• I saw the same kind of points being made in a lot of reviews for this game, too. It seems counter-intuitive that nobody’s trying to form a divergent opinion. Or rather that nobody is trying to cover or discuss exactly what the others might not. But then again, game reviews that are point-based submit to the same system: how highly do I rank it?

    I think score systems are stupid.

    It should be about who it’s for. Like, “If you love violent Greek mythology with lots of quick-time-events, you’re gonna be right at home.” And, “Think Kratos is a juvenile caricature designed purely to indulge adolescent power fantasies? None of that’s changed. These are not the droids you’re looking for.” As for multiplayer, “Have you ever wanted God of War to be a multiplayer game? No? Well, then there’s nothing to see here.”

    Review done.

    Then again, I haven’t even touched the game. So maybe I’m completely off my rocker.

    • I think score systems are good! It’s a basis for comparison – is game X in this genre comparable to game Y? I like to know that information. More often than not, though, the person writing said review is neither an expert nor a very good critic, and thus end up parroting the same exact thing as everyone else.

      • Score systems are simple reductions of greater realities. I have a terrible habit of going straight to scores and hardly reading reviews because it tells me what they think right away. And truly it’s just a scale of an opinion. So if you’re a general consumer, it’s often up to the whims of that reviewer’s tastes and preferences more than it is some kind of empiric system. For years, I missed out on great games because I trusted review systems.

        I’ll be curious if you give a game 5 stars. But that doesn’t mean I’m really going to find it to be a “5 star game.” Our tastes are diametric As such, it’s sometimes best just to learn what reviewers you identify with the most.

        Still, that can be pretty taxing…

        I like Kotaku’s review system more than any others (not to say they’re the best reviewers, but I like their system). It’s more reductive than it used to be (a list of positives and negatives). But I find it super helpful to quickly grasp what the charm or uncharm is of an experience. Also, their “back of the box quotes” are surprisingly useful.

        • A reduction, yeah, but a ideally helpful one. It’s better than buying a sixty dollar product and finding you don’t like it, yes? The opinion of an expert does hold more value than that of the layman when it comes to video games; I’m not looking for Jeff Gerstmann to give me an opinion on a fighting game’s merits – I’d rather go to Shoryuken and see what they have to say (even then, it’s difficult to say whether a game will remain competitive or someone will find cheats/glitches in the system).

          Video games are products – that much is true – and this is why they don’t review free games for the most part (unless official releases from the companies themselves – Mega Man X Street Fighter, for example).

          I don’t find Kotaku reviews helpful at all. It’s like “buy or don’t buy”, but it doesn’t describe anything in enough detail for me to get what they’re saying. The MGR:R one felt nigh useless to someone like me. What’s good about it in comparison to other 3D third person action games? I couldn’t tell.