Should Reviews be considered "Just Opinions"

You know, there are people who come and complain about reviews every so often to bitch about a bad score or review and you'll have som posters return the same generic replys "Reviews are just opinions."  To be honest, I don't think that an opinion makes a good review.  Your opinion is being formed around the things that are developed in the game.  However, there should be little interest on the opinion.  The point of reviews is to help make sound purchases for video games and to give developers money with metacritics aggerated scores.  With over 1400 games that have come in, people such as ourselves aren't going to hold that eye of judgement with a great deal of cordination. 

There is a reason why we would bust Daemon Hatfield's chops for calling the Wii stupid.  We are seeking non-biased opinions to help suggest games to look into.  If someone thought a platform was stupid, would it form biased opinions?


Also to take in comparison, who do you think formed a better review for the conduit, IGN or Giantbomb?

IGN

Reviews shouldn't hold the stock that they do, but they will continue to hold the stock that they do until game prices aren't so goddamn high. 

Yes. There is no definitive answer on what is a good game and what is not. What may be a great control scheme to one may be awful to another. What may be a horrible story may be intriguing to another. I personally hated Fallout 3; it's one of my most hated games of the generation. If I had to review it, it'd be between a 3 and 4.5 (out of 10). But to many, it's one of the best games of the generation.

Everything that isn't fact is just an opinion. A review by definition is an opinion. It wouldn't be a review, then. You could get bullet list of what was good and bad, and it would still be opinion. Not everyone likes the same things. You will never find anything that everyone agrees on unless it is a fact (and even then, some one will still disagree).

So, the argument that "It's their opinion." is valid and will always be valid until opinions no longer exist. You can't review something without opinion.

Edit: To elaborate on my first sentence, everything I said here is just my opinion.

They should be opinion, but at the same time I'm not going to listen to reviewers whose opinions are ridiculous. If someone is going around giving classics 0/10 and shovelware full scores, then they, at least in my book, dont count. 

Reviews are just opinions.

"Reviews are just opinions."

I'm leaning to "it's their opinion." It's common for one editor to review a game and say that it's good, pointing out the strong and weak aspects of the game, while another editor from another site might have an opposite view of it, and both cannot avoid stating their own opinions about it. 

Why is that? It's because it's one person that's reviewing the game, not the opinion of a group or the entire staff. You can't really have everyone having the same viewpoint about a game. Majority of people would give a game like Prototype or Fallout 3 an 8.5 or a 9.0 because they loved it, but there will always be a handful of people who don't like these games, and give it a 5 or lower. Some would point out all the good points and never state the bad stuff, or vice versa, and even a mix of both.

Are reviews opinions? Yes they are. Entirely. You can't avoid that fact at all. If reviews weren't opinions, then they wouldn't be called reviews at all. Reviews about games at Giantbomb will either be different from other sites like IGN, Gamespot or Gamasutra, or have similar viewpoints.  It will always be that way. It kind of also depends on the person reviewing it as well.

Oh yeah, there will always be people who give a game a 10 and say it's "the greatest thing since sliced bread!" or give it a 0 and say it's "worse than my grandma's bean soup" or something. Those are not valid opinions at all. Opinions that are considered valid are the ones that say that an aspect of a game is good or bad, and state a reasonable explanation why.

I don't think there's any doubt that reviews are 'opinions' - there is no way that they could be anything else.

So beware of 'objective' reviews - they are likely to be pushing an agenda by design (the agenda being 'I know best').

"Opinions that are considered valid are the ones that say that an aspect of a game is good or bad, and state a reasonable explanation why. "

"Reviews shouldn't hold the stock that they do, but they will continue to hold the stock that they do until game prices aren't so goddamn high. 

The solution: make games cheaper, and no one will even care.

