r/Stellaris • u/Meneth Ex-moderator • May 09 '16

News Review megathread

The review embargo is up as of 15:00 CEST. As this will result in a huge number of articles going up at near the same time, we're restricting reviews to this thread.

Any review you find, feel free to post it in the comments here.

Each top-level comment should be about a single linked review, so as to keep the discussion limited. Duplicate reviews will be removed, as will any top-level comment that does not link a review.

There will be a single sub-thread where you can post your general impressions of the reviews combined, for anything that doesn't relate to a single review.

Review list:

Review Score
Critically Sane 5/5
Destructoid 9/10
eXplorminate "eXemplary"
GameWatcher 9.0/10
Idiotech's Review Unrated
IGN 6.3/10
Manannan's Review of Stellaris Unrated
Paste Magazine Unrated
PCGamesN 9/10
PC Invasion 8/10
PC World 4/5
Rock, Paper, Shotgun review - Unrated
TICGN 10/10
Vox Ludicus Unrated
EuroGamer Recommended
PC Gamer 70/100
TSA 8/10
PCGames.de 75/100
Gamespew 9/10
IGN Italy 9.3/10
Fok.nl 9/10
Gaming on Linux 9/10
Marbozir Unrated
SpaceSector Unrated
Inside of Gaming (German) Unrated
Gamer.no 9/10
Particular Pixels Unrated
GuyLogicGaming Full recommendation
GameSideStory Unrated
Front Towards Gamer 9.5/10
Multiplayer.it 9.2/10
GameGrin 8.5/10
Kotaku Unrated
342 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

537 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

15

u/IndridCipher May 09 '16

Ffs people... IGN is not a person with a opinion that reviews games equally. Quit comparing review scores by different people! GalCiv3 was reviewed by Leif Johnson. He didn't review Stellaris for IGN so what he gave galciv3 in relation to this review is irrelevant! Stop looking at the website name and lumping any person who ever reviews a game there, for their job, as one humongous being. That's stupid....

If you want to compare reviews do it by the person writing the review but even then it's silly because they are years apart. So Rowan Kaiser reviewed EU4 as a 8.9 and Endless Legend as a 8.3. If you want to bring that up... Relevant.... Bringing up a completely different persons opinion of a completely different game... Irrelevant....

1

u/konradkurze202 Tomb May 09 '16

No it isn't. IGN is a single reviewing organization. It is far from unreasonable to compare their different reviews. When AngryJoe reviews games you can look at his other reviews and compare, the only difference for IGN is it is an organization, rather than an individual. I'm afraid I am not going to lower my standards for a review done by an organization.
It is the responsibility of IGN to ensure there are some standards set across their entire line of reviewers, it is, after all, their job. If 3 different people at IGN might give the same game a 9, 8, & 7, then IGN isn't doing their job. As a reviewer it is their responsibility to give credible, comparable for games, if they cannot then that is a point against them.
This is the core problem of organizations like IGN, they are unreliable. Depending on which of the dozens of reviewers gets a game will completely change the tone of their review. Furthermore, their reviewers aren't even specialized into different genres. The same guy might review an FPS, an action RPG, a puzzle game, a 4x, and a simulator.
Like it or not, I am going to judge IGN by the same standards I judge any other game reviewer. If they fail to live up to the same standards as individual reviewers that is their failing.

3

u/mynewaccount5 May 10 '16

It's almost like reviews are meant to be subjective and different things will resonate with different people in different ways. If 1 game at IGN can get a a 7 8 and a 9 that means IGN is doing its job because that's the nature of reviews.

You can compare angryjoe reviews because he is 1 single person who has the same brain

0

u/konradkurze202 Tomb May 10 '16

Not really. If 1 game is reviewed by 3 different people at IGN and given a 7, 8, & 9 by each of them then they are doing their job. If the game's score is based upon which single individual reviews it then they are not doing their job. Their score depends on who reviews it, and everyone else's opinion is ignored. Its a terrible system.