What's the worst article about videogames you ever read? I'm not interested in the violent videogame controversy - I'm really just looking for articles about videogames where the author gets everything wrong.

Any and every review written by Jim Sterling over on Destructoid.

Originally Posted by Nogib Any and every review written by Jim Sterling over on Destructoid.

Not really?

Yeah, really can't agree with the Sterling hate. I enjoy his articles a great deal even if I do disagree with some of his opinions.

http://www.joystiq.com/2010/05/03/nier-review-fail/

There's tons out there... basically anything that says video games = violent kids/murderers/killers.

But there's one that always sticks out to me because the allegations are so idiotic. It's not an article, but a blog post that had to do with Fat Princess.
http://www.shakesville.com/2008/07/i-write-letters.html

It's pretty clear that she didn't play the game but she's blowing the issue of "fat princess" way out of proporti... I mean, she has no real arguments. How does the game create "fat hating assholes"?

Tom Chick

Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

I guess if I were to pick one off the top of my head, it would be Destructoid's review of Deadly Premonition.

The game is full of bland, broken gaming mechanics and terrible dialogue, yet the game gets a 10/10 because of it's kooky charm and Twin Peaks vibe (OT fun fact: I was just in Twin Peaks yesterday). I can understand that people like the weird vibe of the game, and even that reviews can be subjective, but that doesn't mean that reviews are just some sort of free-for-all. It's the perfect example of why I don't put any trust in yelp or other user reviews sites and lament the rise of "blogger journalism": someone get fixated on one thing and puts the weight of their entire review on it while ignoring all the other important criteria. This is supposed to be a major gaming site, but to me, this review is no different than the user reviews you see that say things like "Just saw the commercial for MW2 with the Eminem song! So stoked for this 10/10!!!!!"

Not an article, but...



videogames.png

EGMs review of Assassins Creed. The guy just said the game was terrible because Ubisoft wouldnt give him a copy of the game early.

Anita Sarkeesian (of crappy Feminist Frequency fame) had such a bad analysis of Bayonetta that even she removed this video from her channel:

http://www.ign.com/articles/2009/02/...-evil-5-racist

and every article on Kotaku

Originally Posted by Rozz Anita Sarkeesian (of crappy Feminist Frequency fame) had such a bad analysis of Bayonetta that even she removed this video from her channel:

Originally Posted by iamsmart I guess if I were to pick one off the top of my head, it would be Destructoid's review of Deadly Premonition. The game is full of bland, broken gaming mechanics and terrible dialogue, yet the game gets a 10/10 because of it's kooky charm and Twin Peaks vibe (OT fun fact: I was just in Twin Peaks yesterday). I can understand that people like the weird vibe of the game, and even that reviews can be subjective, but that doesn't mean that reviews are just some sort of free-for-all. It's the perfect example of why I don't put any trust in yelp or other user reviews sites and lament the rise of "blogger journalism": someone get fixated on one thing and puts the weight of their entire review on it while ignoring all the other important criteria. This is supposed to be a major gaming site, but to me, this review is no different than the user reviews you see that say things like "Just saw the commercial for MW2 with the Eminem song! So stoked for this 10/10!!!!!"

I don't understand why someone isn't allowed to have their own opinion? It sounds like you're suggesting that there HAS to be some objective value to which games are compared to?

Originally Posted by linkpwns I don't understand why someone isn't allowed to have their own opinion? It sounds like you're suggesting that there HAS to be some objective value to which games are compared to?

Are you suggesting there should be no objective value to a professionally written review?

To me it has to be hands down the bashing of Medal of Honor Warfighter. All of the major review sites bashed the game because it wasn't Call of Duty. I have never bought or not bought a game because of a good or bad review. If you read off duty gamer's review and you actually played the game, you will agree with what they had to say. If anybody's review mattered it should be theirs, those guys were actually in the millitary and know what is authentic and what is not.

Originally Posted by JasonTerminator In her defense, she reuploaded it with a focus on the advertisement later on: http://www.feministfrequency.com/201...ment-training/ Of course, you calling the Feminist Frequency "crappy" makes me think you're one of the people who were "outraged" by her Kickstarter, god forbid people actually talk about the sexism in gaming.

Yes, just because I don't like her channel or opinions makes me one of the angry trolls that verbally assaulted her. The fact that she even had to re-upload something else later shows how little research or thought is put into her shit (beyond the fact that it has a very nice presentation). It's not that I want to censor people's opinions about sexism in gaming (as it seems like you're trying to imply), it's the way she presents her viewpoints. Also, it's funny how she apparently doesn't approve well-rounded arguments (in the comments section of her videos) but purposely approves vulgar "troll" comments in an attempt to make herself look good to her cheerleaders.

Originally Posted by linkpwns I don't understand why someone isn't allowed to have their own opinion?

I don't know why I bothered to write so much just for it to be ignored. I specifically acknowledge that reviews will always be subjective and you come back with "so what, people can't have their own opinions now!?"

It sounds like you're suggesting that there HAS to be some objective value to which games are compared to?

Reviews will always have an element of subjectiveness to them, that doesn't mean there aren't guidelines to follow. Proper gaming reviews detail the various elements of a game (presentation, playability, graphics, etc.) and how they perform: there will never be an equation for grading these elements, but that doesn't mean there aren't established ideas of good and bad. Generally, even if one particular elements is amazing while the rest are shit, they're not going to give the game a 10/10, a mark of near-perfection. That's what Destructoid did, and that's why they are poo-poo. I'm sorry: IN MY OPINION that's why they are poo-poo.

Originally Posted by fatmanforlife99 To me it has to be hands down the bashing of Medal of Honor Warfighter. All of the major review sites bashed the game because it wasn't Call of Duty. I have never bought or not bought a game because of a good or bad review. If you read off duty gamer's review and you actually played the game, you will agree with what they had to say. If anybody's review mattered it should be theirs, those guys were actually in the millitary and know what is authentic and what is not.

I think it brings up an interesting discussion on how to review these annual franchises with the same "tried but true" gameplay: even if the game is polished and plays well, at what point do you start deducting for a lack of innovation? Personally I'm sick of the genre, but I'm still surprised that MoH got such low marks just for being the same old FPS, while BLOPS2 was treated like it reinvented the wheel for its modest changes.

Originally Posted by The Crotch Not an article, but... videogames.png

I hope that guy is being ironic. If not - winner!