Well we know on this forum, the Fanboys vs Critics is a big thing here about new MMOs.

But if looking for a review of a product before you buy it, who would you believe more, the more Negative view point of a critic, or the more Positive view point of a fanboy?

Now this is just between these two radical extreme sides of the same poll of a reviewer.

this discussion came to me, after looking over the discussions of the leaked ZombiU game review was leaked on Gamespot.

it got lots of negative reaction, and disbelief from nintendo fans. But non fans, pretty much expected Red Steel 1.2 all over again.

who would you believe?

IMHO, you need a 3rd option...

If any review is too extreme, in either direction, I'm going to disregard anything they have to say. In 20+ years of gaming and 20ish of online gaming (Go MUDS!), I've played very few games that were all good or all bad and if I even think a review is ignoring/diminishing one side or the other then, in my opinion, it's not worth trusting.

Then again, I'm also the kind of person who never reads one review of anything and accepts what I read as gospel.

You can't believe either. Pretty difficult finding a non-baised review now a days.

I like hearing both sides. ANd dislike them fighting over trivial things. Too many times i have wasted money on garbage games because a few people think the game is so great with their linear brain funtion and insulted anyone that spoke against it.

I like to read real reviews....the good.... the bad.... and the fugly.

Anyone that gives all bad or all good opinions of a game are usualy overlooked. Thats what.........93% of these forum posts?   ;)

Neither. A review should be as objective as possible and point out both the good and bad aspects of a game. Also to define all the features and aspects so people can decide whether they agree based on what is on offer.

Point based reviews are generally terrible and not overly helpful. They may as well just have 3 categories:

- I wouldnt buy this

- Could be worth a try if you are interested in the genre

- Brilliant game that may appeal to those who are not normally interested in the genre

Even then, it is so subjective that you are probably better off just sticking to text. But everyone is so lazy that they just want to look at a score to know that a game is empircally better than another, as if it somehow validates their own personal choice, and if it doesnt then the review is biased or wrong of course.

Originally posted by evilastro

Neither. A review should be as objective as possible and point out both the good and bad aspects of a game. Also to define all the features and aspects so people can decide whether they agree based on what is on offer.

Point based reviews are generally terrible and not overly helpful. They may as well just have 3 categories:

- I wouldnt buy this

- Could be worth a try if you are interested in the genre

- Brilliant game that may appeal to those who are not normally interested in the genre

 

Even then, it is so subjective that you are probably better off just sticking to text. But everyone is so lazy that they just want to look at a score to know that a game is empircally better than another, as if it somehow validates their own personal choice, and if it doesnt then the review is biased or wrong of course.

If someone can be objective about a game then its probably a boring one, i'd rather hear from people who actually feel something about the game, negatively and positively, both viewpoints are equally valid, more so imo, than one that is just a list of details for a game, which would really be far too impersonal for my liking, either people like a game or they don't, what i am interested in hearing is what they like about it or what they hate about it, and its after weighing up those viewpoints that i am able to make an informed, hopefully, decision on whether to buy.

Originally posted by ereyethirn
We live in an age where there is so much you can do with the internet, so for me I ignore the hateful don't play this game people and if the game that the insane fanboys say is good sounds good from them then I go look at videos on youtube of actual gameplay or play a trial (if there actually is one) and make a full decision for yourself... There's no such thing as an unbiased opinion so I don't generally take the word of anyone as far as opinions go...

a while ago i used to check out the 'cynical brit' wtf is video's they started off pretty good but kind of lost it, too commercial i don't know, but totally agree that watching gameplay on Youtube is a very useful tool. For me it was the final decider on whether or not i bought GW2, i didnt. Not because the video's werent positive, even total biscuit raved about the game, but when i saw the gameplay for myself, i realised that i wouldnt enjoy it. So yes i do agree that being able to watch gameplay for a game is probably a more convincing 'argument' than just a few words of text.

I prefer a review thats critical but still touches the bright side, a non biased one.

If i had to pick between negative reviews and positive ones, I'd be more likely to believe the negative one.

In the end doing your own research is key, Reviews will never reflect your personal opinions and feelings.

If I have to be rather blunt, I'd prefer some degree of bias in a review, simply because it at least shows that the reviewer actually somewhat gives a damn about what they are talking about, and aren't just simply reading off of a list of "objectively correct" points about the game. Granted, being too biased means I probably won't get any useful information or insights about the game from the opposing view, but being too far in the other direction is just as bad.

The only thing that I will say needs to happen regardless of whether they choose to be biased or "objective" is that they can explain their points of view. If you leave me hanging, I'll get annoyed.

I prefer an opinion that is not subsidized by a paid advertiser.

Originally posted by Simsu

If any review is too extreme, in either direction, I'm going to disregard anything they have to say.

"Disregard" probably isn't accurate either.  Discount?

We have forum locals who I disagree with fairly often, because they're just so intensely negative about everything they say...hyperbole, lots of hate language, doom criers, omgeverythingsuxeverydaymoanwail.

Not the what they're saying isn't valid, but just (knowing their habits)...more of the same, no impact, hard to take them at all seriously.  The emo kids from high school, just older.

Glowing praise?  Plenty of haters around to dump on them, my help isn't needed.

If you had to pick between a hater and a fanboy, the hater would always win. If your considering a fanboy definition of a hater, then it makes haters that much more reliable as they typically can consider anyone with a negative view on their game as being one despite pointing out prominent issues.

But yes, if I had to pick between a fanboy and a hater, the hater will easily, hands down be the best option to make a better judgement on. They will typically flame areas of the game that do have issues which, while likely emphasized by other minute or opinion focused points, will at least point out those faults and use it against the game. 

Anything the is fueld by emotions will never be unbiased. And this goes doubble for reviews. There is not such thing as a fair review that is not in one way or another tinted by the person writing it.

So a sour-sally is as bad as a fanboy.

I did not vote in the poll because it was to polarized.

The only review I truely trust is my own.

What is the game going to deliver for what I pay?  I want a set of features and I will pay something for that, even if it's just my time.

Why would I want to trust anyone elses subjective opinion?  I'll try it for myself and decide it it's worth paying for.

People can have all sorts of reasons why they might post a positive or negative opinion that have nothing to do with my decision criteria.