Should Eurogamer have second opinions on reviews?

  • Page

    of 5 First / Last

    Previous
  • khaz 22 May 2012 16:03:21 2,782 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Normally I wouldn't bother with something like this as I generally ignore the review scores - especially as I tend to find them uhh, inflated to put it generously - but the Diablo 3 mess has got me interested in something @Mugwum actually said in the comments section of this article:

    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-05-17-always-online-what-diablo-3s-battle-net-does-wrong

    He states: "Or maybe it makes us look like a place with more than one writer and viewpoint."

    If EG truly believed this they would have second opinions as standard across the board and not just in what looked like a damage limitation exercise (And rightly so) to many people.

    Discuss.
  • Deleted user 22 May 2012 16:06:31
    Game scores, serious bizniz
  • Lexx87 22 May 2012 16:08:06 20,869 posts
    Seen 9 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    You mean because in that short amount of time ol' Brammers banged out a well thought out interesting article to go with Oli's out of quick desperation did he? I see now.

    Speak the truth hussy!

  • Deleted user 22 May 2012 16:08:21
    No, just read other sites as well as this one for second opinions.
  • khaz 22 May 2012 16:14:38 2,782 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Aargh. wrote:
    No, just read other sites as well as this one for second opinions.
    Its what I usually do but many sites follow similar scoring policies to EG but that isn't the point I think. And i've never understood why second opinions aren't common in game reviews especially because they're fundamentally different from other forms of entertainment.

    We take an active participation in games and this leads to very very subjective opinions on whatever the game might be based on player input. I don't see why we can't have two people offering an opinion so that readers might have a more rounded view of a game.

    Edited by khaz at 16:15:16 22-05-2012
  • richarddavies 22 May 2012 16:15:11 2,627 posts
    Seen 10 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    I just use the reviews to give me an idea about whether a game will be my cup of tea anyway. Not too arsed about there score on the end. I'll decide for myself. That won't change if they use 2 reviewers, or 3 or 5 etc.
  • coomber 22 May 2012 16:15:23 326 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Reviews very rarely influence me at all. If I like the look of a game I'll buy it. I ignore opinions in a review and gleam the information I want: the facts. I don't need to read them twice.
  • disusedgenius 22 May 2012 16:18:42 5,284 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    They do second opinions every now anyway: just when it's either relevant or a slow month. As your link shows.

    /isn't getting the issue
  • khaz 22 May 2012 16:19:32 2,782 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    disusedgenius wrote:
    They do second opinions every now anyway: just when it's either relevant or a slow month. As your link shows.

    /isn't getting the issue
    That's what i'm asking. Why should it only be done when its a slow month or its relevant. Why isn't it standard?
  • JinTypeNoir 22 May 2012 16:21:50 4,377 posts
    Seen 10 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Second opinions could be nice if Eurogamer could afford it and by that I mean, Eurogamer already does less reviews than some of its peers. Second opinions might cut into that even more.

    It's also a problem of who writes them. Compared to the old days, there aren't as many on the staff as eloquent and able as Tom and Oli.
  • MrTomFTW Moderator 22 May 2012 16:21:50 37,849 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    khaz wrote:
    Aargh. wrote:
    No, just read other sites as well as this one for second opinions.
    Its what I usually do but many sites follow similar scoring policies to EG but that isn't the point I think. And i've never understood why second opinions aren't common in game reviews especially because they're fundamentally different from other forms of entertainment.

    We take an active participation in games and this leads to very very subjective opinions on whatever the game might be based on player input. I don't see why we can't have two people offering an opinion so that readers might have a more rounded view of a game.
    Oh yeah, we used to have this back in the day. It was called "reading Crash, then checking out Your Sinclair as well".

    Follow me on Twitter: @MrTom
    Voted by the community "Best mod" 2011, 2012 and 2013.

  • disusedgenius 22 May 2012 16:23:08 5,284 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    khaz wrote:
    Why isn't it standard?
    Because if it isn't relevant it's pretty much by definition redundant.
  • Deckard1 22 May 2012 16:24:16 27,732 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Why just second opinions? I'd like 10. Or ONE HUNDRED!!!! CAN YOU IMAGINE ONE HUNDRED OPINIONS. WE'D REALLY GET TO THE BOTTOM OF SOME SHIT!!

    One hundred would probably be a bit silly the more I think of it. I would like 86 opinions.

