How important are videogame review scores to you?

[Scrubking]

And what do they mean to you when reading reviews?

By scores I mean the 8,9 and 10's given out alongside text reviews.

[CaseyRyback]

extremely important. Mainly because if Gamespot gives it a high score, the majority of the time I am really pleased with the game.

The one exception I can think of was Freedom Fighters, but aside from that they are pretty good at providing me a basis of how much I should spend on a game.

[zewone]

I base buying games off of the scores EGM gives. They usually are right about what I would give a game. Hasn't failed me since like 94'. Other games I probably wouldn't buy anyways I'll just rent if I was even a little bit intrested. Just to try it out for myself.

[dude2003]

review scores dont affect me
i already have a list of games i want and will wait till it's $20 or under (true CAG) before purchase. i do read reviews however it's not important to have a game have high scores

[mombbsmj]

I look at the scores first to see how good the game was at a glance but then I read the review because sometimes in they will say things in the review which will make me want to get the game or not regardless of the score it received.

[hutno]

I usually go with an average of different magazines. I tend to ignore certian magazines like PSM which I had read a lot but gave up on when they started handing out highscores to everything. I still rely mostly on word of mouth

[Scrubking]

The reason for the question is because 2 editors from EGM admitted to giving "generous" (or false however you want to look at it), scores for games they have reviewed.

"Also, the other two reviewers of FFX-2 were blinded by all the flesh flashing: my 8.5 was maybe a little generous..." - Shane

"Since we're being honest here, then I'll come clean - I scored 'Enter the Matrix' too high." - Bryan

EGM Issue 184

[zewone]

The reason for the question is because 2 editors from EGM admitted to giving "generous" (or false however you want to look at it), scores for games they have reviewed.

"Also, the other two reviewers of FFX-2 were blinded by all the flesh flashing: my 8.5 was maybe a little generous..." - Shane

"Since we're being honest here, then I'll come clean - I scored 'Enter the Matrix' too high." - Bryan

EGM Issue 184

I read that. But I know where there coming from. Sometimes when I first play a game I get caught up in how awesome a certain aspect of game is to really see the true gameplay underneath. This happend when I was play Enter the Matrix. I thought it was awesome at first, but then I kept playing it and I was like "This is shit."

[Scrubking]

The reason for the question is because 2 editors from EGM admitted to giving "generous" (or false however you want to look at it), scores for games they have reviewed.

"Also, the other two reviewers of FFX-2 were blinded by all the flesh flashing: my 8.5 was maybe a little generous..." - Shane

"Since we're being honest here, then I'll come clean - I scored 'Enter the Matrix' too high." - Bryan

EGM Issue 184

I read that. But I know where there coming from. Sometimes when I first play a game I get caught up in how awesome a certain aspect of game is to really see the true gameplay underneath. This happend when I was play Enter the Matrix. I thought it was awesome at first, but then I kept playing it and I was like "This is shit."

If that is the case then how can people expect to make purchase decisions off of faulty information? Already some have voted that scores are "extremely important" or use them to make purchase decisions.

[Alpha2]

It depends on the source of the scores... I gave up on EGMs craptacular scores like 8 years ago, and they obviously haven't figured out how to score games YET.

half the time people like EGM and Gamepro are too stunned by the flashiness of a new game and are induced to give it a great score just because it looks great. other times they completly ignore the true quality aspects of a game such as control and fun factor just because they dont like the genre. (WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU REVIEWING A GAME WHEN YOU SAY YOU DONT EVEN LIKE THE GENRE?) ...ahem.

I much rather READ what they have to say about a game regardless of how retarded their reasons are for not liking a game because they MIGHT make a valid point one day (In EGMs case probably not, so I dont even read them anymore), while their number reviews can go from 8 = "this was a great game" to 7 = "festering pile of moose dung" and gets on my nerves.

I like Gamespot's reviews because the number is secondary to the actual review where they actually make points about the pros and cons of the game so YOU can make a decision on the game rather than editorializing on how they hate the game because it reminds them of their mother or some shit.

[levi333]

Fairly important. If theres a game that im interested in, but not sure if i want to buy, then i pay attention to them. but of course theres always games taht ill get no matter what the scores are.

[ElwoodCuse]

Anyone who has ever whined on a message board about "BLASPHEMY this website/magazine only rated this game xxx HOW COULD THEY IT'S THE BEST GAME EVER" need to be banned from the internet. As if a lower score than you expected from a publication suddenly means you like the game less.

Same thing goes to anyone who ever defended a crappily reviewed game by saying "oh yeah then why don't YOU make a better game".

[Indiana]

It's extremely important. I do not have time to play many games. So, I buy what got rated nicely and looks good. Plus it has to be $20 or less. I'm a CAG after all.

