A review of Borderlands 2 written by Adam Najberg has caused controversy by gaining thousands of comments from disgruntled gamers unhappy at the negative views expressed in it. As if reviews are always and entirely factual.
I have some criticisms about the review myself: The constant references to Call Of Duty seem out of place as Borderlands 2 isn’t really comparable to that series; and the reviewer is clearly a casual, or mainstream, gamer, so not exactly the market Gearbox is aiming for with this game.
However, even those criticisms can be excused by the fact that this review is for The Wall Street Journal, a mainstream publication that is highly unlikely to be read by many hardcore gamers.
Regardless, the biggest takeaway from this whole thing is that some people seem to have forgotten that all reviews are based on personal opinion, with an individual bringing their personal likes and dislikes to the table. Which is why reading a range of reviews from different sources is crucial if you’re going to base a purchasing decision on the thoughts of others.
This is the reason Metacritic exists. It may not be perfect but it’s surely preferable than wasting time mocking an individual reviewer like Najberg.