.
 
Soldato
Joined
22 Feb 2010
Posts
5,110
Location
Southampton
other than the pcgamer fc2 review (it was a very good game with just one major flaw)
they are about the only magazine that seems to review fairly

pc zone seem to always get early reviews in exchange for positive reviews
notice how pc gamer are always release date reviews - thats because the publishers dont seem let them review it in advance

ign just use the same xbox / ps3 review for pc and change the title

metacritic are good in theory but seem to take the brunt of protest reviews (about drm etc)
 
Associate
Joined
13 Feb 2004
Posts
2,282
Location
Wales
I also use Metacritic, checking review sites and user reviews there.

And I also check forums for people's opinions.

And haven't read a review in a games mag for years. But when I was buying them. I'd read PC Zone and PC Gamer.
 
Back
Top Bottom