Back in the old days I would rent games and try them out. Now games are so long and there are so many that I only get to rent the games that I REALLY think I would like before buying them. And I just buy games if they are $15 or less since rentals now cost $6 or more.

[epobirs]

Blind reviews from a unfamiliar source are of limited use, unless it's a good writer who effectively conveys his rationales, pro and con. A reviewer I've grown acustomed to is more useful since I have a good idea of how his tastes match and/or differ from mine.

The best is a cross section of reviews.Sometimes that one rebel in the group who loved while everyone else hated it or vice versa, might turn out to be the same kind of oddball as yourself. Whenever I see a rebel score in a gamerankings profile I have to check it out.

A lot depends on whether I'm spending real money or not. I've intentionally bought some atrocious games for $5 or less just because I wanted to appreciate their awfulness first hand. It's the Mistie in me.

[Alpha2]

Reveiws from multiple people in one magazine are the least relyable in my opinion. Why? because you can say "reviewer #2 is just like me!" and then the glowing review he was going to give to a game is poisoned by a comment from reviewer #4 during lunch or something.

If I want multiple imperssions, I get them from completly unconnected sources. that way if they make the same comment about a bad menu screen or poor controll I know it's more likely an actual problem then spill over from someone else.

[WhipSmartBanky]

One review from one source won't cut it for me. I'll typically hit http://www.gamerankings.com and look at the overall picture.

[Parathod]

Somewhat important. In general they are pretty accurate. I do like some games that get bad reviews as well as hate some games that get good ones. However, I only trust reviews from places like Gamespot, IGN, PlanetGamecube, Gamespy, or EGM. So a score on a site like Gamefaqs, means little to nothing to me. There are way too many gamers out there whose opinions on games are baseless (sometimes even my own).

As a side note, I don't trust every magazine/webzine either. Gamepro, Nintendo Power, and PSM are used as references for game information, but not as legitimate sources for game reviews.

[KingDox]

I read the Reviews, IGN is pretty good with reviews, but after I read a review I check out the message board posts and see if the game really is any good. I usually wait for a price drop, by the time price drops come around you know if the game is good or bad.

[paz9x]

the actual scores mean almost nothing, they may inspire to look into a game I wasnt aware of if it has a high score. or read over a review of why a game got such a horrible review.

I will read a description of a game, see how well or how poorly the reviewer feels different aspects of the game were executed.
I know what things I like in my games and I try to see how they feel those things were done.

Since I found out about this site the overall opinions on games from our members are far more useful to me than what some a mag puts next to a review.

[R1V3R5]

I will look at a review if I'm on the bench about something. I usually make up my mind about a game or what not prior to any reviws and disregard them otherwise.

[gomer1andonly]

I usually check what other users of sites tend to give a game instead of just going by a magazine/website review. Too many times I'll see a magazine review and frown upon a game(Game Informer giving Mario Party 4 a 3 and Mario Party 5 a 2, both by two reviewers) that is actually alot better than what the score and the text say. I feel alot of times that other users can give me more of an open opinion, especially since it seems more or less they are playing the games to have fun instead of reviewing them just to give a score. With that said, reviews are of somewhat importance if its a game I don't already have my mind set on. If I'm set on a game, screw what anyone else says cause I'm getting it anyways.

[ykryptonite13]

Fairly important, and upgrade it to extremely important if the game in consideration is on the fringe of purchasing. If I'm just lightly thinking about whether a game is worth buying or not and the score is like a low 70%, I'll look at it a lot longer and harder and may decide if it's worth it or not. If it's a Capcom fighter, NHL 2K, or certain RPG's, I basically could care less what the rating is, cuz I'm gonna pick it up regardless.

[Pylis]

I'll read reviews for kicks, just to get a general idea, but unless a games gets a truly shitty score (like under 6), reviews typically don't deter me from a purchase.

[biggestinuyashafan]

it isn't very important to me for review scores. i usually don't buy a game until it is cheaper. i try to get a few people's opinions that have played the game and now that i work at gamestop i get to hear people's opinions all the time.

[jimbodan]

Scores don't matter too much to me, I read the reviews and base my decision on what the reviewers say in them. I'm fairly good at interpreting what they say and applying it to my own likes and dislikes in games. About the only time I pay attention to scores is when I see a game that I wasn't too interested in get really scores, then I'll take the time to read the whole review and decide if it looks good or not.

[sblymnlcrymnl]

One review from one source won't cut it for me. I'll typically hit http://www.gamerankings.com and look at the overall picture.

Same here.

[Dok Diamond]

Soemwhat important, i barely ever buy a game ver $30, but if it gets a good score and i like what i read i usually get it.