"

"@asian_pride said:

"Opinions that are considered valid are the ones that say that an aspect of a game is good or bad, and state a reasonable explanation why. "

I disagree with this. I think all opinions are valid (unless they disagree with mine), whether it's explained or not. I personally can't explain why I like a game (or why I don't). I just play a game and either end up going "Hmm, I think this games pretty awesome." or I go "This game sucks nuts."I won't be able to explain it, or give reasons as to why. This doesn't make my opinion invalid; You just don't know why I have that opinion."

since they are opinions, then yes they should be considered as such.

"@PureRok said:

"@asian_pride said:

"Opinions that are considered valid are the ones that say that an aspect of a game is good or bad, and state a reasonable explanation why. "

I disagree with this. I think all opinions are valid (unless they disagree with mine), whether it's explained or not. I personally can't explain why I like a game (or why I don't). I just play a game and either end up going "Hmm, I think this games pretty awesome." or I go "This game sucks nuts."I won't be able to explain it, or give reasons as to why. This doesn't make my opinion invalid; You just don't know why I have that opinion."

At a certain point, you're right. But I was referring to opinions that are stated in reviews, not opinions in general. When you say "this game's awesome," that's just your general opinion about a certain game. That's fine. If the same statement was put in a review and not really explained why, then it's an invalid opinion. But if that statement is said as only a general opinion about the game, then it's valid whether or not you explain it or not.Perhaps I should have written that last statement better. I wasn't very clear what I was trying to say. "

"Reviews are the ass juice of the gaming world. "

Yep 100% opinion,sometimes a well educated and valuable one though.I don't pay attention to the scores of any form of media any more.
Just look up videos if you want to see if you like a game.

And also, find reviewers that have similar tastes to you if you're going to read a review. ie.I'm not going to pay attention to a Final Fantasy XIII review by Ryan but will gladly listen to Brad's.

I always thought reviews were opinions. I only read reviews by people who's opinion I respect, like Jeff.

Reviews are always opinions.  Other than factual details about game modes, stuff that is actually in the game, control schemes, etc. everything is opinion.  What some consider great graphics, others don't like the style, some games people say have little substance or replay value others can spend 100's of hours on, problematic controls could be singled out when another user finds them intuitive and competant.  If you haven't realized that most reviews are based mostly on how much lip-service the devlopers and publishers of the game give that review outlet, well, there you go. 

But what I really want to say is; A great FPS is made by stellar graphics and twitch-precision controls.  What the hell would you want to play one on the Wii for?  Stop caring what others think and say.  Your opinion should be all that matters.  That's why game demos are so awesome... oh wait, you've got a Wii, nvrmnd.

Plenty of objective facts can be contained within a review, however the overall verdict is a subjective opinion.

It's better to look what other sources say when they review a game and view the it from different perspectives. To judge a game soley on one or two reviews can be a little inaccurate, it's like trying to get the perspective on a major event in history based on one man's opinion. Even so, there's quite a lot of drawbacks on video game journalism, I remember reading about something like that a while ago. Essentially, the best way is to play the game yourself...of course that's MUCH easier said than done considering the price of videogames these days...I remember the good old days when PS1 games used to cost £25-40...

Of course reviews are opinions. If reviews were simply a series of facts regarding any given game, there would be nothing to gain from reading them. I wrote a rather negative review on Prince of Persia, but should that mean that others wouldn't enjoy it? No, not at all.

Reviews ARE opinions. However, they are opinions that actually played the game.

Yup.

A review is simply the reviewers opinion. Any reviewer, however should pride themselves on being able to have an educated opinion and be able to articulate and argue their opinion well. A good reviewer will then be able to filter their opinion through the lens of the game's target market, which both reviews have done. The IGN one decided that the target market is the wii crowd whilst Jeff decided it was the 'hardcore' FPS crowd, both are just as valid. Jeff also took into account that GB isn't the biggest video game website out there and that anyone reading his review probably already owns a PS3, 360 and/or a decent PC as he states in the review.

" Reviews are the ass juice of the gaming world. "

Of course they're opinions, but some opinions are shitty.

