During the whole time I've been at GameFAQs, probably the best idea (on paper) they ever came through with there was their current review rating system.
I thought it was bitchin' groovin', dude! A lot of us had been talking about how it'd be nice if actual writers of quality could be seperated from the "chaff" in some way......and a few of us had the chance. By being on the "Highest Rated" list, a number of the best writers that submitted there could be prominently featured.
And then.....everything was ruined. First off, why can't you directly link to the review from the "Highest Rated" list? When I click on the name, all I get is some stupid screen telling me who all rated that review. To get to the review, I have to run a search for the name of the game and manually get to the proper review. What's the point of featuring (and that word is used loosely since I have to go through about 4-5 screens/menus just to get to this list) the "best" reviews on the site if there is no easy access to them?
And worse, when I looked forward to this function, I forgot about something that should be considered a given: IN GENERAL, PEOPLE ARE FUCKING IDIOTS!
I just spent about an hour on that site, going through a huge list of shit reviews by either shit writers or good writers who were beginning just to make the list look respectable again. For some stupid masochistic reason, I feel compelled that no review should be on the all-time highest rated list unless I've rated it, since so many of the people that do these ratings are fucking morons. Every day, some folk self-rate themselves a nice, fat 10 OR they give some poorly written review a 9-10 because they agree with it.
The only good things about that site nowadays are:
1. Review exposure/hits.
2. Laughing at the idiot brigade.
|Most recent blog posts from Rob Hamilton...|
No one has responded to this post yet.