Do review scores matter to you?

I am honestly too old to care about reviews. I know what I like and no review is going to change that. What is usefull for me is a quicklook of a game. Thats the information I need to decide if I want to play a game or not.

Numerical score, no. General trend, yes

Meaning, if outlet A gave it a 4 and outlet B gave it a 3, it's probably fine. But if all the outlets give it bad scores, then it's probably honestly bad.

The score itself, no. If the game is well received in multiple places and I have an interest, I will pick it up. Your poll is misleading. I base my purchase off reviews but the score doesn't actually matter.

I have a couple of critics here and there, who more or less share my taste in games. They have influence on my purchases, but i ultimately do my own research (gameplay videos and whatnot) and go from there.

I don't give two shits about score though.

Typically, I tend to look at the reviewer and see if they have an overall positive or negative experience rather than an arbitrary score at the end of the page.

A review can encourage me to give a game I've no interest in a second look.
A review can prevent me from purchasing a truly broken product.
What a review cannot tell me whether I will find the experience of playing a game a pleasant one as experience is entirely subjective*.

I'm perfectly fine playing a flawed game, provided it gives me an interesting experience along the way.

*Unless it's Alex reviewing as If he likes a game, chances are so will I.

I've played a fair amount of well reviewed games that I dislike. I've played a fair amount of bad games and I even like some of them. I've started looking between the lines of reviews to see if something is for me.

I pretty much buy games if certain reviewers that I like or share opinions on games with like it. But sometimes I ignore the critical reviews the game has received and just take a chance on it (this happens rarely though).

The number at a glance, then I read the content looking for trends.

I also read a couple I often disagree with for a different opinion.

It all depends. If every sight ever gives a game glowing reviews, I definitely look into the game and consider buying it(if it was a game I was already looking forward to, I absolutely buy it)

If every site ever gives a game crap reviews, of course I won't buy it. If a game I'm barely interested in gives a game pretty good reviews, I don't buy it(I didn't buy Destiny)

The score itself is rather useless in any case.

I care about reviews. I enjoy good pieces of critique.

I do not care at all about review scores and barely ever even look at them unless they're at the top of the page.

I mean, if the game has like a metacritic score of 20 then of course I'm not gonna run out to the store and buy it. That said, I've played quite a few extremely well-reviewed games that I didn't care for (The Last of Us for example) and some fairly poorly reviewed ones that I did like (Dynasty Warriors games for example), so it all depends.

People constantly being mopey and down on a game I'm currently playing sometimes kinda bums me out though. And that's happened with almost every game I've played this year. A weird amount of negativity this year, and that's coming from someone who's always being overly negative about games.

Reviews from people I respect do make a difference to my purchasing habits. But than again everyone as different tastes, for example Jeff might hate Handsome Jack and Borderlands: The Pre-sequel yet I know I'm pretty sure to like that game quite a bit.

So they do matter, but it depends on the source.

The more I think about it the more I realize what I want from reviews hasn't changed since I was kid:

• some spoiler free descriptions of the game story and mechanics
• an opinion on the game
• screenshots / video

Maybe a bit simple but the whole number value thing has just never had any use for me. I imagine there are many who feel the same and probably that is why we gravitate more to video content (quick looks) and podcasts. All of the description, none of the numbers.

While My outlook on the game may be altered thanks to a review, which I do enjoy watching and reading, it doesn't really affect my purchase. If I want to play a game, chances are that it has something of merit to me, and I'll most likely buy it regardless of what others say.

I look at scores, I think about what reviewers say, but I have to admit that reviews scores do not make me happy, sad or angry much.

I might have a big mouth on some topics, but personal opinions about the score of a game is not a big deal to me. I love some real stinkers, and I hate some well reviewed games....yet, nobody will ever convince me that Skyrim is a good game, or Destiny is just misunderstood, or that Bioshock Infinite isn't just plan offensive on many levels.

But, I won't fight anyone about it...people have opinions...nobody died because of a star or fraction score on a website.

When I was younger, yes. A number score mattered to me. But everything that happened with GameSpot really made me think about scores. I then started to actually read the reviews.

Today, I usually watch quick looks to see if it is something I am interested in. I was always at odds with bad scores because I had fun playing some bad games and still do.

I mean I did buy Clive Barker's Jericho twice.

They doesn't affect me.

Depends on the game. I waited for PCGamer and Eurogamer's reviews of something like Shadow of Mordor before deciding on whether I was getting it or not. But on the flipside, there's a game like Dragon Age: Inquisition, which all the negative reviews in the world couldn't stop me from getting.

A lot less than they used to. I started disagreeing more than just slightly with reviewers at some point on some occasions. Now, there are so many more ways to check and see if a game is for you. I think the Quick Look has proven that. I get much more out of those than out of a review score. It's still not perfect. Something like Destiny comes off as quite... well... the way it is start to finish. But after that it starts getting really fun.

