Game Informer reviews losing credibility?

Sgt Barone

Sgt Barone

CAGiversary!
Game Informer's review scores have been really high for somewhat average games lately. It's getting to a point where a 9 is starting to feel like an average game. Some games like Tropico 3 and Just Cause 2 have been getting way too high of reviews. Earning a 10 or even a 9 from GI seemed like it used to be an accomplishment, but now it feels like they're being passed out like candy. Opinions?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Their reviews are pretty on par with what the rest of the gaming media thinks... They're within a handful of points on the games you listed, coming in below what many think of just cause 2 and bfbc2.

What else would you expect a gaming magazine to put out besides sensational reviews? They're a publication you get when you buy an edge card from Gamestop. Gamestop is in business to sell games. To say they aren't influenced by their Gamestop (push x game) overlords is naive.
 
[quote name='Puffa469']GI is owned by Gamestop. Bad reviews do not promote sales.[/QUOTE]

I'm pretty sure that they're not owned by Gamestop, but they just have a great deal with gamestop and the edge cards. They make no mention of Gamestop in their company bio: http://gameinformer.com/p/corporateinfo.aspx

Also, i think people need to stop paying attention to review scores, and pay more attention to the actual writing in the reviews.
 
Reviews are always going to be someone else's opinion, not your own. You could always write a review and have someone disagree w/ your review. =]
 
Game Informer's reasoning is that their idea of an average game is a "7" (even though traditional sources have always considered average to be "5").

EGM had far better magazine reviews.They didn't care about pissing off publishers (I remember Ubisoft was steamed when the original Assassin's Creed didn't receive thrilling marks over there).
 
It's hard for me to trust any game reviews. For most review sites, a score lower than a 5/50 is reserved for the crap de la crap. Seems a majority of stuff is graded on a 7-10 scale.
 
[quote name='Brownjohn']I'm pretty sure that they're not owned by Gamestop, but they just have a great deal with gamestop and the edge cards. They make no mention of Gamestop in their company bio: http://gameinformer.com/p/corporateinfo.aspx

Also, i think people need to stop paying attention to review scores, and pay more attention to the actual writing in the reviews.[/QUOTE]

Unless they've split off from Gamestop in the last few years they are owned by them. I used to be a store manager at a Gamestop some time ago and it was brought up during training.

I'm trying to find a non-wikipedia entry for this, but it started from the circulars that Funcoland used to give out in stores. It came up to a small magazine and then expanded when Gamestop bought Funcoland. Actually, that's more of when Gamestop came into existence. The parent company (before Gamestop split off) was Barnes & Noble. Double discount days at B&N used to rule.

Oh, and totally agree with your statement. A score is a very arbitrary number based on opinion and a set of self-created standards. Reading the in-depth impressions, word of mouth and demos are the way to go. I still like the magazine though.
 
I'd like to say it all boils down to opinion, but I recall reading this one editorial in EGM (pre-Halo 2), and they mentioned a few game companies that said they could get a great scoop on a big up-and-coming game if they guaranteed it a specific score. He said, while they declined the offer, some other mag totally jumped on the offer. Ever since then I can't help but wonder what lengths some mags go to get certain scoops, or worse, line their pockets with gold and make the game companies or whatever happy. Another example is what Ubisoft did to EGM as soon as they gave it a less-than-stellar review; they wouldn't let them review any more of their games. That is just freaking ridiculous if you ask me. So yeah, it's my opinion that some game magazines - not specifically GI - basically tread safely just to sate these huge companies who - worse case scenario - might just cut them off completely from reviewing their games just because they didn't give (insert game) a near-perfect score.

In the case of GI: I'm sure for the most part they are just plain old opinions, but on the other hand, it's owned by Gamestop (yes, it is owned and published by them), and yes, they sell games. To assume there isn't a marketing strategy behind it would be kind of silly.
 
