Gameinformer reviews

XCOM: Enemy Unknown - 9.5/10 (Game of the Month)

Joe Danger 2: The Movie - 8.25/10

Double Dragon Neon - 8.25/10

NHL 13 - 8/10

Pro Evolution Soccer 2013 - 8.75/10

FIFA 13 - 8.75/10

Resident Evil 6 - 8.75/10

Mark of the Ninja - 9/10

Dance Central 3 - 8.75/10

Pokemon Black & White 2 - 7.5/10

LittleBigPlanet Vita - 8.75/10

There are five different covers for this issue, as their "under-the-radar titles".

Fuse
Dead Island: Riptide
Beyond: Two Souls
Metro: Last Light - I lost this pic.

Ninokuni:

Tom Jam and Earl coming to PSN/XBLA

This funky fresh news makes me so happy I could almost bust out with an early 90's rap.

Iga_Bobovic said:

The BS surrounding the 10s from GTA4 are well known. Why are you guys acting like it is new news?

When I write "Remember this", does the word remember not indicate that I am asking people to recall old news?

Archangel3371 said:

If what he says is true then like I said before I really doubt that it's something that's really so widespread and epidemic.

I can see it happening in bigger companies where large revenue comes from advertising. Less so for smaller outfits. Look it's like politics, money is influence, gaming media makes money from advertising, advertising the very same games they are covering. If a large publisher is buying huge blocks of advertising each year and threatens to pull it because their game won't get top marks you can see pressure being applied to up scores. This guy writes for Eurogamer and has written across the Future Network involving EDGE mag, CVG, PC Gamer etc and he has worked with or knows people from OXM and more. He's confirming all this.

Archangel3371 said:

Secondly pretty much all the top AAA games I've played have been as good as most of the reviews have said so it's not like I really have any where I can point my finger at and say for certain that there's any misdeeds going on there.

But you like everything.  

Archangel3371 said:

I can most certainly agree to disagree.

YOU CANNOT HEATHEN

gamingeek said:

Iga_Bobovic said:

The BS surrounding the 10s from GTA4 are well known. Why are you guys acting like it is new news?

When I write "Remember this", does the word remember not indicate that I am asking people to recall old news?

In the words of the great Tony Stark: "Whoops"

Archangel3371 said:

Meh. Not much to say on what that freelance writer is saying about the pressure for better reviews. If what he says is true then like I said before I really doubt that it's something that's really so widespread and epidemic. Secondly pretty much all the top AAA games I've played have been as good as most of the reviews have said so it's not like I really have any where I can point my finger at and say for certain that there's any misdeeds going on there.

Your problem is that you close your eyes and disregard every evidence pointing the other way.

The fact that the reviewers are paid by the same guys which product they review is a HUGE conflict of interest. Please explain to me how this is in any shape or form acceptable. Using the argument that you never disagreed with the score does not mean a thing. It just mean that you happen to like those games. Or maybe you like all games. Who knows.

Crap I had a good post written out and it crashed. Basically saying that yeah it's a conflict of interest but they need to make money. Unless you can have a non-partial BBC like gaming review site. And that this reviews malarky does not apply to everyone, some mags are different, some publishers don't push for scores like Capcom, Nintendo etc. Some others like R* are worse. Just saying I/we are not saying all reviews are corrupt or whatever. Seems like in terms of actually scoring games, reviewers scores get changed by management, publishers "control everything" as the journalist says. Exclusive scores are upped for platform specific mags/sites.

In some instances.

You know what? Fuck everyone.

SteelAttack said:

You know what? Fuck everyone.

Me first!