Basically here's Graham Linehan explaining my point for me

@ramone: And game critics wonder why people criticize their work.

I think the real turn in this round of game review score bullshit is the increasingly important and variably subjective appreciation of story elements and characterization having a lot of weight on the experience is happening for a game as big as GTA. Furthermore, that it might affect the score (although it seems not to have in many cases which really begs a lot of questions) makes me excited. Happened with Dragon's Crown, which I only bring up because of how popular the harumphing was for that game, and I see it with this.

If the accusation was misogyny was just at the format in general, then I can see where that's a stretch that might now work but the stuff pointed out so far is totally valid and makes a lot of sense why that's the source of the issue for those reviewers. Straight up, it's harder to continue not having strong female roles in Rockstar games, and that radio shit is lazy and easily comes off as merely offensive.

I don't know, seems pretty cut and dry to me. The improvements to the gunplay which began with Red Dead have me interested and I need to see for myself how the tone works overall. But of course anything less than a middling piece of garbage would mean I would play it as a fan of IV and Red Dead so the point is almost moot.

What review is getting the highest reviews?

LOL never played any GTA games before huh?^^

@darji: I believe he has, actually. The point he's trying to make is that you say something like that offends you so much, and yet a 9 out of 10. His point is it's a tad hypocritical.

It doesn't matter. He made a general statement in a "reviews compilation" thread that doesn't mention her specificically where there have been multiple reviews that bring up this issue. You come in all puffed up claiming he's saying things that she didn't claim, while he actually didn't claim those things to begin with. You're guilty of what you've accused him of doing.

It doesn't matter. He made a general statement in a "reviews compilation" thread that doesn't mention her specificically where there have been multiple reviews that bring up this issue. You come in all puffed up claiming he's saying things that she didn't claim, while he actually didn't claim those things to begin with. You're guilty of what you've accused him of doing.

Quick question for anyone whos' played the game already. Are there any MALE characters in the game who aren't complete shit heads?

No. This is a GTA game aftterall. There are no good guys in a GTA game.

@darji: If that's true then I don't see where Polygon/Gamespot is coming from with this whole misogyny thing. If there were an over abundance of strong male characters but all the women were fuck heads, yeah I'd get it, but if everyone is an arsehole I don't see the problem.

She (gamespot)called persona 4 anti gay and anti transgender just because Kanji did not become gay at the end and naoto never was a transgender in the first place. You do not need to understand her just ignore her.

Can we please not give these transphobic/homophobic/asshole remarks more attention by quoting them or posting screenshots. Discussing those comments and other reactions to GTA V reviews is fine, but we really don't need to disseminate that hate speech in the forums.

@dudeglove and @slashdance That Mega 64 video is amazing. Never seen it before.

On topic: The backlash against 9.0 and 9.5 review scores is insane. Pretty sure those scores mean a game is pretty darn good. And @ramone, I see where you're coming from, but that would also require a reviewer to have such a bad experience with that one specific aspect of the game that it devalued everything else that much. I doubt that any reviewer has had that strong a negative experience (yet) and using reviews to front some sort of feminist agenda would just be super icky. Either way, I know that I'm not going to be playing GTA V for a while (thanks college) but it's good to know Rockstar has hit it out of the park again.

@darji: Um... OK. I don't really care what she said about anything tbh. I was just curious about some comments I've read.

But that is the reason. She has some complex about all this stuff and that is why she calls everything out that is involving no women or women with bad characteristics. She is on a real feminism trip right now. And that is why you should ignore her opinion. As for polygon. They think it will give them clicks just like Kotaku.

I'm really curious to see a year from now where this debate is at, specifically whether or not it is still happening and if it is how viciously is it going cause at the moment I feel like everyone is the geez outside the kebab shop looking to start a fight cause he can. Maybe once the consoles launch people will calm down a bit. Maybe not.

In a year we will still have these Anita sakeasian videos so no this debate will not die until these videos are over.

In a year we will still have these Anita sakeasian videos so no this debate will not die until these videos are over.

Oh your parents do let you out of the basement? That's novel.

Expressing my thoughts...on a game message board. Thought that was pretty clear.

Good thing I never said that was the case. Leaping to conclusions is never wise.

This thread will be ruined all because of this sexism talk, its like being in fucking limbo at this point.

I haven't seen people be this completely batshit stupid about game reviews since Jeff gave Twilight Princess an 8.8.

No, wait. There was that one person back in my Gamespot days that completely lost her shit when Kevin VanOrd gave Blue Dragon a 6.0. That was like a ballet of self-destruction.

Almost done with installing! Weee! =D

Shit is so stupid. Like, I was incredibly flummoxed when polygon gave Ni No Kuni such a low score but christ who cares if you like it then play the damn thing.

I agree, but unfortunately that isn't the mindset of a lot of people on the internet. I don't know what it is about gaming, maybe it's the cost of the games, maybe it's just the audience it attracts, but something drives a lot of enthusiasts to need to justify their purchase and prove that their opinion is "right". It doesn't seem like you really get that sort of violent backlash against opposing opinions nearly as much in other media. People seem to generally be fine with others not liking the same TV, films, or music.

Honestly I can see why in terms of it being "misogynistic". The only thing is that is not the whole reason why it was a 9 and not a 10. Just shows how many people care about reviews which in a way is a good thing and also a bad thing. GTA 5 could have gotten a 5/10 and still would have been one of the best selling games.

I dont know anymore when it comes to the mysogony stuff... as times I feel it is just and worth talking abot, but I see it on the GTA review... and it's the biggest game of the year, short of COD, and it's gonna get a lot of clicks... maybe.. just MAYBE stuff like that should be pushed to a companion piece, if the content in question has no bearing on the actual end score of the game.

