best fun really isn’t that hard to relay to an audience. I’ve read that article by Dan Hsu and that was an excellent one. So, while that’s irrelevant to their reviews, it’s just what I think about when I imagine reading them. While it’s a bit irrational, I don’t read Kotaku because I feel like they’re not a very respectable site because of their policy of posting anything and everything as news sources, along with the fact that they’ve been proven not to check their sources (people have leaked fake rumours just for the purpose of demonstrating this about Kotaku). So, I had to get a ton of stuff ready.īasically, yeah, I’ve seen Kotaku’s reviews. Sorry to have dropped out of this discussion so suddenly I’m moving across the state…actually, like, today. The Steam sales data supports this point.
Pirates that pirate games because something is not worth what they want to pay or because what they pay for is attached with a substandard experience, like DRM, should not be seen as pirates, but unhappy potential customers. YES a lot of people are douchebags, but Newel sells his point very well: pirates invest a lot of money in their machines and internet connections. Psychological studies on this phenomenon only influence a person’s impression based on what they personally invested or profited from.Īnd AGAIN I am disappointed you don’t read the article I posted because it is CLEAR you do not understand a core element behind piracy. It doesn’t bias the reviewer unless the reviewer actually paid for it, which doesn’t happen often in the press, as you will know. If a game is just as enjoyable as a 60 dollar game, but is for sale at 20 dollars less, it alters the market significantly. Its not the same message because the context is not the same. I have seen people say “At x price, this is a bargain” because the game was not a regularly priced game. I don’t think reviewers directly claim “I paid X, was it worth it?” with a regularly priced game.
The most a reader will expect is whether the person was happy playing it or not. Most fun vs best fun is a highly subjective and difficult thing to tease and impossible to really communicate consistently to an audience. These declarations very clearly tell everyone the context in which the game was played and the review was made.
On top of that, they describe how much they played the game and what parts. There were a few lengthy blog posts by the former EGM editor in chief, Dan Hsu I think his name was, that discussed the extensive investment companies made to provided the game media with goodies and it is very inappropriate. I think an important bias you didn’t mention, which I believe is very important, is the financial relationship between the company who provided the game and Kotaku. His reviews summarize what the experience was overall, what he liked and what he didn’t like. They do 2 things: they look at a gradient of reviews from a few other sites that typically have vastly different impressions and they have their own guy doing his own reviews. They appear to have a similar philosophy as yours when it comes to the content of what they want in a review.
Along those lines, that is why I like reading reviews at Kotaku and why I think you should check them out.
0 kommentar(er)
