You think Harebrained Schemes is paying people for reviews?

No, but Metacritic has never been reliable, because the people that are bothered to write a review/give a score are by definition motivated beyond that of an average gamer. I myself take games seriously and they are mostly my only hobby, yet I'll be damned if I'm going to give a score to everthing I play on Metacritic.

It's a site for motivated minorities, and the scores always reflect an agenda, either it's THIS IS NEW CITIZEN KANE OF GAMING or it's THIS GAME IS EVIL and rarely an area in-between.

Also there's the reality that many people who rated it may not even have played it, or those who gave it a good score psychologically ward off their own buyer's remorse.

The best way to find the opinions of actual gamers on the game (I mean people who play the game from start to finish) is to frequent dedicated boards on the net.

Not really. Most of those who post are the disgruntled minorities who are motivated enough to go online and complain about their wasted money.

Sometimes, but at least on those boards people make elaborate enough posts on the intricate details of the gameplay, so you know at the least they did play the game. That's the only way to really know that the opinion is from a gamer who played the game, not a liar.

Metacritic reviews also often show quite a bit of detail. And since generally Metacritic user opinions chime in with what you see on boards, I think they tend to be representative.

I think putting a "Score" on an opinion shows an agenda. I don't think a game can be rated like this, games are more complex than that, they have many different features and components all of which are worthy of discussion on their own, and I personally roll my eyes when I see an "opinion" with a 5/5 preceding it, it reeks of agenda and wanting other people to accept your opinion as objective fact and follow you, especially when video games are commercial products.

This is why I don't review games on GOG (except when I'm really pissed and feel ripped off), and no it's not laziness.

For fans of the Choose Your Own Adventure-style books:
Atama-ii Books: multiple-path stories in easy English!

That's why you ignore the number and only read reviews that are in-depth (see: avoid most so called professional reviewers or gamers) so you get to the core of the game and what it has to offer. Sadly, there are few who accomplish this and in the end gaming is an experience. Playing it yourself is the way to go to get the feel of it.

No, it just shows that you have an opinion and can think of a way to quantify your experience. I've reviewed quite a few things (mostly on Amazon) and I select a number of stars based on what I felt my experience was like. Of course, if "agenda" for you means "an opinion", like "shill" means "someone who likes the game", then there's no point in arguing about this.

You're trying to reason with Crosmando? There's no hope, 'tis impossible, really. It won't be long until he calls you a moron and such.

Concerning SRR disappointment, I have the same feelings: it was very well written, but the game is really short, with no/or very few replay value, because it had almost no real choice and consequence. It was intended to be a RPG, but I feelt it much like an adventure game instead. A nice (short) one, but as a RPG gamer, I was disappointed.
Yes, it has toolkit but I cannot view a game with too much hopes on the community. Or on DLCs like Berlin.

I have seen many similar concerns from gamers sometimes in fora, but other answer "that was a tiny budget game" and so on. I agree that KS' games cannot be so compared to AAA, but it wasn't a KS with only $50, and even if they had to deal the licence with M$, they weren't the only ones to deal with a publisher to have the right to use a licence (I'm thinking about InXile with EA about Wasteland, and FullControl about Jagged Alliance).

I am personally a bit sad to reduce expectations from crowdfunded games, I only hope that Wasteland 2 would change that (and I though anticipate people who would say that if W2 is great, one cannot expect much from lower budgets). Well...


But, concerning their new project, I have to say that it looks far more promising than resurrecting Shadowrun licence. I hope that won't be only locked to mobile devices, I know lots of figures wargamers who would like to use their netbook/laptop for wargaming or roleplaying.

NeverEnding Nightmares

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/infinitap/neverending-nightmares

(sorry about potsting in the wrong thread before ...I didn't see there was a new one until after)

Nope, it means that I only really value my own experiences with a game, and I feel disappointed that other people reviewers decide how they feel about a game before playing it for themselves.