So, Piers Morgan on CNN mentioned it today while discussing the DC Navy Yard shooting. Apparently, he says that the shooter was "addicted to violent videogames" like Call of Duty and GTA, and he claimed that all of the recent shooters that liked videogames clearly show that something must be done about them.

It is literally day 1 and a shooting is already partially being blamed on games like this.

I'm guessing you didn't see the drama over Anna Gunn's op ed dealing with the Skyler White hate and people sending her death threats? It was everywhere for several days.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/24/opinion/i-have-a-character-issue.html?smid=tw-share&_r=2&

I know Jeff did the review, but all of the angry talk around assorted reviews just makes me a bit surprised this gif hasn't been posted yet...

Dunno man, I feel like readers expect much more objectivism than most outlets are capable of.

I think the German GameStar is one of the only outlets that's almost scientifically objective. They're the biggest PC-mag/website remaining in the world, do panel reviews for every bigger game. First they provide a reference list of similar games reviewed prior to the game at hand. Then they score individual aspects of the game numerically (maximum score per discipline differs depending on relative importance), giving pros and cons for each. Finally they tally up the score to xxx/100. For most games they'll also offer two or more candid editorial opinions. In my experience, these reviews are always spot-on.

It's just most outlets don't have staff as luxuriant as that, and those that do, like IGN and Gamespot, still seem to go for the opinionpiece-style of review, rather than the objectivist panel review. They do not suss out the particulars meticulously, and if they did, they don't care to surface it to their reader/viewership. In these cases, it feels like they're hiding behind the pretence of opinion, when in reality the expectation of objectiveness is justified due their size and relative importance as opinion makers. For example, on a objectivist panel review, the accusation of misogyny would have been related to Carolyn Petit's editorial comment section of the review, and have had a lesser impact on the overall score.

For opinionpiece reviews, anything beyond the 5-star scale just doesn't work. Just look at all the guff all the perfect 10s from IGN and such get. Nobody bats an eyelash twice at Jeff's 5-star review. Even if it essentially means the same thing. Personally, I prefer the objectivist route for my reviews, but so few outlets even attempt to go there these days, it's a way too rare commodity. So there's the disparity. The expectation of more objectiveness than most outlets are capable or willing to give.

China don't care!

Forget this sexism bullshit, I've played the game now and I'm much more interested in how Rockstar continue to avoid criticism for making third-person games with terrible gameplay compared to their contemporaries.

In terms of actually playing the thing, Saints Row and Sleeping Dogs leaves GTA5 in the dust.

Reviews shouldn't be and aren't objective. You're asking for someone's opinion on something. Its no different than if you ask your buddy Hey, whats up with the new GTA game is it good? Your friend is going to tell you how he feels about it. The only difference here is these people make a living off of doing this. I agree that there needs to be a level of professionalism that wouldn't be present from your average off the street opinion but wanting reviews to be objective about stuff is just silly. How much fun something is or how affecting the characters are to someone is something that you can't measure.

The only things you can nail down for sure are the technical aspects of it. Those can be objective facts. Everything else is subject to opinion.

Terrible gameplay like what? Cars that handle with some proper weight and physics to them? Characters that move with simulated weight and procedurally animate and react to forces in the gameworld?

Not everybody shares your tastes man. Flat physics models and shallow controls like Saints Row and Just Cause 2 may be for you, but don't put your lack of finesse on Rockstar. GTA IV controlled perfectly outside of wonky shooting mechanics and a finicky cover system. Especially the vehicles were great, if you're approaching it as the simulation it is.

It's one of the few misconceptions that still makes me angry. GTA games don't play like shit. You're playing them wrong! Approach it as a simulation, and everything will fall into place. If you got your way, GTA would be diluted into a lesser product with a fraction of the impact it has now, with it's simulation-heavy gameplay mechanics.

What have reviewers said of the differences between 360 & PS3 frame rates and pop in and jaggies?

Reviews can be objective. At least more objective than most outlets are willing to be. Put more reviewers on it. Suss it out. Rate everything on a scale according to how you've rated before. Reevalute all your reviews regularly.

• Provide a scale.
• Surface the method and the meticulous detail of how you derived your score.
• Offer up multiple perspectives and opinions on the review and the game.
• Be transparent.

Objectiveness is a matter of quantitiy and quality of information. Opinion certainly does factor into it, but within the context of well-done panel review, it's but the cherry on top.

They did not really mention it because both games are the same. People on foruks say that the PS3 version is a little little little bit better but it does not really matter. Just buy the version you prefer and you will get the same quality.

Just wait for the Digital Foundry comparison. Popular reports say 360 has crisper shadows and less jaggy foiliage, whilst PS3 has better Level of Detail texture draw-in and sports a minutely smoother framerate with less dips. But who knows at this point? Differences are minute enough not to matter.

In your reply to rick_fingers, I think you make a decent case why reviews can only put on a face of objectivity when really the bulk is subjective. As you said, "not everybody shares your tastes man".

If you then try to present your tastes as fact in a rigorous point scale, you're really just presented opinions as a lot of numbers. For some "objective" outlets, they might agree with rick_fingers that it doesn't play well, and they might give it a 3/10 in their Gameplay section. And another "objective" outlet might agree with you that it plays like an angel's dream, and they might give it a 10/10 in their Gameplay section. And then they tabulate it along with their numerical opinions on the music, numerical opinions on the visuals, and their numerical opinions on the story. Possibly leading to drastically different "objective" reviews.

Or an outlet just admits that their reviews are mostly subjective. That not everybody shares their tastes man.

Beyond that applying some weird formula to games reviews just ends up making the reviews feel manufactured and not really genuine. I want to know what someone personally thinks not some formulated opinion based on numbers and math.