-"I feel like they're the only people who don't overrate shitty games."
Truth be told, you'll eventually find any outlet/reviewer will overrate something you despised. Some of their past issues were wildly kind to some indie games I wasn't too fond of (We Are OFK for example).
I mean... that's a weird one depending on how insular you're trying to be. It's more well-rounded than the MW reboot by default of not having a laughably mismanaged co-op this time, but it's still incredibly dumb and uneven. I agree that it's very highest threshold you can go in its current state.
@sinspirit
Invoking the definition of a word shouldn't be considered "overthinking it." These terms mean something and just casually tying a broad consensus with 'factual' is the kind of nonsense I hope we move away from.
-"We need experienced reviewers of a genre for a fair review based on their total experience and ability to compare it to other games in the genre to give an objective score on where it stands, exceeds, or fal...
@sinspirit
Ironically enough, that's *OBJECTIVELY* incorrect. Look at the first meaning of "objective" in any standard dictionary:
https://www.merriam-webster...
The core purpose of that word is to remove *ANY* sense of personal opinion. Having some general consensus doesn't get around that either.
-"I'm sure som...
@Crows90
That is not how objectivity works. lol
Just because a bunch of people arrive at a similar consensus doesn't mean that morphs into a fact. Imagine how little room that leaves for criticism if you just assume a collective of people have determined what *x creative work* deserves (with recency bias no less). Reviews are and will continue to be inherently subjective because that's the nature of opinions.
-"I couldn&#...
I don't get how you can agree with the review when it doesn't say "this is just God of War DLC for max price!" It's literally a recommended buy in the summary.
Welp... since my name's been casually invoked and you've decided to spread disinformation at the same time, I guess I *HAVE* to respond. Sure, I've challenged heated comments against their reviews before, but no bans have been handed down unless they violate guidelines or they're alt accounts (which is against the rules). Take the one obvious case within this comment section: Snarkbark. Regardless if he spread anti-GOW or pro-GOW opinions, there's clear evidence of him ...
It's rumored that Sam G tries his material out at rap battles too. ;)
@Senor
Sadly, it's one of the go-to moves of this site: bring up something critical of *x game*, wait for bias accusations, and have everyone agree with that person. If users didn't know my account on here, guarantee I could clean up on agree votes just by making the most inane fanboy rebuttals.
@Extermin8or3_
-"How the hell did you manage to become a MOD with crap takes like the one above."
If I were to guess: by actually having a decent reading comprehension and enough sense to properly follow the context of a conversation. Seriously, do some of you deliberately not bother internalizing the words I'm saying or the context of my response? Once again, showering a game you like with praise (ON ITS OWN!) shouldn't immediately su...
-"Play the game, then reply to ny comment again if you'd like."
Nah. I think I'm okay to just continue commenting right now. Like I just said before, there doesn't need to be this reached threshold to reply as I have b/c opinions on Ragnorok was never my intention.
-"What doesn't make me happy is when someone on "the other side" does their best to make something look bad, where there is nothing "bad" to...
@Erick21
Are you even considering the context of my comment or just being deliberately obtuse? If an article is critical about *ONE ASPECT* of a highly-rated game and your response is "hmm digging to nitpick this untouchable masterpiece, are we?" then... yeah, that does reek of weird desperation. The inverse of this can ALSO be true (i.e. acting like a bad game can't have a good quality worth examining in an article).
Yeah, yeah the old &q...
If you're trying *THIS* desperately to shower its praises, you do more to harm than help its reputation. I haven't played a second of Ragnarok, but this kind of cringe-inducing reflex intuitively makes me wonder if you're trying to convince yourself into an opinion.
Hell, even the writer's criticism is benign: "I liked the more relatable & simple story structure of its predecessor." What convinced you to go DEFCON-2 over this?
The previous mainline CoD title.
Have to say it: one of the greatest games of all time.
As opposed to a publication littered with 8s and 9s?
-"This is not how data works. I have studied data science and they have to specify a standard that can be communicated."
Okay cool. Then your extensive knowledge of data science would reveal the disparity between 'data' and opinion. We're talking about an artistic medium where subjective feelings, though hopefully still grounded on basic observable info, guide whether a game is great, good, mediocre, and so on to said reviewer(s). Within that contex...
I'm genuinely confused here. Do you think EDGE (or any other site) is rigorously scoring every title by ONE specific standard? I thought it's already assumed that they're looking at that game's specific goals (genre, potential story, etc.) and calculating where it falls in their score rubric.
I love when he said that part and then waked all over those guys.
It looks genuinely fun too. I have to get to playing it soon.