We can agree that most reviews are paid or extremely biased, but are there any out there that are consistently reliable?

We can agree that most reviews are paid or extremely biased, but are there any out there that are consistently reliable?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/cPTj5ZzEs04
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

your own review is the only honest review

no, mine is

OK but what if I use reviews to make purchasing decisions?

your friends' reviews are the only honest reviews

>"Hey dude check out this sick game Read Only Memories, you can choose your own pronoun!"

Yeah, never again.

>what if I use reviews to make purchasing decisions?
then you should kill yourself/

no really, why would you listen to the opinions of others to decide your purchases.
If anything just watch some gameplay, no commentary and decide for yourself.
Most of these reviewers are either paid shills, or retards with no taste that are shit at playing games.
you watch IGN or gamespot play games, they are fucking terrible.

I would rather trust a Sup Forumsirgins opinion over one of those cretins.

It helps get an idea of the game. The numbers they give are arbitrary and irrelevant, it just helps to have some commentary from someone other than the game's publishers.

HG101 but they only do older games
CGR is also good if it's Mark but sometimes he memes too hard

>indie game
>paid reviews

I'd give Undertale a 10 aswell though

as we've seen, indie devs will sometimes by positive reviews with sex

Sup Forums loves that christian site

>Toby offering his supple body to the reviewing community

>Toby slowly bent over, sliding his silk boxers down his legs
>"Don't go TOO hard boys!"
>Undertale gets goty reviews for every man he made cum that day

Undertale was good enough that I wouldn't complain about it getting a 10

Big AAA names are mostly paid reviews and most of them are bad since they try to pander the normie audience and indie shit are usually overrated in general.

Other than that, opencritic is pretty good on how good/bad a game is.

Sure, but compare it to other game reviews on the site for other, better games.

>It helps get an idea of the game.
You know what helps even more?

Watching the fucking gameplay. Or even better, playing a demo.

>inb4 no demo
Fuck the publisher then, he clearly doesn't want consumers to see the product for what it is. Pirate it, play a little to see if you like it, buy it if you like it.

Kotaku/RPS

youtu.be/cPTj5ZzEs04

But yeah, Kotaku is pretty good

>We can agree that most reviews are paid
Despite popular believe, reviewers are not paid by any publisher. Yes they given free shirts and shit, but that's purely to advertise. There's never been a case in the gaming industry where a major publisher pays a reviewer for a higher score. It's just a meme.

Some reviewers are, however, heavily bias. Sometimes, they are tasked to review a game of a franchise/developer that don't really care for, so that in turn inspires a lower review score, whether that reviewer knows it or not. Sometimes, intentionally, they get a reviewer who is a big fan of a certain franchise, to review it. That in turn, means that the reviewer rates the game higher, since he/she already loves the franchise.

So, if you find a site that usually gives a certain franchise lower scores, that means that there aren't any big fans of the franchise to begin with. (Ex: IGN and Kirby)