Love them or hate them, odds are that if you’re reading this you also read game reviews from sites and magazines such as Game Informer, Kotaku, OXM, Polygon, etc. Some people actually use them to determine whether a game is worth purchasing or not,
while others are just looking at what people say about games they’ve already played. It can be entertaining seeing what others think about something you like or dislike. Often these reviews and their scores lead to debates on whether a game is actually any good or how it stacks up to another similar game. Additionally, it seems that once readers get their particular outlet’s score, they close the book on whichever game isbeing reviewed and that is just plain stupid. When a game is reviewed, that should give you some initial impressions but by no means close the door on the game. What people forget is that these scores are still subjective opinions not some grand majority consensus. Let me go through a few titles that I see in a different light than other company’s game reviewers.
I’ll start with a game that as you all know I adore, “Alien: Isolation”. It got some good scores but didn’t do so well on other major sources such as IGN, Polygon and Gamespot.
Now what should we take away from bad scores? Should they simply deem a game as bad and unworthy of anyone’s time? No, worst case you should continue to research the game because again, these scores came from a total of one person per company. The reviewer may just not take well to the way it was executed, b