But reviews can be inaccurate completely I find. Look at Red Dead Redemption. It got amazing scores everywhere, but I just dislike that game so much. Thought the previous game was a lot more fun and to the point. Look at Mirror's Edge. It received middling reviews everywhere but I still think that game is absolutely amazing.

Yes and no. If a game looks interesting, but I'm not completely sold on it for whatever reason, I'll check out a few reviews and try to get a feel for things that way. See if there's recurring themes throughout the reviews and whatnot.

Most of the time though, I feel like reviews are useless to me. I didn't buy Valkyria Chronicles for the reviews anymore than I bought Hyperdimension Neptunia for the reviews. They simply looked fun. I bought 'em. I had a blast a blast with both. Bad reviews aren't going to stop me from trying something that genuinely interests me.

On the other hand, games like Bioshock Infinite or Brothers, despite the glowing reviews, look boring as shit to me so I don't buy them. Good reviews aren't going to get me to play something that genuinely doesn't look like it would interest me.

I've usually already made up my mind on certain games, unless when reviews go up and say Madden is universally panned for being bad. I'll avoid it. It just all comes down to what Jeff said in the podcast "is this game worth my time?"

Only in the sense that when I see them on this site, I know how to interpret them. For example, I like Mortal Kombat. I know Jeff likes Mortal Kombat. Jeff giving MK 5 stars does not surprise me but also tells me as a fan of the series I will like the game. Now if Brad reviews DOTA or whatever and gives it 5 stars, I know I'd still hate it. So for this site, reviews matter, but for most others I'm going to say no. Video usually can tell me what I need to know, even if it's hand-picked stuff released by the developer.

I think reviews used to influence me more than they do now. If a game gets terrible reviews, I usually try and watch some footage of it and find out EXACTLY why they got those scores. If a game gets EXCELLENT reviews and it wasn't a game I was thinking of buying to begin with I might do the exact same thing. But if a game like Borderlands the Pre-Sequel comes along and I know what it's about and I know that I love that kind of thing. Unless it was getting 1/10 or 1/5 I would probably buy it anyway.

Nope, not really. There are certain reviewers that might make me take notice of a game I hadn't really followed, but I know what I like and find interesting. I don't really care for most of the reviews on GB. I love GB a ton, but my tastes differ from the staff pretty vastly at times.

Nope, I don't purchase a lot of games these days. And the few games I purchase I know I want to play, with or without a good score.

Yes, I can purchase a game just because of the developers history and an interesting premise. And sometimes it falls flat (like most recently Hack 'n' Slash), but I'll take it.

Nope. I do read reviews but they don't affect wether or not I'll buy a game.

They get to play and experience the game before I do, and then assign a number to represent how much enjoyment it gave them. Yeah, that's pretty darn useful, but only in aggregate, which is why I trust Metacritic. I very rarely play a game and strongly disagree with its Metacritic score.

That or listening to various podcasts where people talk about their experiences with a potential game you want. After several years listening to many of the same people, you kind of get to know who you agree the most with when it comes to taste in games, which is sometimes very helpful.

@pornstorestiffi: You have the weirdest username.

I'd say they are capable of warning me off a game but not getting me to purchase one.

For myself, no. Lately, I wanted to Bayonetta 2 to get good reviews because it might get more people to buy the game. Because I selfishly want a third one.

Reviews matter. Scores don't.

@mpgeist That's not selfish, more Bayonetta would be a gift to everyone on the planet.

I don't think a positive review ever inspired me to buy a new game, but if there is a negative consensus, that will pretty much stop me from buying most games at full price.

I really don't pay much attention to reviews.

I like when high profile games get low review scores so I can watch the fanboys heads explode with rage. Other than that, no.

A review score conveys little to me. In the end, I won't end up not buying a game because it failed to cross that 8/10 or 4/5 star threshold. What matters more is to see how the game plays and whether or not it looks fun. I think the review itself has at least some effect on me, but then I look at the community of people who bought the game - If the majority of them seem to think the game is enjoyable, I'll ultimately end up buying the game. I think a perfect example of this would be Destiny. I don't own a current-gen console, but MAN, seeing SO MANY people talk about and play Destiny made me want to buy one so I could get in on that stuff, even though I saw review and review saying how disappointing and mediocre it was.

It's weird, though. My approach to how I buy games is completely opposite from how I watch movies, because with movies, I care very little about individual reviews; I go straight to that percentage score on Rotten Tomatoes.

Depends. Thinking about it, I definitely operate on a kind of unconscious "tier" system. In general, I tend to trust my own past experience over that of reviewers. Take Two Worlds II for example. The original game in that series got some pretty terrible reviews, including by reviewers I generally agree with, but personally I enjoyed it enough to pick up the sequel.

