Quantcast
Playstation Move Vs. Xbox 360 Kinect: Metacritic

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Playstation Move Vs. Xbox 360 Kinect: Metacritic

Hi Seece,

I think there are at least two Move games missing:

Flight Control HD (Score: 82): http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/flight-control-hd

Tumble (Score: 74): http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/tumble/critic-reviews

I won't argue about games with Move support as an addon goodie, but these two are clearly Move games.

And I noticed your rating categories are a bit arbitrary: you combine the top ten (90-100) and next ten (80-89), but the next category is only the next five?! (75-79) and then all of a sudden follow the next 25?! (50-74)?

What about combining always groups of ten for sake of neutrality?  I hope your grouping is only accidentally and not by bias... Kinect happens to have two upper-seventies games and Move one in the lower-seventies which ends up in the same category as Kinect's two fifties games. A bit strange, huh?

So with the two games above included the more objective table would be like this:

Meta Kinect Move
90    
80 1 1
70 2 3
60 1 2
50 2 1
40   2
30 1 1

This suddenly looks much more in favor of Move, doesn't it?  But the neutrality of my categorization is undoubtedly higher.

So I would aks you to update your table accordingly. Thanks!



Around the Network
durbacher said:

Hi Seece,

I think there are at least two Move games missing:

Flight Control HD (Score: 82): http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/flight-control-hd

Tumble (Score: 74): http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/tumble/critic-reviews

I won't argue about games with Move support as an addon goodie, but these two are clearly Move games.

And I noticed your rating categories are a bit arbitrary: you combine the top ten (90-100) and next ten (80-89), but the next category is only the next five?! (75-79) and then all of a sudden follow the next 25?! (50-74)?

What about combining always groups of ten for sake of neutrality?  I hope your grouping is only accidentally and not by bias... Kinect happens to have two upper-seventies games and Move one in the lower-seventies which ends up in the same category as Kinect's two fifties games. A bit strange, huh?

So with the two games above included the more objective table would be like this:

Meta Kinect Move
90    
80-89 1 1
70-79 2 3
60-69 1 2
50-59 2 1
40-49   2
30-39 1 1

 

This scoring scheme does make more sense then the one used in the OP.

We can see quite clearly there is a general lack of quality launch software for both of the new motion control peripherals.



Now this is interesting.. Even though I'm not interested in the Move, nor Kinect, I will still keep up with this one. Cool man



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

durbacher said:

Hi Seece,

I think there are at least two Move games missing:

Flight Control HD (Score: 82): http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/flight-control-hd

Tumble (Score: 74): http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/tumble/critic-reviews

I won't argue about games with Move support as an addon goodie, but these two are clearly Move games.

And I noticed your rating categories are a bit arbitrary: you combine the top ten (90-100) and next ten (80-89), but the next category is only the next five?! (75-79) and then all of a sudden follow the next 25?! (50-74)?

What about combining always groups of ten for sake of neutrality?  I hope your grouping is only accidentally and not by bias... Kinect happens to have two upper-seventies games and Move one in the lower-seventies which ends up in the same category as Kinect's two fifties games. A bit strange, huh?

So with the two games above included the more objective table would be like this:

Meta Kinect Move
90    
80 1 1
70 2 3
60 1 2
50 2 1
40   2
30 1 1

This suddenly looks much more in favor of Move, doesn't it?  But the neutrality of my categorization is undoubtedly higher.

So I would aks you to update your table accordingly. Thanks!


Thank you.  I and a number of people pointed out that it's odd to have mixed ranges in a table of this sort, and it leaves the reason open to all kinds of missinterpretation.  Note I don't think Seece was trying to play favours for Kinect as his table went up - so far as I know - before there were any scores.

I think he's trying to zoom in on the 50 to 80 section with the view anything over 90 is great and anything below 50 is crap, but it just distorts the data spread in my view.

I do think the Kinect launch titles are slightly more polishing in some areas, and seem a bit more cohesive - I prefer the look of the avatars, etc. in Kinect Sports vs Sports Champions for example - but purely as games the launch titles for both peripherals really are startlingly similar in range per genre and very in line with similar Wii titles.

I feel we're still waiting for the first really amazing Kinect or Move title.



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

Ok, granted: the original table may have had the categorization before any ratings were in and there is a point in focusing on "the sweet spot", but having a 5-points section next to a 25-points section is a distorted way of zooming...

Not doing any concentration on a certain range will be better suited to wipe off any doubts about objectivity.



Around the Network
durbacher said:

And I noticed your rating categories are a bit arbitrary: you combine the top ten (90-100) and next ten (80-89), but the next category is only the next five?! (75-79) and then all of a sudden follow the next 25?! (50-74)?


It's based on MetaCritic ranges.

100-75 = Green
74-50 = Yellow
49-0 = Red



Fab_GS said:
durbacher said:

And I noticed your rating categories are a bit arbitrary: you combine the top ten (90-100) and next ten (80-89), but the next category is only the next five?! (75-79) and then all of a sudden follow the next 25?! (50-74)?


It's based on MetaCritic ranges.

100-75 = Green
74-50 = Yellow
49-0 = Red

The table mixes the green/yellow/red with clear mathematical ranges.  This is a mistake I'd say.  A table based on 0-100 ranges should normally have even breaks - 80-89,90 to 99.  Just because Metartiic mixes in a colour coding based on a simple bad, okay, good doesn't mean you should mix them.  It's not consistent.

But... this does shed more light on Sceece's odd ranges.  I'd note he's trying to split the colours finer to mix them with the percentage ranges, and this is where I think it doesn't work too well.

Either a table with consistent splits would be better or a table with only three rows, for 75-100, 50-74 and 0-49 colour coded to exactly match Metacritic.

BTW - thanks for pointing this out.  I'd never really noticed this overly before - not using Metacritic much.  I see what they're tyring to do but again it smacks of trying to mix different approaches and oversimplify for the end user.



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

My problem with this thread is games that don't require Move or Kinect shouldn't be listed.



Recently Completed
Crackdown 3
for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Why not just go all the way. Create a table for downloadable games that use Kinect/Move exclusively, create another for commercial titles using Kinect/Move exclusively, and yet another for any games that utilize a hybrid control scheme. If necessary create a fourth table for hybrid downloadable titles. Not only should this put an end to the constant bickering, it makes sense.

Use a point scale from 100-0, with the intervals of tens being the different sections by which the games can be counted.



GOTY Contestants this year: Dead Space 2, Dark Souls, Tales of Graces f. Everything else can suck it.

durbacher said:

Hi Seece,

I think there are at least two Move games missing:

Flight Control HD (Score: 82): http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/flight-control-hd

Tumble (Score: 74): http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/tumble/critic-reviews

I won't argue about games with Move support as an addon goodie, but these two are clearly Move games.

And I noticed your rating categories are a bit arbitrary: you combine the top ten (90-100) and next ten (80-89), but the next category is only the next five?! (75-79) and then all of a sudden follow the next 25?! (50-74)?

What about combining always groups of ten for sake of neutrality?  I hope your grouping is only accidentally and not by bias... Kinect happens to have two upper-seventies games and Move one in the lower-seventies which ends up in the same category as Kinect's two fifties games. A bit strange, huh?

So with the two games above included the more objective table would be like this:

Meta Kinect Move
90    
80 1 1
70 2 3
60 1 2
50 2 1
40   2
30 1 1

This suddenly looks much more in favor of Move, doesn't it?  But the neutrality of my categorization is undoubtedly higher.

So I would aks you to update your table accordingly. Thanks!


Great job, this table is much nicer. Sad though that both libraries already have so much garbage. :(