darkside

I used to check EGM religiously for reviews and their reviews always seemed to be the most accurate. However, in the last 3-4 months they have been running down nearly every game released it seems.

Its not even the low scores they have been giving out as much as the smart ass comments about many games. Its almost like they have become gaming elitists that are too good for gaming. Yeah I know there is crap out there, but by reading this magazine you wouldn't think there was a good game released in the last 6 months. Are they judging todays games against the expectations of the PS3 and Xbox360? They have gone from being .3-.8 lower than other reviewers to almost seeming like they are reviewing completely different games from everyone else.

I've had to start using IGN and Gamespot for my reviews because even though some may say their numeric scores are too high they at least go into enough detail to give an honest idea of what a game offers.

Some recent scores that just seem like bullcrap from EGM:

Death Jr: 6.5 to 7.5 by everyone, but EGM gives it a 4.83 and completely ridicules the game. Feedback from actual gamers is favorable. The game isn't perfect, but its not the pile of crap EGM makes it out to be.

Coded Arms 6.6 and 7.0 by IGN and Gamespot, 4.5 by EGM. Again a very sarcastic review that makes it sound like monkeys made the game. Feedback from actual gamers is again much more favorable. A few of the problems are there, but Konami didn't just crap this out they way EGM made it seem.

Advance Wars DS: EGM are the only ones anywhere to give this game below a 9 out of 10 average. Everyones gold award game gets a silver from EGM.

NHL 2K6: Pretty good reviews from many. IGN and Gamespot go 8.7 and 8.5. EGM goes 6.83 after giving 2K5 a 8.33 a year ago.

Day of Reckoning 2: Very good reviews from both IGN and Gamespot giving it 8.5 and 8.1. EGM's take, 5.83. How can the game be that bad and IGN, Gamespot and several others mags not catch it?

Geist: Granted this one isn't perfect by any means but it gets a 7.8 from both IGN and Gamespot. EGM gives it a 5.33 and much ridicule.

Killer 7: Loved by both IGN, Gamespot and several mags. 8.3 and 8.1, but from EGM a very critical 5.5. I can tell by this review that the entirely wrong type of person reviewed the game. They also reviewed the PS2 version, but applied the score to the Cube version as well even though many of the issues mentioned are not in the Cube version.

EGM has completely fallen out of favor with me. Its okay to be harsh with reviews, but at least by realistic. Reading some of the reviews and then playing the actual game you get the feeling EGM didn't even play many of the games past the first level. That mag has really gone down the tubes as far as I'm concerned.

Dragon Fly

It's not really just the low scores, I think I've noticed a desperately wide range in scores between reviewers. One game this month got a 7.5 from one reviewer and a 3.5 from another.

Crizzar

sadly enough, about the only reason I still pick up gaming mags any more is for the demo discs. I really enjoy sifting through the whole rundown of reviews on metacritic.com

Spicollidriver1

Actually the new offical xbox magazine gave nhl2k6 a bad review to they said there is some problems that werent there last year. Also the presentation is not the same. On the rest I agree with you

Chris_D

I only occasionally read (which involves buying) egm because it's so expensive over here. But I really don't get the amount of respect their reviews seem to have from the gaming public. For starters their reviews are really not that useful in telling you about the game. They seem to assume that you have read every preview, and presumably other coverage, that has already been printed, so any discussion about the actual game content seems to not find its way into the review. Sometimes I even have trouble telling what the gameplay would be like.

Then the 3 reviewers often seem to be in competition to see who can make the most funny, and smart ass remarks when instead they should be providing objective commentary on the actual +ves and -ves of the game. Of course, jamming all this onto a single A4 page (with images), even for bigger titles, doesn't give you much room for real content.

I don't necessarily disagree with their actual scores, as they're just a number which is based on that reviewers opinion, and in theory over time you can automatically adjust the numbers to your own scale. Of course with out any real content / arguments to justify the number this can be hard to do.

This is why I prefer Edge.

DamingR

Maybe they're sick and tired of playing the same old games over and over again and are looking for some exciting games to breathe some fresh air into the industry. I know I am.

jeffdsmith

That was my initial thought, but there are some innovative titles in darksides list there.

At the end of the day, its an opinion, even though almost everyone uses the 10/10 scale its still an opinion and subjective. A 5.0 for me might be a 7.5 for you. So having lower scores does not necessarily mean EGM is whack.

Inserting pointless jokes etc. at the cost of coverage of content is just foolish and needs to go. The reaility is though, the majority of gamers that buy the mag are 12-20 year old males that enjoy that humor, therefore the magazine sells more by appealing to the largest audience.