You talked about the aggregation of review scores such as Metacritic and i think in some respects that's a great idea. However it falls down when one publication has one system of marking (say 1 to 10) and another one has a different system (such as a percentage).

Eh, I didn't like the first guy grammatically. Yes, I can complain about him beginning sentences with "and", along with using the word "though" improperly. For opinions, though, (see? I'm using it correctly. I'm using it as a transition into something different) I usually trust the GameFAQs scores. Granted, I don't look at their scores until I've beaten a game, but more often than not, they agree with mine.

Of course, reviews are just opinions.  They are as valid as the opinion of your friends who suggest a film to you which is why it's important for a consumer to develop a relationship with a few reviewers so that they can tell if their tastes are similar.  Why would you put your faith in a film critic who admits to not liking a specific genre when you are a fan of that format?  The same is true of video game reviews.  If you read enough reviews and take note of who is writing the article, you'll eventually come to see if that reviewer's opinion is something you consider before a purchase.  I tend to "get to know" video game reviewers by listening to them on podcasts as well.  I think it's easier to identify with the critic hearing their voice and understanding how their passions flow this way.  This is one of the problems I have with X-Play and Gametrailers reviews, because there is no acknowledgment of who wrote the review.  I can't just consider the overall editorial staff's opinion as valid because individuals might completely disagree but have no ability to change the final score. 

If the review is based around fact, like there is a ton of texture issues, the game freezes every ten minutes, you cannot find an online game, so you give the game half a star, then no, its not based around opinion, but almost always it is

I agree with Jeff, but that doesn't make his review better. How can a review not be an opinion? That's a pretty stupid question. 

Uh, yes. They cannot be anything other than "just opinions". No matter how much you want pure facts to be the detail of the review you cannot factually define what is fun. That's an entirely subjective value that differs from person to person. Leaving this out means simply detailing the gameplay included and this is something anyone can get by looking at the back of a box.

Yes, but their opinions by professionals trained to objective about things. You just have to find some reviewers you like and who's view is usually in line with your own, or else you will probably be subjected to a lot of crap

Reviews in and of themselves are obviously little more than someone's opinion. Given how you feel with regard to said individual, judge the review as is due. Taken as a group, a general consensus, they often help shape an idea of the quality of product. Sites such as Rottentomatoes and Gamerankings are good for this. Be wary of, for lack of a better term, critical wankery. 

All reviews ever have been and ever will be, is the opinion of the reviewer. The question you need to ask yourself as a consumer, is if you trust their opinion, and how close do their view on video games, in terms of likes and dislikes, fit yours.

well if they were called "Opinions" i'm not sure Jeff Vinny Ryan and Brad would matter as much.

You can't put them as "Just opinions" seeing as outside of a reviewer liking the game, they also review the technical aspects of a game (Bugginess, framerate, controls and what have you)

" @JJOR64 said:

"Reviews are just opinions."

Tell that to gamespot (see Kane and Lynch review and what happened to Jeff as a result) "

They can only be opinion otherwise a review would come down to whether or not the game has any crashing bugs, bacause that's the only thing that's completely non-subjective. (and even then a reviewer would have to play the hell out of some games to find those bugs, so even that's not really useful.) In the end, reviews have to and can only be opinions (outside whether the tech works). How else do you explain the range of scores? If reviews weren't opinions than every game would score the same, more or less, wouldn't they? But go to metacritic.com and look up ANY game and there is a breadth of scores. Why? Because it's based on opinion. Have you ever tried to review games? It's almost impossible to remove yourself from the review. You CAN'T. Why? Because YOU are the one who played the game and results may differ. Most people found Alone in the Dark to have "borken controls," but aside from the driving, I thought it controlled just fine.

Reviews are a little like opinions, but not completely.

And it's funny how much people will get angry when someone mocks the Wii.

Yes they're opinions, but the point is you have to take what you read in the review and decide if it's the kind of game you might enjoy.  It's not all just an opinion, if the graphics are bad or if the controls are outdated, those are facts.