Company of Heroes 2 is a real snow job

Just sad what a person would do just to get people into he's website.

Ok, I will try this then.
I think that's the spirit of this comment section.

FUCK YOU THAT'S A GOOD GAME YOU FAGGOT EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME DESERVES TO DIE

I don't even like RTSes. I've played the shit out of Diablo II and the Torchlight's. If anything, my biases should make me lean towards his scoring. Marvel Heroes is garbage. Everyone knows, not thinks, that.

I don't want him to "forget" that it is very similar to CoH. I want him to realize that it is just one factor and a factor that does not apply to everyone. He seemed to be able to remember that in the CoD Black ops 2 review...
As long as he keeps calling these writings reviews, I do expect some sort of objectivity in trying to evaluate a product from the PoV of its target audience.

Just "my feelings" is not interesting at all unless you know the person, because it contains zero information then. But maybe it is fine then, maybe a lot of people know this guy, but I recommend renaming these things something else than reviews.

If he did like CoH, I simply won't believe that he would absolutely HATE CoH 2. Yeah, maybe annoyance that "I got a sizeable expansion instead of a sequel", but raging hate (lowest score would indicate that I feel). No way.

If he did NOT like CoH either, then he should not even bother, least of all trying to evaluate it. I don't like flight sims or sports games, if I'd just write how I feel about them I'd give them 1/5 all that. If I was stupid enough not to realize that they are not meant for me, that is.

Based on his review, he very clearly liked the original COH, so I'm not sure what you're getting at with the last paragraph.

The idea that reviews should be "objective" is incoherent. You want Tom to pretend to be in the "target audience" -- even though he IS in the target audience, as someone who games and liked COH 1. So what are you really looking for? A reviewer who pretends to be surprised by game features that he's really bored by, who pretends to care about every little newfangled graphical effect that he barely notices, even if he hates the game and wants nothing less than to play it? He is supposed to hide that?

You don't really want Tom to pretend to be in the target audience. You want him to pretend to like the game. Personally, I think game reviews need more honesty. They should not be chasing arbitrary standards of "objectivity" that make next to zero sense. If I want a bland, meaningless rundown of a game's features, I can look at the back of the box. Or IGN.

The last paragraph was just covering all options. I don't want Tom to pretend anything, least of all liking the game. I appreciate honesty and not being fooled by production values.

He is just taking it too far. There is a huge gap between not liking or being somewhat disappointed with a game and hating. Not sure how he achieves it, as it is "more of the same" based on a game he likes. I hope for his consistency's sake that he rates all CoH expansions 1/5 too, because they are the same.

Since I can't imagine that "he hates the game and wants nothing less than to play it" unfortunately it makes me to question his honesty and that is the problem. Exaggerating and sensationalism is understandable to a degree, just don't want me to approve.

I think it's because the game took a few half-steps back and looks about ready to gouge people with ridiculous amounts of DLC. That's where the "hate" comes from. But anyway, the difference between 1 and 2 stars doesn't seem significant to me.

Already done that, sent an email to Metacritic. I advice everyone to do the same.

Thanks for the comments, everyone. I picked up the game anyway (not a Russian key), and I'm enjoying it. Only played 7 hours, so it's a bit early to say for sure, but it feels like an 8/10 game to me.

Bad games do get bad reviews. The problem, for me, is that many games I consider average get good reviews. I've no problem waiting for a game to go on sale when the consensus is "good enough," because I have patience and I don't value average work at full MSRP.

When the majority of reviewers gloss over real issues on their way to score a game as outstanding, I get fucking pissed when I purchase the game and find that not all of it is outstanding. And the crux of the problem is that the issues some of these games have are missing from both the final score as well as the content of the review.

I always know why Chick scored a game as he did when I actually read his review. He has the balls to call a spade a spade when reviewing games and even when the problems he calls to attention aren't as important to me as they are to him, they are never surprises to me when I play the game. With other reviewers, I am quite often surprised by things I encounter while playing that they never bothered to bring up.

Hopefully your retarded letter wasn't as poorly written as your comments, dumbass.

Tom Chick: "Oh man what a great game, I'm going to give it a 5/5"

Nick: "Wait Tom, you can't give it a 5/5, this is a AAA game, have you forgotten our policy?"

Tom: "Oh yeah, that's right. We are the hipsters of video game critics, we have to give the score that will get us on the front page of Metacritic."

Nick: "It's getting favorable reviews"

Tom: "1/5 it is!"

(OR)

Nick: "It's getting mediocre reviews"

Tom: "5/5 it is!"

Speaking of spawn, you talk to much, moron. Get a life and stop jerking off to yourself online.

Damn breeders and their moronic emo kids online. GTFO.

"Objective critique" lol. You are so far from understanding the fundamental purpose of reviews and opinions that there is no point talking to you anymore

He also is monetizing the user comments.

Do you really want to start going down the road of objectivity and subjectivity?

Critics are supposed to assess things with a clear and level head. They try their best not let their emotions, expectations, preconceptions and personal biases influence, or exaggerate, their judgement.

This is what I mean in the broadest, most approximate sense of objectivity, for which Tom Chick scores a 0/10.

For being a complete and utter idiot, you are now first in line for castration.

your life must be great reading through tons of comments to spend the time to reply to the ones you hate.. fuck im jealous..

What should influence their judgment, then? If not their personal beliefs or interests. I'm trying to figure out why you think all reviewers should pretend to have feelings and thoughts they don't have. It's quite bizarre. (The castration thing also made zero sense)

It looks like someone didn't get paid off again, so he wrote another lousy review.