Ever bought a game because of a negative review?

All this recent talk of Metacritic and its inherent irrelevance got me thinking; has anyone else here ever been convinced to buy a game because of a NEGATIVE review/opinion of a game, be it professional or user created?

For example, that's why I bought Might and Magic: Clash of Heroes for the DS. All the game's positive reviews were alright, but what finally convinced me were the game's many negative scores from users, almost all of which were from gamers who hadn't actually played it but just dismissed it based on it being a spinoff of HoMM, being largely puzzle based, its cartoony art style, and it being *gasp* published by Ubisoft (back when it was trendy and hip to hate them). In other words, most of the negative reviews told me more about the reviewers themselves than the actual game, and any game that pissed people off like that can't be too bad.

And then there's Banjo Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts. Again, the game did get some positive press, but the worst thing that even professional reviewers said about the game is that it's unique, creative, different from the previous games in the series, and that the game should have just stuck to the done-to-death formula. And as someone who had no emotional attachment to the previous games and is always looking for something unique, all these negative points suddenly became even more posisitive to me. Sure the game isn't perfect, but I guess fanboys can useful for something after all.

Anyone else?

Oh hell no. If somebody tells me a game is bad, I stay away from it.

People told me Alpha Protocol was bad and it was pretty awesome.

I have bought games with negative reviews but that was not the reason I bought them. Usually it was because a friend recommended it or I had my eye on it before it was ever released.

Because of one? No that dosent make any sense. In spite of one or several....Yes. My favorites are the reviewers that hate the genre. Do you hate star wars...Check! Do you hate MMO's...Check...Why dont you review SWOTOR. Im sure you will be unbiased.

I got Kane and Lynch because I read Jeff's review back in the day, and I wanted to prove him wrong. I really thought that game was going to be good.

People told me Alpha Protocol was bad and it was pretty awesome.

Only Rogue Warrior as far as I can remember

Fuck no. Why would I want to play a bad game?

Rouge warrior, just to see how bad it really is, and man, it's bad.

@Video_Game_King said:

Oh hell no. If somebody tells me a game is bad, I stay away from it.

Radiant Historia is bad.

I haven't bought a game because of any review but I certainly wouldn't if it is a bad one.

I got Duke Nukem Forever because of that. Never again.

Deadly Premonition.

IT WAS SO WORTH IT

Oh hell no. If somebody tells me a game is bad, I stay away from it.

@Narx said:

Deadly Premonition.

IT WAS SO WORTH IT

Same

I usually don't let reviews factor into my game purchases that much. I certainly don't ever pay any attention to user reviews for games (especially from metacritic.)

I find the Quick Looks to be the most useful on me deciding to get a game or not. Even if the people playing the quick look don't seem especially fond of the game, there might be something I like about it that makes me want it.

Lifeline, it had voice control that was way ahead of its time. The technology just wasn't where it needed to be at the time. I beat it, it was great.

@AndrewB said:

@Video_Game_King said:

Oh hell no. If somebody tells me a game is bad, I stay away from it.

Radiant Historia is bad.

If somebody tells me THIS, I sew their mouth shut, sit back, and watch as they explode in a violent burst of pent up stupidity.

@AndrewB said:

@Video_Game_King said:

Oh hell no. If somebody tells me a game is bad, I stay away from it.

Radiant Historia is bad.

Ohohohohohohoho.

@Amukasa: i will never understand why they chose jeff for that review

Only if the review comes off as whining.

@n11n12 said:

All this recent talk of Metacritic and its inherent irrelevance got me thinking; has anyone else here ever been convinced to buy a game because of a NEGATIVE review/opinion of a game, be it professional or user created?

For example, that's why I bought Might and Magic: Clash of Heroes for the DS. All the game's positive reviews were alright, but what finally convinced me were the game's many negative scores from users, almost all of which were from gamers who hadn't actually played it but just dismissed it based on it being a spinoff of HoMM, being largely puzzle based, its cartoony art style, and it being *gasp* published by Ubisoft (back when it was trendy and hip to hate them). In other words, most of the negative reviews told me more about the reviewers themselves than the actual game, and any game that pissed people off like that can't be too bad.

At first I was like "What? How can MM:COH have negative reviews" but then I read the part about user reviews. I don't listen to any video game user reviews period.

Desipte? Sure; because? Never.

I have never bought a game because of a negative review.

Reviews don't dictate my choice in buying video games but I thoroughly enjoyed the Green Lantern movie tie-in.

I agree. I've never bought a game because someone said it was bad, but I have bought a game despite it having bad reviews. I bought Homefront despite terrible reviews (which the single player campaign certainly deserved) but I had some fun with the multi player. It's a poorly rendered COD clone, but I treated it like a map pack extension, and it felt pretty OK.

I bought a copy of The Red Star mainly because of the positive press (and a mention on the Bombcast). But the thing that actually made me buy it was an incredibly inept review I found on metacritic. The review was so poorly thought out that I figured a person this ignorant hating a game must mean that it was, in fact, great.

BECAUSE of a negative review? because of middling reviews, sure (Binary Domain) but not full negative ones.