If EGM has decided to actively or passively forsake their past history and become a more immature magazine, it doesn't matter, simply don't read it; I no longer do.

Joe Molotov

Killer 7 is different and interesting and unlike anything I've ever played, but yet they gave it one of the lowest scores of anybody. Even though it got a solid 8.1 and 8.3 from IGN and Gamespot, I think alot of people saw the EGM review and instantly thought Killer 7 was crap.

If they were really sick of playing the same old games, they'd quit awarding Madden the "Game of the Month" award EVERY. SINGLE. YEAR.

Josh H

Personally I like their reviews. But I also hate most games I try anymore, so I guess I'm "too elitist" for games now too.

Outlaw

lol, I was about to say the exact same thing. If killer 7 wasn't "different" enough for them than nothing will be. Killer 7 is the most refreshing and original non traditional game that has ever come out.

It's been years since i've picked up an EGM. I do look at scores though and its still a way to gauge how good a game "might be", but I've learned to get a feel for certain sites and read the writing in the reviews, which many times don't accurately reflect the final score. Sometimes they'll will bash the game but give it a high score, but other times they'll glow over the game but give it a low score. Gamespot reviews are usually pretty thorough without being overly long. The more important thing is that from reading the review, you should be able to find out if YOU would like the game, even if the reviewer did not. I find that most often on gamespot so far (its far from perfect, they are humans reviewing the games afterall, but I seem to find that more often with them more than some of the other sites, but then again even I don't visit them as often as I used to). Given the space limitations of paper, that is tougher for EGM to do since they have to cram criticism/review/information in a small 4x4 inch column per game. Or maybe they're watching too much X-play.

Ralph Wiggum

EGM's review structure has been a mess for awhile now, IMO. The "couple of paragraphs from four editors" approach worked great back when it was the same four guys doing it every month, and even when they expanded but kept a consistent group. You quickly got to know exactly whose opinions you valued. There's probably been twenty different reviewers over the last couple years alone and they've abandoned substantive pre-review coverage for all but the biggest games (read: the ones that don't need it), so you rarely have any idea where the review is coming from in the first place. Now throw in the fact that their "reviews" are little more than a casual roundtable that spends more time on the reviewers in-jokes than on the games, and EGM's opinions aren't worth a whole lot anymore. Pithy comments and a number don't cut it.

spainlinx0

I still miss Gamefan magazine. High quality paper, and lots of writing.

lukewarmwater

I got to be honest I really like egm. Imo it's the best gaming magazine out there. But I do agree that some of the reviews are a bit to inconsistent.( I.E. Hulk getting a 9, 9 and 7? Fantastic four getting a 7, 6, and 4? )
But the magazine seems to really know videogames. The only thing I am a bit no into is the most popular games getting most of their coverage, but that's more a problem with the industry than anything.

I really like reading the magazine too, it isn't just a magazine that just has pictures of upcoming games. When the did the back and fourth between the designer and attorney about game violence, their zelda preview, their next gen reports, their miyamoto interview, etc.

For those of you that don't like egm, can you think of a better magazine?

jeffdsmith

Next Generation - circa 1995-1997 - I often go back and read them to remember that magazines do not have to be trash.

What many of us forget is that the magazine business is simply no where near as profitable as it once was. Television and the internet have slashed into the business like a mircle blade on a tomato. Today's profits are gained by lots of advertising and mass mailings, that is why so many "subscriptions" can be had for free. In the past people got the magazine because they were seriously into games, the same can't be said for all of todays audience.

DJ_Longfellow

What about a magazine NOW...not 10 years ago. Live in the NOW man

PixyJunket

I don't read EGM on a regular basis, but I will pick it up from time to time when I'm at my friend's place.. and every time I do I regret it. You are right in that they seem to come off as elitist pricks and seem to have some kind of stock in the words "kiddy" and "childish". They also seem to discount girl gamers as an urban legend which is apparent whenever you see the amount of ridicule something that may be more female-targeted in their magazine gets. Just another publication that's really harming the gaming world by celebrating the "gaming is for pre-pubescent males" ideology. Disgusting.

fujishig

At first I thought you said high quality writing... ha!

I liked Gamefan, even though I was one of the many ripped off by their "subscriptions." What I really liked was their import scene stuff, which was pretty much unparallelled at that time (because we now get most games over here anyway, the importance of that is diminished... but I still wish other mags would review or write about Japanese-only games more)

Recently, while waiting for my wife to finish shopping, I picked up a copy of Play which is by the same guy as Gamefan (Halverson). Beautiful magazine, but there's a definite emphasis on platformers (I think that cat platformer got game of the month), but there was definitely the eclectic feel of the old Gamefan. I'm actually considering subscribing to it now, just for the pictures. But the reviews are horrid.

