We all know about the publisher drama and "bribes" and whatever the internet comes up with. But there is ONE thing that is persistent and is always present in video game reviews but big websites: The fact that the reviewer never bought the game in the first place.
As a consumer, I'd expect my $60 to be worth the purchase and get some quality entertainment from the game. On the other hand, the reviewer received a free copy of said game and probably never had big expectations from it, since they didn't spend a dime to buy it. They also never have buyers remorse, which is a common thing among gamers. They can give a game a huge score just because they can, and because they are reviewing a product they played for FREE.
Just my thoughts on the matter :)
Recent discussions in the Video Games forum
|Another TR Rumor; Rise of Tomb Raider might not be a timed exclusive||54||16 seconds ago|
|What audio options do you like to use for gaming? Do you prefer headphones (Turtle Beaches), the TV itself, or a full surround sound setup for gaming?||15||28 minutes ago|
|VGF Official Bloodborne Thread (Expect Spoilers)||3557||32 minutes ago|
|OT: Memorial Day Weekend Plans||17||36 minutes ago|
|Special Edition White X1 Halo MCC bundle announced||78||42 minutes ago|
|OT: first, Honey Boo Boo's mom dates a child molester, and now one of the Duggar offspring is molesting little girls||35||57 minutes ago|
|God of War Thoughts: Kratos Discussion||40||1 hour ago|
|OT: 2015 NBA playoffs!||711||1 hour ago|
|The Witcher 3 Discussion Thread||560||1 hour ago|
|Can someone make the darn "Weekend Gaming: What's everyone playing this weekend?" thread already?||38||1 hour ago|
|OT: Memorial Day is about having a BBQ, not about the military.||15||1 hour ago|
|OT: Just Over 10 Years...||8||1 hour ago|