As the majority have probably guessed, I’m a gamer. So far I’ve complained about two games that were quite popular, specifically on the XBox. Well, I guess that’s picking on one crowd, and as a 360 owner who’s judging games based on their PC releases, there’s only so much I can say. It’s different if you have no experience with PC games, these console titles that we’ve been getting equivilents to for years just seem THAT much better and innovative. So where should the blame go? To the people who popularize these piles of crap. Ladies and gentlemen, do you know anyone who does… Game Reviews?
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion of things, so where do you go when you want an advance opinion? Not sure that you want to spend the money yet: you trust the reviews. Now, film and book reviews have existed for a number of decades, but reviewing games is relatively new. There are a number of games reveled as classics, games that are just great, that no reviews exist on. The opinion simply began when the games were bought, and word of mouth spread their awesomeness.
Nowadays however, reviews are out on sites like UGO or IGN before the game has even hit the shelves. This is a multi-million dollar industry now and they’ve got to keep you updated and wanting to buy their games. Really though, what am I bitching about? Reviews are reviews, reviewers are just people, but there’s a hive mentality that’s come with these games nowdays, and going through the Steam Metacritic ratings, I see the magic number that all the review sites base everything on: 80.
Confused? Allow me to elaborate. 80 is the new 70. Whether it’s 8.0, 4 out of 5 stars, whatever, it’s 80. 80 is the magic LINE, and if a game gets a score of less than 80, it’s not “okay”, it’s bad. Every single game that gets less than 80 is forgotten within a week of its release, and with good reason. These are crappy games for a very simple audience, the entertainment value is low for the masses, if any. But still.. a game that gets a 79 should not suck for anyone who isn’t a fan of its predecessor. Likewise, any game between 80 and about 85 are the “average” games, and everything else is just a degree of how big the fanbase is. This leaves roughly 15 points between “the best game ever”, and “meh, it wasn’t that great.”
Here are some notable examples.
Bioshock: 95%
Doom 3: 88%
Quake Wars: 84%
Unreal Tournament 3: 84%
Red Alert 3: 81%
Tom Clancy’s H.A.W.X.: 74%
These games are definitely listed based on their overall quality, however, every one of those ratings should be about 10 points lower than they are. No way in HELL does Bioshock deserve to be up there, with StarCraft, Half-Life 2 and other damn-near perfect games. With an ending that botched? H.A.W.X. was ignored across the globe, with people playing it, not really enjoying it, and then being done with it and letting it collect dust in their shelf.
The film Watchmen, sits at 64% on Rotten Tomatoes. There’s your basis for comparison. That means that compared to all of those games, Watchmen is LESS interesting and less good. I don’t even need to do a closing paragraph, just think about that for a bit, let it sink in, and I sincerely hope that a big “What the FRAK!” pops into your mind too.