I guess the only good thing about game informer is that since gamestop sells all games, there's less favoritism for a certain publisher or platform. So if you look at a review according to game informer scoring standards, it'll be pretty fair.
 
[quote name='Dead of Knight']Losing credibility? I thought this officially happened with the Paper Mario incident.[/QUOTE]


yes, just because one game you like got a low score, the credibility of the entire magazine was shot down. nintendo lol
 
I'm not so sure about the whole "masses of money" thing, seems a bit over-the-top and crazy. If they got paid such an absurd amount of money you would think they could further expand and get rid of a few ads (not very realistic, but you get my point). I'm sure there is a bit of behind the scenes greasing of palms, though (I'm not talking 10k here, but then again, what do I know?), and of course breathless sucking up. The latter is obvious, and somehow you know this is all a matter of "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours." In the case of GI it just seems very likely that since they are attached at the hip with Gamestop that video game companies then think that somehow if they play their cards right they will in turn get a good review score and get a lot of ad-exposure/promotions with Gamestop.

I'm not saying that's exactly what happens. But they are possibilities.
 
I still like GI. I like magazines in general, I'm saddened to see them go the way of the dodo.

Review scores don't mean much to me. I read multiple reviews from different sources and make up my own mind. It's rare that I intend to buy a game and then don't due to low review scores, and vice versa.

I agree with the poster who said their review scores are consistent, but consistently high. Average games get 7's and 7.5's.
 
GI's reviews are fine in my book. They're usually close to the average on GameRankings or Metacritic.

But every now and then, they do give out a score that seems too high or two low.
 
Review scores have no impact on me. I like some of the articles in GI like the interviews and Q&A but for reviews they are hit or miss.
 
[quote name='mtxbass1']Their reviews are pretty on par with what the rest of the gaming media thinks... They're within a handful of points on the games you listed, coming in below what many think of just cause 2 and bfbc2.

What else would you expect a gaming magazine to put out besides sensational reviews? They're a publication you get when you buy an edge card from Gamestop. Gamestop is in business to sell games. To say they aren't influenced by their Gamestop (push x game) overlords is naive.[/QUOTE]

your definetly right, but i don't like it, and it didn't seem as obvious before.
 
Just Cause 2 is reviewing pretty high just about everywhere it seems so it's not just GI trying to push Gamestop sales.
 
I hope everyone here who doesn't like reviews goes out and gives "Gingerbread Ninja" or whatever the fuck it's called a spin. After all, all those reviews about how fucking dreadful it is could be lies because the magazine publisher is feuding with the publisher of "Gingerbread Ninja". Spend a whole day with the game (can't possibly get a feel for it in anything less) and report back here with your findings.

Reviews are fine. There are hiccups here and there. That's because everyone and their fucking mother feels entitled to review videogames nowadays. At the end of the day, shitty games tend to get shitty scores while great games get high scores. fucking videogame douche spasms. fuck.

TC - This isn't really to you, I do understand the concern but jesus man, is it really that big of a deal? Do you own stock in videogame companies? Is your day ruined if game X doesn't get at least a 9 or game Y gets under a 7?
 
GI is easily my least favorite mag. Too much crap, heavy bias, unnecessary products, etc. I think I'm going to stick with Nin Power and PTOM. Gamestop hasn't given me a reason to renew my card anyway, I've gotten better deals on new games than they offer on used.
 
I've noticed this lately, too. I still enjoy the most of the mag, but the reviews are getting quite terrible. I knew something was wrong when the BlazBlue review was stuffed into the upper right corner of the page and dismissed as a wacky acid trip and nothing more.

I think IGN still has some pretty good reviews with the UK and AUS alternates, but by far the most thought-out reviews I've seen are the video reviews over at Game Trailers.
 
I just look at metacritic mostly, then I click on the links to the blogs and read them.
Also, I look on forums like CAG and see if people like the game or not--I don't trust most of the reviewers.
 
