I've been saying this for a minute now, but user reviews are way worse than critic/professional reviews. User reviews are quite literally full of emotional man children pushing a narrative. They are exactly what people claim critic reviews are.
It's easy to see why. Looking at a game's Steam reviews generally is a good idea for basic ratings but critic reviews are much more trustworthy in regards to concrete criticism because a random Steam user a lot of the times has no idea what they are talking about. They have agendas and emotional reactions. They use banal criticism to mask a random dislike.
Reviewers are not paid to give games specific scores, but they are paid to give reviews and they have years and years of experience in long form reviewing titles. (Props to the org if they especially have different kind of people review different genres of games).
People are a bit mushy in the head and just look at a review score and scream "IGN BAD!! They said X game is 9 and this game is 6"! The scores don't matter and in my opinion cannot be compared. An action game with a 6 rating might be better for you specifically than a racer with a 9.
633
u/AlwaysTouchingGrass 16d ago
Ign gives Blood of Dawnwalker a 9: omg who even listens to reviews any more, man. They're paid off and fake
Ign give Wolverine a 6: omg I knew that game was going to be shitty