Originally Posted by ihadFG I think a slightly biased review from a dev is still more honest and useful than a review from a random dude on the internet who didn't even play through the game and gave it a 0 because everyone is saying it is different from DA1.

Exactly. Opinions are fairly useless in general, but there's no more useless opinion than those posted by users on the internet.

Fanboy bias, people being more prone to bitch when they dislike something or have problems than to take the time to praise something they enjoy etc.

So I just don't see the big deal. At the end of the day the only opinion that matters is your own, and if you want to use reviews it's best to look at the average among professional reviewers to get a sense of whether a game/movie/etc. is worth checking out on your own than the stupid user ratings that are full of bias. Professional reviews can be as well, but they're (when there are several of the anyway) at least a bit more believable to be at least somewhat objective than the user reviews that have no accountable mechanisms at all. At least professional reviewers can be fired if they're found being too biased.

Originally Posted by ihadFG I actually don't doubt that the Bioware employee was genuine in thinking the game is great. The review was based on his opinion of the game. He is also biased though, so that is where the issue comes in. But this is also a user review section, which is full of trolls and fanboys and just general idiots in the first place. I think a slightly biased review from a dev is still more honest and useful than a review from a random dude on the internet who didn't even play through the game and gave it a 0 because everyone is saying it is different from DA1.

This is still a step up from the user review system that they had before where you didn't even need an account to write up a review, which lead to every system exclusive game getting really low scores by trolling fanboys.

Originally Posted by FriskyTanuki This is still a step up from the user review system that they had before where you didn't even need an account to write up a review, which lead to every system exclusive game getting really low scores by trolling fanboys.

A step up sure. But it's still not anywhere near relevant. Dragon Age 2 has a user average of 3-4 across all three platforms. Apparently people are still willing to make an account so they can give the game a 0.

Originally Posted by FriskyTanuki I don't think the FTC regulates user reviews nor do they seem to have much presence in video game blogs since that's the only thing I've seen about the ruling.

It's probably because a company or consumer won't get much if it goes after a video game blogger on a review. =)

Restaurants and other businesses that rely on repeat business, getting a bad review on a blog could be killer. And plus you have Yelp acting Mafia-like spotlighting negative reviews if that certain business doesn't want to pay ad money...

And anyway, professional video game reviews are a joke anyway, haha.

Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

Originally Posted by randall82 It really isn't that he wrote the review that bothers me. While unethical, that can be explained away. It's the fact that this is viewed as "business as usual", and this one just happened to get caught. We might not look at reviews as something to take seriously, but sadly, the industry does. People's livelihoods are tied to a number. It effects whether studios get work or not, what studios get shutdown, and more importantly, it effects the bonuses and job security of the PR department of the publisher. When score is king, nothing else matters. That's why embargoes are allowed to be broken early if a certain score is met. It's why certain publications get review copies while others don't. Objectivity is lost when PR Reps are under so much pressure to control the discussion that they resort to unethical behaviors to change public perception. If we want to hold up game journalism as something to be taken seriously, we have to realize that such unethical behavior is an attack to its cornerstone, objectivity.

Except game reviews are inherently subjective.

Originally Posted by randall82 He might not have to, but I think it's unethical for him not to disclose that he's obviously biased. No one is saying you can't comment on your own work or be proud of your accomplishments, but not disclosing that you had a part in making it, to me, is shady.

Every reviewer comes in with a certain set of biases coming into a review. We are just talking about different levels of bias.

Originally Posted by msdmoney Except game reviews are inherently subjective.

I think he just meant lack of bias and favoritism though (in regards to websites and companies). Or at least that's how I took it. Either way, you could replace "objectivity" with professionalism, and his points are still valid.

Originally Posted by ihadFG A step up sure. But it's still not anywhere near relevant. Dragon Age 2 has a user average of 3-4 across all three platforms. Apparently people are still willing to make an account so they can give the game a 0.

I never said it was relevant, just that they acknowledged the issues and have moved to something that at least makes it harder to just submit reviews anonymously to mess with the scores.

I don't know what they could do to legitimize the user reviews, as you'd probably have to require all user reviews to be submitted in writing to cut out the random 10/0 scores and require some sort of approval process where the community would have to approve the reviews to a certain degree that would allow it to show up to the public and count in the average user score.