[quote name='Dead of Knight']You're either an idiot or you're ignorant of the situation. It wasn't the score, it was their response to the backlash about the score.
http://www.jivemagazine.com/column.php?pid=2589[/QUOTE]

I just read that link and what the reviewer supposedly said while defending his review is fucked up. I read reviews for the opinion of the reviewer and he blatantly stated that they rated games that they hated highly just to please the public.

[quote name='jh6269']I just look at metacritic mostly, then I click on the links to the blogs and read them.
Also, I look on forums like CAG and see if people like the game or not--I don't trust most of the reviewers.[/QUOTE]

This is what I do also and it has yet to fail me.
 
[quote name='Sgt Barone']Game Informer's review scores have been really high for somewhat average games lately. It's getting to a point where a 9 is starting to feel like an average game. Some games like Tropico 3 and Just Cause 2 have been getting way too high of reviews. Earning a 10 or even a 9 from GI seemed like it used to be an accomplishment, but now it feels like they're being passed out like candy. Opinions?[/QUOTE]
they get paid to review games. but they get paid even more if they review games with a high score :)

money changes everything. maybe they get more ads when they do a good review or something.

other than the art section and the upcoming games, i rarely read all the other stuff on game informer.
 
[quote name='yarkitty123']I'm not so sure about the whole "masses of money" thing, seems a bit over-the-top and crazy. If they got paid such an absurd amount of money you would think they could further expand and get rid of a few ads (not very realistic, but you get my point). [/QUOTE]

And how do you think this large mass of money is transfered? Why through ads of course! Car review mags have been accused of this also. As a matter of fact people have actually counted the ads and compared them to the scores and found interesting correlations between them. Don't think the gaming industry is above those kinds of things either.

coughgamespotcough
 
No reviewer has any credibility with me. Whether it be a magazine or a website because of the fault of, they review games to make money.

No reviewer reviews games in mainstream media because they love it, they do it because they get paid to do it. And with the internet paid reviewers have to work extra hard to get attention so people will keep on buying the magazine or giving the website hits and clicking on ad banners. So they skew reviews in favor of what will get them the most traffic.

Most everytime even mediocre games get good reviews all in all with comments like "Well the story wasnt so hot here. But dont get me wrong its better than most games and you can tell the devs tried really hard. And its story really is pretty unique and alot of fun with alot of great humor and cool plot twists", thats about as harsh as they will get on a big named title, especially ones from companies that advertise with them. They only games they will rip apart are the little no name ones or games so bad that everyone is ripping on it.

Now on topic, game informer is owned by gamestop, so its no wonder they dont try and promote games that will sell well in their stores. Why anyone would ever trust a reviewer that works for a company that sells the very same product is beyond me.

Thats like trusting reviews about cars from a guy that owns a car dealership, he wont ever bad mouth a car thats sitting on his lot for sale.
 
I think most sources GI and IGN as a reference are fanboys toward certain games. For example Left4Dead 2 and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2...I think they are good games but did either one really change all that much from the previous release...not in my opinion. But other games will get dinged for not bringing fresh gameplay or something to the sequel. People are fallible.
 
Admittedly, I like the GI reviews less now than before, but that is mainly because there has been so much turnover on their staff. I used to know that certain writers pick up on certain things that aligned with my thoughts on those types of games. Now, not so much.

What is really starting to bother me though with GI in particular, and reviews in general, is that the score dont match with the prose. They can go on and on about the flaws of a game...then give it a 9 or conversely, say how great of an experience the game is, but give it a 6. Sometimes I just dont know what they are thinking.

But when I read reviews, I really want to know three things: What are the basic gameplay mechanics, Is it soul-crushingly difficult, Is it broken in any way. Other than that, I pretty much make up my own mind about games. If it's a game I'm interested in already, I just need to know it works. If it's a game I never heard of, then the review is more like a preview anyway.

Scores are going to be the bane of the gaming industry.
 