A tier down from that are games that I probably should like, but I'm cautious either because I'm skeptical about the concept or I've been burned in the past. In that case, I'll wait for a narrow sampling of reviews from outlets whose tastes I have found to be similar to mine. Dragon Age: Inquisition is a good example for me. I love RPGs, and I loved Origins, but DA:2 left a really bad taste in my mouth, and what I've seen and heard of the previews of DA:I make me kind of skeptical about it. Therefore, I'll wait to see what a couple of reviews are like before I consider buying it.

My third tier exists for "experience broadening games" - those games in genres that I don't typically like. In that case, reviews matter a little bit more since it usually takes a very broad sampling of high review scores to get me to pick it up. If I owned a WiiU, the new Bayonetta would probably qualify here. I tend to dislike fast paced action-y games in the DMC/God of War mold, but Bayonetta is getting such high reviews from just about everyone that I might have been tempted to pick it up just to try it.

If viewed as a concensus, yes. Drivelub's response was fairly lukewarm but that featured some blisteringly low and one blisteringly high score. Playstation Universe gave it an incredibly optimistic 9.5. In many ways, metacritic has become a damn excellent tool for showing you exactly where a game stands and just who it stands with. Without an actual score, it'd be harder to really quantify how good a game is because you would have to start reviewing the reviewers and thinking just who you take advice from.

They matter a bit to me. I'm generally aware of what games there are out there that will interest me a great deal and typically have them pre-ordered anyway if I'm confident the game will be great and it's from devs I trust. For games I'm on the fence about, though, I'll wait and see some metacritic scores and can be swayed one way or the other if a game is 85+ or so or below 75. I don't tend to pay much attention to individual review scores, especially outliers with little logic behind them (*cough* Polygon *cough*). Mostly, I try to discern what reasoning people have for rating a game as they did, and sometimes if their reasoning is sound enough, or conversely, seems to be a real reach, I can glean things about the game and the validity of the review(er) from there.

Yes they do. I will spend $10 for every star a game gets. So a 4 star game, I will not buy until I can find it for $40 or less.

Only to let me know if a game I'm interested in is totally broken or not.
I pretty much have my mind made up on a game before reviews are out.
If a game I'm gonna buy gets an unexpected low score I'll look into the review as to why.

Although I am a gamer, I have other things going on in my life and I can only spare time to play the VERY best games, usually I have a month or two free a year and just catch up on all the MUST plays.

Quick looks are nice but too many games can appear good on them and I want to play games that I will remember when I finish and usually reviews indicate the whole experience. If a game has 5 stars from Giantbomb, I expect a game that they finished, and at least a game that has an interesting mechanic or an amazing story either way something that I will walk away from and be thinking of for the next couple of years.

Sometimes even giantbomb doesn't hit the mark for me but if its not in the stars its in the words of the review. Quick looks are just fun, reviews are the vital part of gaming sites, humor and fun the added bonus.

I'm interested in what certain people have to say; not some numerical value. A game being 8/10 or 4/5 isn't particularly useful information, but several paragraphs of text from a personality I find appealing can be, even if their opinions differ wildly from my own.

I find them helpful at a glance to get a weak understanding what the opinion is about a game. I often use Metacritic when I see an embargo is out on Twitter. The score gives me an approximation of how the games reception is. Then I start to read or watch from those site i prefer.

I don't base my buying decisions on scores BUT they are helpful the first 2-3 minutes before I actually decide to start reading reviews.

Exactly. As long as someone is decent at conveying what something is, both thematically and mechanically, I can generally get a pretty good idea if that thing is something I'm likely to enjoy, regardless of if the writer enjoys the end product or not. Even with poorly written reviews I always find the end score the least valuable part of the whole thing.

It depends on the game really. If I'm on the fence about a game and I want more information, I look at reviews to provide that information.

Often times a lot of reviews fail to provide the information I'm looking for, but usually I can get a good idea about a game after reading a number of reviews. I never actually care about the numerical score. I read the reviews to see what's consistent between them and what isn't.

I'm usually set if a game is something I'll pick up. I read enough about it beforehand.

When I have major misgivings or questions about a game, I'll wait for a review to see what's broken or if a marketing campaign feels way too aggressive (i.e. Destiny). But I'm about to turn 29 and just know enough about what I like at this point.

Still, I read them because I like hearing the critique, even from people I usually disagree with (Mass Effect 3 was GOTY, dammit).

Scores are bullshit, but the words and opinions expressed next to them can have an impact.

Scores matter to me as long as they matter enough to critics for them to put them on reviews. I'll obviously consider the review itself more important, but whenever a reviewer tells me "Stop obsessing over the score, read the review!" my response has always been "No, you fucking put the score there, you considered it important enough to include, so I'm judging it."

I like to read other opinions about games, but they don't affect me.

At this point a quick look is more useful to me, but people who maybe don't care about gaming culture and just need a quick way to see a review score or something I can see how they would still find reviews useful.

For the most part hardly. All about eye candy...a short quick look or two for backlog priority listing and about a two month waiting period to snatch up most games sub-$25.