Adam Sessler bitches about people bitching about games

If someone doesn't like something that's that (their time, time money, their opinion). Enjoying something on its own merit can be difficult when there are so many things to compare something to... and if it's not near being as good as something you've played in the past, is that meant to be overlooked? Maybe if you've got money to burn. Or perhaps he's just finding another way of saying, 'if we wind up giving you a turd, shut up and like it.'

Though to be perfectly honest, while some may be overly critical, the opposite is true of the gaming press, anything with a bit of hype is great (9-10). He probably just gets grated when players call a spade a spade, when they said it was pure gold (e.g, Oblivion, the critics give it 94% on average, while players give it 76%, http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/elderscrolls4oblivion )
 
Metacritic seems to be the kind of site where people only bother to rate something when they're either going to give it a 0 or a 10, because a) love or hate is the only thing that's going to make them bother and b) they want their vote to have as big a statistical impact as possible, never mind that this in effect reduces the rating system to a scale with two points on it.
 
That's true, though after a quick run through some of the games on the side bar, an 18 point gap seems quite wide even by metacritic standards. It's crazy to think only 3 gaming mags gave it less than 90 (84, 80, 80), especially when It's likely a lot of them played the game straight out of the box.
 
Haha, while I may agree with the point Adam Sessler brings up, I will say one thing for sure...

Gaming journalism is still fucking horrible.

But I don't think that is what he is talking about?
 
Back
Top