Next Gen was an incredible magazine... very dense, which meant it took longer than 20 minutes to read through, and a lot of the articles were in-depth or behind the scenes instead of just previews and the like.

I used to get PSM, but that was in the early days when I only had a PS2... now it makes little sense to me to buy a mag that only focuses on one system. (I did start getting OPM for free, with demo disk, though, and XBN, before it died)

EGM is ok. If not for my free subscription, I doubt I'd continue to subscribe. I understand they just can't compete with the timeliness of the internet when it comes to reporting news. (In a recent issue, they printed something like "Xbox 360 will NOT be backward compatible: you can't always believe what you read on the internet"). I find I gloss over the magazine when I first get it, looking over the pictures and reviews of games I'm interested in, but rarely pick it up after that. I have noticed lower scores, but I don't mind the diversity in their scoring... it may prevent a great game from getting "game of the month" but not everyone will like every game. I think it's actually a strength of theirs that they have different viewpoints (though you will never, never see someone that hates sports games review Madden). For example, I can see how Killer 7 would not be everyone's cup of tea, and if my initial excitement for it had not been tempered by the crappy reviews for it, I might not enjoy it as much as I do. I think Advance Wars DS is a very enjoyable game, but it's pretty much more of the same: using the stylus is entirely optional (and I actually rarely use it), and the dual screen thing is not that revolutionary.

Believe it or not, I actually trust the people on this board more when it comes to new releases, because there are many different opinions here, and games get "reviewed" as they come out. Without this board, I would have never bought games like Culdcept, or known how fun the Incredible Hulk game really is.

jediwicz

It's funny how EGM gave Halo 2 a perfect score than went on to complain about the game for rest of the review, don't know how this is possible, bribes. IGN and Gamespot are my main sources of written reviews now but I also use Gamestats.com which calculates an average score from many different internet/magazine sources and it provides a little validity to overall scoring. If it's got an 8 on Gamestats it's an average score from a bunch of legit sources so I know the game will be good.

outer-edge

I agree, I was attracted to Play because of the pretty colors, but the writing stinks. Much of what Pixy said about EGM, I've often thought about Play. What's worse, is that they rank some games high when nobody else does, and I think they do it because they can't admit they were wrong. They spend months hyping the game and calling it next big thing, and when it truly is not, they won't admit it (could be advertiser pressure as well).

I read EGM on occasion and have taken up their free subscriptions before. Mostly I do it for previews though, since I have not found reviews I think are consistently good in any current magazine.

SteelgearX

I don't get what all the fuss is about. I've been reading EGM since I was a kid ('89-'90). They're not perfect, but I trust them more than most. The OP is averaging the three reviews for each of those games and that can be somewhat misleading. Where most other review sites have one person review and score the game, EGM has three seperate reviewers with three seperate scores.

How can you possibly say they are inconsistent? If you and I were were to score a game, chances are we'd come up with different scores. You have to understand that they don't see each others scores until they've all scored it. Imagine if EGM was like IGN and the person that gave Killer 7 a really low score had reviewed it. That would be it, a score of 4.5 (or whatever it was). Nothing to compare it to. With EGM you sort of have to find which reviewers you to tend to fall in line with. They all think differently just like we do on this board.

I love Metal Gear, a ton of you hate it. A lot of you love Halo 2 and play it to death, I quit a long time ago and spend way too much time on Splinter Cell. Such is life.

Oh, and about Madden getting game of the month every freaking year... I agree 110%.

Superboy

personally, I don't trust anyone's reviews anymore. I always find most reviews always leave something niggling about a game out... Case in point would be Halo. Only Gamespy's review mentioned how incredibly repetitive the game is and even the intense story was really underdeveloped.

If I was a game reviewer I'd probably give most games a 6/7 when most are giving them perfect scores.

Trigger

never liked EGM - barely one rung above GamePro.

Josh H

To be fair the Madden games are always excellent lately and they come out in August which is a slow month for game releases.

spainlinx0

Madden should get game of the month every year. I mean if it gets it one year, and they release the same exact game the next year why wouldn't it?

maingon

i agree, i always notice that EGM's Reviews are always alot lower then everyone elses. they are hard on every game. i still like the magazine but the review section i think has gone way down hill. I try to be funny and sarcastic with there reviews. they never go into detail with the gameplay, graphics or sound.