    Hush you ponce

  • khaz 22 May 2012 16:30:45 2,782 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    disusedgenius wrote:
    khaz wrote:
    Why isn't it standard?
    Because if it isn't relevant it's pretty much by definition redundant.
    I don't understand. How is a second opinion ever not relevant? The whole point is that it (usually) offers a different take on something.
  • mcmothercruncher 22 May 2012 16:33:18 6,813 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    They should certainly mention technical issues in the review more thoroughly- or in the case of too many games- at all.
  • Fake_Blood 22 May 2012 16:35:28 4,169 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    You're just butthurt because your favorite game didn't get the score you wanted.
  • Deleted user 22 May 2012 16:36:51
    For one thing - it doubles the cost of reviewing (people have to be paid for their work after all) for no actual benefit. For another, the number of games that are divisive enough to even require a second opinion are pretty minimal.
  • khaz 22 May 2012 16:37:35 2,782 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Fake_Blood wrote:
    You're just butthurt because your favorite game didn't get the score you wanted.
    Yeah, Diablo 3 got a 9. Clearly i'm very butthurt.
  • nickthegun 22 May 2012 16:37:36 59,492 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    It should be like famitsu where they have four worthless opinions rather than one decent one.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    He totally called it

  • Inertia 22 May 2012 16:37:41 677 posts
    Seen 3 weeks ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    I think your remark about good games being more subjective, and hence need a second opinion, because we engage with them more than music or books or whatever is way off the mark. I think good games are easier to rate than music or books where too many other factors can sway an opinion.

    I don't always like every "good" game but I think I could throw out a top ten this year, last year etc that most people would generally agree with. Do that with movies, books or music and each list could be totally different.

    What makes a good game is quite obvious when we play them. I didn't like Dark Souls but I could see why people did, the mechanics and mystery if you wished to spend time playing were in place for a good game despite technical limitations.

    And surely metacritic is exactly what you want, no?
  • Kanjin 22 May 2012 16:38:03 1,092 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    @mcmothercruncher Agreed. For games like Skyrim it would have been very helpful to know.

    On the topic. I don't see the point really. Why not go to another site, like suggested? A review is only an opinion after all.
  • Fake_Blood 22 May 2012 16:41:10 4,169 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Who reads reviews anyways these days? I pretty much just look at the score, then bugger off to giantbomb or gametrailers to see the game in action and form my own opinion.
  • Deckard1 22 May 2012 16:44:44 27,732 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    They should just replace every review with this, amirite eh amirite

    Hush you ponce

  • dsmx 22 May 2012 16:53:25 7,589 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Games need to start being marked down for being broken, lots of high profile games have been released from big publishers and they always score highly even though the gameplay is crippled by bugs and exploits.

    You can draw your own conclusions on why that is the case, I already have and thus it makes any score that eurogamer gives completely meaningless.

    "If we hit that bullseye the rest of the dominoes will fall like a a house of cards, checkmate." Zapp Brannigan

  • disusedgenius 22 May 2012 16:55:43 5,284 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    They should also revisit them later to check on the service/patch progress. Probably better than a second opinion at the same time.

    Edit: though one of the big problems is that not everyone is affected by the same bug.

    Edited by disusedgenius at 16:56:12 22-05-2012
  • Deleted user 22 May 2012 17:08:53
    khaz wrote:
    Aargh. wrote:
    No, just read other sites as well as this one for second opinions.
    Its what I usually do but many sites follow similar scoring policies to EG but that isn't the point I think. And i've never understood why second opinions aren't common in game reviews especially because they're fundamentally different from other forms of entertainment.

    We take an active participation in games and this leads to very very subjective opinions on whatever the game might be based on player input. I don't see why we can't have two people offering an opinion so that readers might have a more rounded view of a game.
    If subjectivity is that vital then 2 opinions isn't enough.

    Just look at the metacritic score. That's the best measure of a game's worth.
  • dancingrob 22 May 2012 17:15:35 1,162 posts
    Seen 10 hours ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Is reading the reviews to complicated for some people or something?

    If you do that, you'll have a much better idea of whether the game is something you'll enjoy, far more than if you simply look at the big 8 at the end...
  • King_Edward 22 May 2012 17:18:39 11,454 posts
    Seen 1 month ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    I could offer second opinions on most reviews if you'd like?

    Edited by King_Edward at 17:18:49 22-05-2012
  • nickthegun 22 May 2012 17:22:10 59,492 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Things that require a second opinion: cancer

    Things that do not require a second opinion: video games

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    He totally called it

  • MrTomFTW Moderator 22 May 2012 17:26:58 37,849 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    King_Edward wrote:
    I could offer second opinions on most reviews if you'd like?
    I would read that. Have at it!

    Follow me on Twitter: @MrTom
    Voted by the community "Best mod" 2011, 2012 and 2013.

  • Page

    of 5 First / Last

    Previous
Log in or register to reply