[quote name='Brownjohn']I'm pretty sure that they're not owned by Gamestop....[/QUOTE]
http://www.gamestopcorp.com/

GameStop is the world’s largest video game and entertainment software retailer. The company operates more than 6,200 retail stores worldwide, as well as GameStop.com and EBgames.com. Game Informer magazine, a leading multi-platform video game publication, is also an important part of the GameStop family.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='Puffa469']GI is owned by Gamestop. Bad reviews do not promote sales.[/QUOTE]
Answer in first reply.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Game Informer didn't used to be owned by them. I think they purchased them in the past five years or so.

And I don't even like Paper Mario, I was just disgustedwith their review philosophy.
 
[quote name='Dead of Knight']Game Informer didn't used to be owned by them. I think they purchased them in the past five years or so.

And I don't even like Paper Mario, I was just disgustedwith their review philosophy.[/QUOTE]

I didn't even know about the Paper Mario thing, but I read the link you gave yesterday.

Do you think that's really GI's review philosophy, or just the thought/actions of that one dumbass reviewer?

Or is that one incident enough to make you not trust any of their reviews no matter who writes them?
 
[quote name='ninja dog']i hear gamestop opens new games but doesn't sell them as used[/QUOTE]


OMFG REALLY?

Shit!
 
[quote name='Dead of Knight']You're either an idiot or you're ignorant of the situation. It wasn't the score, it was their response to the backlash about the score.
http://www.jivemagazine.com/column.php?pid=2589[/QUOTE]

Seems like someone doesn't know the basic tenets of argument. Sure, it's easy to dismiss people by calling them dumb and ignorant, but it isn't necessarily correct. In the case of Paper Mario, you have a few people who are strong supporters of a particular franchise arguing against a score, even after the fact that it has been explicitly stated that reviews are written in terms relative to the general public. Thus, since an average person would be reading the review, they want to know how the game will be in terms relative to them, not to some gamer who enjoys a niche genre of games. In fact, it would be devious of GI to rate Paper Mario a high score if they knew that the vast majority of their readers wouldn't like the game.

Readers buy review magazines to read opinions on products that will likely match their own. They aren't meant for some random person to give a review and for the reader to do extensive analyzation of the review to see if it applies to them.
 
Game Informer makes decent reading material when in the shitter, but that's because it belongs in there. I preferred the magazine back when it was a slightly thinner design and NOT owned by Gamestop.

The magazine has become 70-90% ads for games and shit reviews that give the overhyped sequels of sequels of sequels automatic 10's, even if the game is a total turd in many ways.
 
[quote name='help1']Seems like someone doesn't know the basic tenets of argument. Sure, it's easy to dismiss people by calling them dumb and ignorant, but it isn't necessarily correct. In the case of Paper Mario, you have a few people who are strong supporters of a particular franchise arguing against a score, even after the fact that it has been explicitly stated that reviews are written in terms relative to the general public. Thus, since an average person would be reading the review, they want to know how the game will be in terms relative to them, not to some gamer who enjoys a niche genre of games. In fact, it would be devious of GI to rate Paper Mario a high score if they knew that the vast majority of their readers wouldn't like the game.

Readers buy review magazines to read opinions on products that will likely match their own. They aren't meant for some random person to give a review and for the reader to do extensive analyzation of the review to see if it applies to them.[/QUOTE]

A review is simply supposed to be your opinion. What's the point of changing around scores or whatever just because you think someone else "might not agree with it"? It's supposed to be your take on the game, that's why it's your review.

If I were to review Street Fighter IV and give it an 8 out of 10 but then think to myself "Well, most people prefer shooters over fighters, so I'll give it a 5", then the review would be absolutely pointless.
 
[quote name='dallow']That was a joke post right, help1?[/QUOTE]

Nope. A reviewer's job is to write how he and his readers will feel about a product. If I read a broadway theater review from the NY times, and then tell a redneck to write a review, I would expect both to be completely different, because both are writing for different audiences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top