[msdmoney]

I usually hit gamerankings then weigh the score vs. the price. Anything around 70% and 10 bucks, I'll probably buy it and try it out. Anything 15 bucks or higher, better have some damn good reviews, and anything around 5 bucks reviews probably don't matter much. For most games you can get an impression on them just from being on these boards, I just use reviews when considering newer more expensive games, otherwise I just wait til its cheap.

[vanlandw]

I normaly know what games i'm going to buy and what I'm not going to buy. After the game comes out i read quickly what they have to say to stay spoiler free. After playing then i go back and see what they have to say and if i agree or whatnot. IGN, videogames.com, teamxbox, gamespot and a few others are the main ones i check out..also game informer mag

[elprincipe]

Not important at all. I've found reviewers' scores to be far divorced from my opinions a majority of the time.

[Sartori]

And what do they mean to you when reading reviews?

By scores I mean the 8,9 and 10's given out alongside text reviews.

Essentially zero. When Gamespot or whoever posts a review and I'm there for news- if it's something I'm interested in I'll check it out (the score). If it receives something I wasn't expecting by quite the margin (like a 5.5 or, likewise, a 9.6) I might check it out. Otherwise I'll just ignore it and do as I was.

[alongx]

Review scores usually push a game from a 'maybe I should purchase this' to 'definitely do/don't get this game'.

[wubb]

For me reviews are the only way to really evaluate a game so they are extremely important. I generally like to look at the aggregate on gamerankings.com as my final word. If a game is in the 80s+ it's usually top quality. In the 70s is usually a good game. 60s+ can be iffy. And if it's below 50, it's usually crap.

I also generally read the full review at IGN, I've been checking their site since the N64 days and it's my favorite. And I get OXM and XBN so I'll read the reviews in there.

I guess my general system is that when a new game comes out if it is hailed by most/all critics as great (Ninja Gaiden for example) I'll keep it in mind as one to pick up for sure. Then when I see a game is on sale for $10 or less I'll check gamerankings.com and if it has a score in the 70s+ I'll usually pick it up unless it is in some genre I hate.

And if we are talking a new franchise I really don't see me paying $30+ for anything that doesn't have a gamerankings score of 90+.

One recent example of dissapointing reviews influencing my decision is Sudeki. I was somewhat looking forward to this game, but a gamerankings score in the low 70s said to me, hold off until this is under $20.

[slidecage]

never cause they are paid to say it

i mean they gave madden2005 a 9 and i hated it it was almost like 2004

[abrannan]

The scores mean little to nothing to me. I know what I like, and I'll usually be able to tell if I'll enjoy a game from the actual words of the the review itself. The numbers scale is too subjective/arbritrary for it to me meaningful to me. Particularly with the categories. They all use the same boring categories:

Gameplay
Sound
Video
Replayability
Overall

What I want to know is, how enjoyable is the game the first 5 hours you played it? How about a week later? How's the mood of the game, the overall presentation? What's the most annoying feature? Does the game innovate, and how well executed were the innovations? Would you recommend it for fans of (Fighting games, shooters, RPGs, stealth action , FPS, MMOs, online players, offline only players)? How much do you think the game should sell for?

[jlarlee]

They are somewhat important to me. I hardly ever buy anything right off the bat which gives me the chance to get reviews from different venues. A bad review will defiently push me to rent a game first. Another good thing about reviews is they usally tell you how long it takes to beat a game. If it is under 10 hours I just rent it and save myself the cash of buying it.

[HOTSHIET]

I like to look at a lot of scores such as from gamespot where they have a quick overview of what others have rated the same game. But I do like word of mouth games the best.

[Rig]

I glance at a review, look at the score, and do one of two things. If it is a great score, I usually pick it up without second though. This is of course checking a few different reviews. If it gets a low score or review and I am still interested, I will rent the game before buying. But most of the time, you will know if a game sucks or not, with or without a review.

[AlbinoNinja]

Extremely important: there are waaaaayyyy too many games for me, just a casual gamer, to play. I go by reviews to make sure that i don't get my money's worth, but also to make sure that the game will be worth my time.

Of course if i see something that looks really cool or creative, like Katamari Damacacy (even if it didnt get great reviews, i still would have tried it), if i tried it at a friends house and really liked it, or rented it and liked it enough and didnt get too far so its worth my money.

[rvdrock]

Did not used to be important to me, but ever since I have been on metacritic.com, I read more reviews than ever. I like how they do an overall ranking based on ALL of the scores given, I just tend to ignore the overseas ones. So thats what I use to determine what games I get.

[Admiral Ackbar]

I'm very keen on the Gamespot reviews. I think they're some of the most professional reviews on the webs. Also, their numbers are usually pretty indicative on the greatness of a game.