Are people controlled by reviews, or by their own opinion on what games they like

[Niale]

Age of Control, muhahaha!
Follow me sheep
I'm just kidding, your opinion

[Madonna]

The most effective method of selling something is selling via friends; if your friends can vouch for something, word of mouth, you are way more likely to purchase than any other form of advertising. Reviews and going out on a limb on something are both valid reasons to purchase something, but if you know someone whom you trust and whose opinion you respect, you are going to pick up that game/movie/thing that much faster.

[Ayen]

I get the feeling you don't like critics very much.

[Niale]

I get the feeling you don't like critics very much.

I praise entertainment
I am not convinced by people claiming they know everything, basically a fest crash for me , i can sort that myself . But ey its cool
No worries, its all chill
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FA3Royf9_zM
Edit:

[Jiro]

Some critics are undoubtedly trout at their job, and some are influenced by marketing departments or bribes or whatever, but the simple fact remains that game criticism is not objective and anybody who believes that it is is an idiot. There is no objective or standardised way to review a game -- even the very act of scoring them is imprecise (I wrote a journal paper on this if you care to read it).

I read reviews. I read them for games I'm interested in and ones I'm not. Because one element of reviewing is entertainment -- if I'm not enjoying the review, I'm not gonna finish it and the critic doesn't get his or her opinion heard and the whole exercise was a bit fruitless.

[Laddy]

I pretty much only listen to critics that value a design philosophy I agree or respect, and that's pretty much how critics should be treated, imo.

Frankly I think game criticism is far too lenient and complacent and most major publications really drop the ball when it comes to actual insight or anything remotely resembling objective critique.

[Skyblade]

Word of mouth is definitely higher ranked in my mind than reviews. I have to take most reviews with a grain of salt anyway, as I'll frequently find that things people complain about are things that I love.

[Old Manus]

Everyone says they don't listen to game reviews, but if they really didn't we wouldn't have had the 8.8 saga

[theundeadhero]

Some people do. Some people don't.

[Botchmun]

there are some reviewers I like and some I don't, I always form my own opinions on games and I'm happy when reviewers agree but all in all I'm more of a "make up my own mind, share opinions" kinda guy. Sometimes my opinions are swayed but when I like what I like not even two cans of spinach in Popeye can change my mind.

[Jiro]

I pretty much only listen to critics that value a design philosophy I agree or respect, and that's pretty much how critics should be treated, imo.

Frankly I think game criticism is far too lenient and complacent and most major publications really drop the ball when it comes to actual insight or anything remotely resembling objective critique.

Can you point out a feasible way that an objective standard can be evenly applied to video games? It's literally impossible without stifling both game design and freedom of choice, even personal taste. I don't weight reviews I consume highly in determining whether or not I should purchase a game, but this idea that critics are blowing smoke or not worth a grain of salt confuses me. Who are you reading and why don't you find something or someone else?

The metric of an out of ten score is heavily flawed. Personal preference is the only way to approach this without diminishing its significance further. Like you say, finding a critic that has a similar design philosophy -- or at least one you can relate to -- is your best bet. But entertaining ideas of objectivity is pointless. Tetris cannot be measured against The Legend of Zelda which cannot be measured against Bioshock Infinite which cannot be measured against Rock Band, but they're all rated on the same ten point (or, what, four point if we only use 7-10) scale.

[Ghosteses]

a review is just a opinion. someones opinion that they have every right to =D

i never read a review and take it to mean i should not get a game. if it IS a bad review i go in more cautious and maybe get more and more opinions.

but i am not controlled by reviews. always better to judge stuff for yourself

[Bolivar]

I really can't trust reviews at all, even journalists who I agree with on some titles are far off the mark from me in others.

[Spuuky]

I only play games that are scored 95/100 or higher, I don't even bother reading the reviews.

[Bunny]

I take reviews, not just for games, with a grain of salt. They can be a good measure of the worthiness of a game if they are mostly uniform in their grading systems (sub-5/10 or 50/100 scales). If a game has high scores from some sites and lows from a few others, I'll typically check it out to see what the deal is with them.

Aside from word of mouth "advertising," I think the best way to get me to play a game is to have a playable demo available. I very rarely buy games that I haven't heard about already if there is not a demo available. More companies should utilize them and it confuses me why they don't.