Not really but then again I don't listen to comments that much. I bought the Bionic Commando game despite everything saying it sucks etc and I had an awesome time with it. Who cares what others say, I respect Jeff and the guys but some of the games they love I couldn't even stand or found horribly mediocre. Doesn't mean they're wrong, just different tastes.

@Nentisys said:

People told me Alpha Protocol was bad and it was pretty awesome.

Agreed.

There are bad games ive played cuz of the hype(maybe a bad term) of how bad they were, wasn't from an actual review just word of mouth and the general internet and sources, sorta like what Duke Nukem Forever was for allot of people, although i cant say i do that on a big scale and i don't remember the last game i did it for, maybe Yakuza 4 since it is generally a bad game but has a weird following for it.

@NarficAcid: Amen for The Red Star. Bullet hell SHMUP + Streets of Rage = Hell yeah!

No because I just don't have that kind of money to do something such as that.

My purchasing decisions aren't influenced by any reviews, positive or negative.

@Video_Game_King said:

Oh hell no. If somebody tells me a game is bad, I stay away from it.

This... I don't buy bad games.

@hifi said:

I got Duke Nukem Forever because of that. Never again.

This.

@VierasTalo said:

@Nentisys said:

People told me Alpha Protocol was bad and it was pretty awesome.

This. I felt weird when watching reviews and LPs of Alpha Protocol and seeing people complain about the game when they didn't have much idea as to how to play it.

I had every idea how to play it, loved how much I could get through, but the game was a piece of shit. It was littered with glitches, particularly on PC, the bosses were AWFUL (I started the game on the hardest difficulty, and loved it until I got to the bosses. When I got to the guy who gets high on stage, I just couldn't beat it. Why? Because I wasn't using a combat spec, I was stealth and pistols.) That game is so awesome, but the craftsmanship is terrible. It's like a really pretty house where most of the rooms are sealed shut and useless, and the walls fall apart when you touch them. That game deserved the poor reviews, but it deserved the praise it got as well. I still have my save, maybe someday I'll be pro enough to beat that boss and move on, but until then I won't touch it. And that's sad, but the game was a pretty piss poor experience for a lot of people for very good reasons. When it isn't broken it's glitching, and when it isn't glitching it's being janky, and when it isn't being janky it's kinda awesome. But that's a lot to get through to get the awesome out.

And there were also plenty of valid arguments against how the game played too. Not everyone has to like a game's choices. Most of them were fine to me, beyond not making the bosses enjoyable/possible with all of the different build. I still think that game had the most enjoyable stealth puzzle of any game I've ever played.

@n11n12 said:

All this recent talk of Metacritic and its inherent irrelevance got me thinking; has anyone else here ever been convinced to buy a game because of a NEGATIVE review/opinion of a game, be it professional or user created?

I can't recall. I don't think I ever have. One thing negative reviews do, uh, do, is they actually make me take a closer look at said game only to see if all those complaints are warranted or if people are just hating on it.

Never because of one, but I've bought games (that I've really enjoyed) despite bad reviews (PC port of DMC3 and Lord of the Rings War in the North, for example.)

I don't listen to professional reviews anymore, they are completely untrustworthy. I never have any idea if a game is good or not from professional sites. I look at user reviews only. I look at what people say on forums and stuff and go from there.

No, if a game gets bad reviews I'll stay away. Though if it is something I really wanted to play, i'll buy it when it gets cheaper down line.

i ultimately dont care about reviews if theres a game that seems really bad and not interesting in anyway i stay away until i hear something positive. if it atleast seems interesting i will look it to it more and then decide

@VierasTalo said:

@Nentisys said:

People told me Alpha Protocol was bad and it was pretty awesome.

This. I felt weird when watching reviews and LPs of Alpha Protocol and seeing people complain about the game when they didn't have much idea as to how to play it.

I had every idea how to play it, loved how much I could get through, but the game was a piece of shit. It was littered with glitches, particularly on PC, the bosses were AWFUL (I started the game on the hardest difficulty, and loved it until I got to the bosses. When I got to the guy who gets high on stage, I just couldn't beat it. Why? Because I wasn't using a combat spec, I was stealth and pistols.) 

I bought Darkest of Days.

Soooooo...there's that.

*EDIT* I would really like to point out the word "bought" in that first sentence. It's not "played" or "borrowed". I actually paid full price for that game.

I almost bought Nuke Nukem Forever in a closing down sale, just to see how bad it was. Luckily, the person I was with asked me why I would do that, and I realised my insanity.

When a game gets received negatively in prof preview, it tends to make me curious. Plus some of them end up being really good as used titles when the price goes down, or as rentals.

I don't know if I've so much done it because of a bad review, but I've certainly many bought games in spite of them. I'm not big on reviews at all. Good examples are Vampire Rain and Alpha Protocol, both of which are severely misunderstood. Though AP is certainly the better of the two. By a lot.

People told me Alpha Protocol was bad and it was pretty awesome.

I find that negative reviews are your best source of finding out what's really wrong with a game. Assuming they say enough to give the indication that they played the game. Positive reviews often turn into romance novels where people don't even want to mention negatives, or they just really white wash them.