Review score aggregates are such asinine barometer for a subjects quality. The most egregious thing is just how readers interpret these arbitrary estimations. For example a game furnished with a 6/10 would be widely regarded as mediocre. Perhaps even respectable. Others may perceive this same score as underwhelming. Maybe even something to be avoided. The trouble with these interpretations is that none of these suggestions can be considered right or wrong. They’re just opinions. Which despite what social media would have you believe are selective, not factually binding statements. But because reviews are concluded with these numerical summations, that only hint at the involuted components, you’re getting a scrupulously abridged depiction of a product. Much like reading the synopsis of a movie and asserting that you’ve seen it.
They detract attention from what you should be looking at. The fine details that give greater insight. You might be swayed by a negative aspect highlighted in the conclusion, that doesn’t accurately represent how you might actually engage with it. Likewise the summary may allude to a games expansive open world. That it might well be a vibrant, densely populated Open-World, with many beautiful forests and winding rivers. But one devoid of activities to engage with. There have been many games over the years that fit the criteria of mediocrity that I thoroughly enjoyed, despite its numerous flaws. A game like “Shadows Of The Damned” is the very definition of mediocre. Clumsy mechanics. Sudo 51’s obscene horror schlock is an often disjointed experience, helmed by a protagonist whose dialogue is often infantile and at times obnoxious. And yet it’s still a game I had immense fun playing. The macabre setting and grotesque story were such memorable features. Particularly the disturbing origins of the bosses that have succumbed to such morbid curiosities. But would I objectively say this was a “good” game? No. I’d recommend it, but couldn’t defend it other than being subjectively entertaining.
Now if I had based my interest purely on the descriptive brevity of a major site, or glanced at the capricious number assigned to Shadows, I probably would have ignored what was a fun, anarchic distraction. Which would have been a real shame. I think such concise epilogues are useful tools in determining the overall thrust of the thing you’re analysing, to be used in conjunction with specific points that have been detailed. Relying on the excerpts to determine the quality of a game, is only going to dilute the subject. Ultimately you have to rely on your own instincts to suitably judge the merits of a game. Because even if you read a review from start to finish, each of these assessments are often dependent on the reviewers subjective prejudice. And in some cases influenced by the collaborative bias of the site and developers. And as much as I’d like the latter to be a scurrilous rumour, propagated by the disingenuous community, it’s becoming increasingly difficult to believe anything anymore.
Game, Complain, Repeat 