My Problem With Reviewers

Yes everyone knows what a review is, it's when someone judges your work rather it be video games, movies, books or a physical performance. Since the beginning of entertainment their have been reviewers or critics as they are usually called. However regardless what you may call them they often have the same problem, selling out for a good review. But do we really need this line of work? what's the difference between a critic and a reviewer? Join me and we will find out a few of these things anyway..

I am not entirely certain what the difference is, critics are often popularized as having negative views about everything always pointing out the bad but that's just not true, sometimes they put out really positive reviews. But then why is a small youtuber or magazine writer a reviewer and not a critic? I would have to say it's probably a class thing, if you have a large audience like rotten tomato's or IGN then you are a critic but if you have a very small audience like on YouTube or in a small magazine then you are a reviewer. Long story short, they are the same thing just different words.

I don't think I even need to explain how much influence these people can have. To put it simply, how many times has a friend, family member or coworker made a decision about buying something or trying out some food purely cause you said it might be good? I know several people who will not give something new a chance unless there has been at least a little good word about it. A few good reviews can send people into a frenzy for a chance to see the next Superman movie but on the other hand, a few bad reviews can stop people entirely meaning the studio makes nothing. Do this people have power, yes they do.

This is a hard one, we don't really need them per say however everything cost money and if having some small insight can allow us to save some money then you bet people are going to take it. in truth some good can actually come out of them particularly in video games, see a movie is done and that's about it sure perhaps you didn't like but at was at most 3 hours, but a game could take way more before you can really get a feel for what it is all about, that's what made company's like blockbuster so good you try the game for a little while without commenting to buying it. Also a good reviewer might point out a fault with the game the developers did not catch and with modern day patches they may be able to fix it.

The problem is that half the time they sell out so that the company can have some good publicity about whatever it is they are trying to sell. If you are reviewing something they (the company whatever it may be) expect you to behave like a robot and say something nice about the product, but by doing that you are not being a honest reviewer, what if the movie a very poor pacing or the game is full of game breaking bugs or just takes way to long to get to the "fun" part. Some of these things cost allot of money so an honest opinion would very much appreciated.

I complain about people selling out so that the company get's better publicity but here the thing, everyone as different taste and opinions, what good for one is bad for another, so trying things out for yourself is really the best option. Unfortunately we live in the real world where everything cost money and quit allot of it, time as well. As we work to acquire said money we lose said time, and unlike money to which maybe you will find a job that pay's more for the same hours once you use up that time, it's gone, you are not getting it back. I suppose I do have a problem with reviewers but they do play a role, I just wished more of them where more honest. But what do you guys think please leave me a comment in the section below Wanderin Jim and I hope you all have a super happy day.