I think Im through reading game reviews.  They lead to way too many expectations of a game, and I never fully enjoy the game as a result.  The final straw: Red Dead Redemption.  I read a few reviews of the game before buying it (Game Informer, IGN, etc.), and was stoked.  This sounded like the western game that Call of Juarez was not; open, alive, and with all the spaghetti flair of old movies I watched with my dad.   The game was great; in fact it was the first GTA-style game by Rockstar I played from start to finish.  The problem, though, as it always is when I read reviews before playing a game, is that it all felt too familiar.  Why?  Because some people had already told me what to expect!!  Every major plot branch had been mentioned in the reviews, and even though no direct spoiler were given, I had a pretty good idea of what to expect at the end.  Playing the game was like going through a checklist of everything the reviews said it would be.  Duels?  Check.  Headed South?  Check?  Back up north?  check.  Ending that "defies storytelling convention"?  check.  If I wouldve just played the game with no prompting from the reviews, I might just have been blown away by the breadth and scope of the game.  Instead, it fit neatly in my expectations, while managing to disappoint ever so slightly as I new it was all coming.  
 
When I think about it, most of my favorite games were games I just picked up without researching first.  Well, I knew that they were considered good by the number scores reviewers had given them, I just never read the reviews themselves.  Jak II, RE4, Shadow of the Colossus, FFX, Portal, Bioshock, the story part of MW1; these are among my favorite games, and I think part of that is I didnt really know what to expect from each one (well, with FFX I expected a FF story, but that was it).  I did know they were hyped, and that quite a few people loved them, but nothing more.  Each one therefore had moments I truly did not expect, and that adds a ton of thrill to any good game.  If I was well-prepped on the feel and gameplay of the games, they might not stand out so much.....So now I wonder; what would Dead Space, FFXIII, MW2, Demons Souls, Red Dead or GOW 3 have been like coming into them completely blind?  Certainly more jaw-dropping, to say the least.
 
I never really read reviews for games before a couple of years ago, and looking back, I enjoyed what I played more because some dude hadnt told me what to expect in the game beforehand.  Really, how can a game be fresh and exciting if youve already been told what the experience is going to be like?

They're not telling you what to think of the game, they're just telling you what they thought of the game.
 
But I agree that some reviews can actually take away from the game. Not through story spoilers but there is a certain appeal to a game where you wonder 'what's the next weapon I get going to be?' or 'what will the next boss fight be like?'.

" I never really read reviews for games before a couple of years ago, and looking back, I enjoyed what I played more because some douche hadnt told me what to think of the game beforehand.  Really, how can a game be fresh and exciting if youve already been told what the experience is going to be like? "

I agree that reviews can make a game seem less interesting or fun especially when they give away major events. The only thing I like to use the written review for is to find out if the game has an major bugs or game design issues. I actually went into Dead Space knowing nothing about the game except that  a friend said it was good when he handed me the controller and not knowing anything may that game better imo.

" @amoremono1 said:

" I never really read reviews for games before a couple of years ago, and looking back, I enjoyed what I played more because some douche hadnt told me what to think of the game beforehand.  Really, how can a game be fresh and exciting if youve already been told what the experience is going to be like? "

Wait, so some game reviewer is a douche because he reviewed a game, aka did his job? "

meh, reviews are there for the people want to know what to expect. some of them do give out what the game is about and things like that. you just have to kind of skimm through the reviews to see how you would like them.

@mazik: I didnt mean to imply reviewers are necessarily telling you what to think of a game.  The power of suggestion is a very strong force though, and for me, reading their opinions inevitably influences mine for better or worse... 
 
@davidwitten:  Good point, thank Jeebus for the edit button.  just for the record, though, Im one of those douches who writes online game reviews too; I didnt mean to offend anyone.   If someone gets paid to voice their opinions of anything, more power to them, and Im freaking jealous.
 
@john:  I think Dead Space was great, but it wouldve been way more immersive if I hadnt already known what to expect.  I read a bunch of professional and user reviews before that one....someone had even pointed out to me the acronym of the chapter letters, so that was spoiled too....booh.  Im definitely not doing that with the second one...

