[NaotaM]

Nor have I. I don't want to comment on the sites being an overall disgrace to VGM but every review I read looked like it was written with the intent of making it a review exactly like the reviews on any pretentious music review site. In the same vein, I've never read even a semi-negative review from either of those sites, and there was a time where I actually went searching for one just to see if I could find one (and not too long ago, within this past year). I'm interested in reading a review in which the reviewer isn't just using all the same bullshit praises every time. To me they just seem like sites where people show off their higher appreciation for music and their talent for writing typical music reviews. Why would I want the opinions of websites who post all positive reviews; their opinions reveal nothing because they like everything.

"I'm sick of all these reviewers talking about music as if they know things about music and how to write about it." ???

ahahahahahaha what

I've never seen a statement make so little sense, and I saw the earlier guy say SEMO's reviews are never "grounded in reality", which I'm pretty sure is entirely meaningless. Talk about pretentious.

As for never seeing negative reviews, you're not looking hard enough, period. I'm a new writer for SEMO. My first review was an album by Yoko Freaking Kanno and some of the tracks are awful. And not just the Mitsuo Yamamoto ones, either. There are tons of reviews for mainstream soundtracks and things you would consider quite obscure and "underground" that get middling reviews too, so no, that dog won't hunt, sorry.

But beyond that, I get the feeling neither of you really know the first thing about editorial policy or how review sites actually operate. On SEMO at least, different types of material are generally spread out to different reviewers who specilaize in or are interested in different types of music. Don handles most of the newer Japanese stuff and gets exposed to the same composers and development houses, like CAVE and Square. Josh and Simon handle Western stuff, and Chris does a lil of everything because he's siterunner.

Nobody picks and chooses what new thing to handle, so it's not like everybody only does what they're sure to like. It just so happens that our choices of editorial coverage often exposes us to the same couple of composers, and at a certain point, you can be reasonably certain if you're going to like something or not, and conversely, if you're going to agree with a review or not. I despise the western game scores of today, whereas Josh Barron typically showers them with praise. Does that mean he has no taste? No, that's stupid. If anything, it tells me that anything he thinks of an OST, I will likely feel the exact opposite, and that's good, because his review has done its job. His opinion is worth a great deal to me because he's generally positive towards this specific genre.

You know why that old disclaimer "The views and opinions expressed by X are not the views and opinions of Y" exists? Because networks and websites are not hiveminds. It continually boggles my mind how people can assume members of so-and-so review site must all conspire and agree on every single little thing and that the "official" opinion published by one member of the site must naturally be shared by everyone else and thus, we must all like or hate everything. If I were to review, say, Type-0 or Red Dragon or Bastion or Knights of Amalur or Nier or any Western fps or rpg score in the past decade, you'd be seeing 4s and 5s across the board.(Well, maybe a 7 for Nier.) Hilarious irony is, there would still be people kvetching about how I must then hate everything and they should hire someone who will be kinder and more positive to wider swaths of music. There are quite a few OSTs I and a few others could go back and give a second opinion on, but to do so now would be idiotic cause we all have our other obligations and jobs and new releases never stop flooding in.

Why not start your own platform to express your own opinions if you feel sites like SEMO or rpgfan are "too positive" or "too pretentious"? Cause sorry, but none of us are interested in pretending to be harder on shit if we honestly like it just to somehow validate our tastes to some, as to do so would be exactly as dishonest as to think we should like everything just to please readers, and any reviewer who entertains doing either for even a second should be fired.