@harry: Nothing meant by that.  The quality of the person writing a review wasnt the point, and for the record, I think you reviewologists do a fine job at what you do and Im sure youre all pretty kick ass.  I live with people who trash talk alot, and its rubbed off.  Again, apologies to anyone out there who writes game reviews. 

I agree. Usually I just read the summary of a few reviewers I trust, but never the whole review. I like to be surprised and discover stuff myself.
 
I also stopped watching GT video reviews since they usually put in footage of later levels of a game.

You kinda have a point. In fact, I'm having a hard time thinking of a game that I went in blind, and that's a little depressing. Almost all of the really good games I've played in the last few years have been spoiled, although not all of that was from reviews alone. Sometimes even the information a company releases can do that. Dead Space is a good example, and specifically the boss fight with the leviathan, that would have been crazy if I didn't know about it before the game was released.

I may try going on information blackout for Dead Space 2 and Mass Effect 3, among others, to see how that turns out. The problem is that with the exception of sequels (and sometimes not even then) it can be hard to know if a game will be worth your money without first getting info on it.

" @harry: Nothing meant by that.  The quality of the person writing a review wasnt the point, and for the record, I think you reviewologists do a fine job at what you do and Im sure youre all pretty kick ass.  I live with people who trash talk alot, and its rubbed off.  Again, apologies to anyone out there who writes game reviews.  "

I read them but I don't pay much attention to them, usually games that get bad reviews I still find some enjoyment out of.

Gametrailers especially have an annoying knack for letting loose a few annoying spoilers too. Gameplay and storywise. I more often buy the game first before I actually read/watch the majority of reviews.

I have nothing against game reviews.
 
I just found out that watching Quick Looks or Youtube playthroughs of the game are a lot better at figuring out if the game is good or not than just a subjective review.

I don't like to read reviews because i know subconsciously they influence how i feel about a game, unless the game is interesting enough to defy my pre-conceived notions (brought about from reviews) I generally agree with the opinions of reviewer and this can effect my enjoyment (this usually only happens with mediocre or polarizing games). Also flaws that i would have overlooked become obvious. 

Having said that, i can't  stop myself from looking up a score to see if the game is worth a purchase. In 10 years i think game reviews will become more like that of film, when it gets to that stage im out.  

Reviews are good for insight on the game's strengths and weaknesses, but you should never let a review be the deciding factor in whether or not you will enjoy the game. Just because it got a 9 out of 10 doesn't mean you'll enjoy it, and conversely, just because it got a 5 or 6 out of 10 doesn't mean you won't enjoy it.  
   
I've stopped using all but a few sites I can trust (eg. Giant Bomb) because sites like IGN and GameSpot operate on a scale of 7.5 - 10, with anything below being complete shit. Some reviewers on these sites also come up with frivolous bullshit to knock the game down for when they personally don't like the game. Metro 2033 got shit because "the whites on their eyes are... too white".  

I never read through any critic review of anything regarding to entertaining before experiencing it myself 1st.  
I read them after I finished the game 

I only read/watch one review nowadays, GameTrailers. This isn't because I find their view the epitome of journalism, its because seeing a game in action along with hearing their words is so much better to men than just reading a block of text with some images scattered in. That way, I can see for myself if a game's janky cover system is indeed easily over looked.

I always read reviews. 
 
Partly it is because I simply don't have the time and patience anymore to sit through tedious stuff without knowing when (or in some cases, if) it'll end, partly because it helps me to get to know the reviewers. Brad likes Final Fantasy games, Dave has a thing for PC RTS games, Jeremy Parish likes his RPGs: I know my preferences, I know their preferences. They overlap, that's good! Miles apart, I'll pass or wait until it's in the bargain bin. Couple that with the podcast most sites release and you'll get a good picture about the games you're interested in.

NoobToob is the only place where I actually finish reviews because they focus on whether or not the game is good, not on explaining the game to you.