Quantcast
Who else doesn't give a hoot about VG Chartz game ratings?

Forums - Website Topics - Who else doesn't give a hoot about VG Chartz game ratings?

I just like reading other people's opinions. Sometimes, flaws that one reviewer will complain about don't bother me. Other times, something they'll barely mention will intrigue me and convince me to buy a game. It's all about thhe text, not the score. VGChartz reviews are pretty well written. The only downside is that I usually already own the game by the time it gets reviewed!!



Twitter: @d21lewis  --I'll add you if you add me!!

Around the Network

yeah they cant review for shit here can they....



I stay away from the reviews on this site. Metacritic or nothing...



Not a 360 fanboy, just a PS3 fanboy hater that likes putting them in their place ^.^

shinyuhadouken said:
I stay away from the reviews on this site. Metacritic or nothing...

I can respect people who just don't like the reviews, but come on. Really? You're actually subscribing to the Hive's newsletter?



coolestguyever said:

Examples:

Endless Ocean - 8.3  > Fallout 3 - 8.2

Valkyrie Chronicles - 9.4 > Bioshock - 9.3

Tales of Vesperia - 8.8 = Halo 3 - 8.8

Civilization Revolution - 8.7 = Uncharted - 8.7

God of War: Chains of Olympus - 7.9?

With the VGChart reviews, you really shouldn't care games from different systems (unless they are PS3/Xbox 360, IMHO).

Endless Ocean is great.  I don't like games like Fallout 3 - at least not on consoles.

I've never played VC.  Bioshock was not a good game, IMHO.  It was about how Ayn Rand was wrong - which is crazy because she was right. 

I've never played a Tales of game (including Tales of V).  However, I don't like Halo 3 at all.  It was a pretty good game by all accounts though, and it has a good score.

Uncharted looks fantasic.  However, Civilization is one of the best series of all time.  Of course, I won't play it; RTS on a HD console - no thank you.  Neither one have a bad score, so I don't see what your point is.

I have no idea on God of War because I don't play games like that.

Anyway, there is more to reviews than numbers.  Make sure to actually read them.  VGChartz reviews are much more informative then reviews from many other sites.

 



 

Tired of big government?
Want liberty in your lifetime?
Join us @
http://www.freestateproject.org

Around the Network
naznatips said:
Believe it or not, aside from brilliant atmosphere Bioshock was incredibly unoriginal. It was a downgrade of System Shock 2's gameplay mechanics.

 

^^This

Great game - but highly overrated by most.



To Each Man, Responsibility

The reviews are wrote very well and the reviewers do an excellent job at it. The only problem I have is the scoring method. "Value" always seems to drive down the score of a great game. They don't have to have a good replay value to be a AAA game.

I like how IGN scores there games. You got your Presentation, Graphics, Sound, Gameplay and Lasting Appeal, it covers everthing, I'm not saying VG Chartz should copy them, but I'm just saying I like how they score there games.

VG Chartz has just three categories to rate a game, I just think we need more so the scoring is more fair, like adding Graphics and Sound would be nice. I know that's all included in Presentation, but I think it should be seperate.

(Again the reviewer's do an excellent job at reviewing a game, and I'd never be able to be as good as them at reviewing, but it's just the scoring that bothers me.)



Gilgamesh said:

The reviews are wrote very well and the reviewers do an excellent job at it. The only problem I have is the scoring method. "Value" always seems to drive down the score of a great game. They don't have to have a good replay value to be a AAA game.

I like how IGN scores there games. You got your Presentation, Graphics, Sound, Gameplay and Lasting Appeal, it covers everthing, I'm not saying VG Chartz should copy them, but I'm just saying I like how they score there games.

VG Chartz has just three categories to rate a game, I just think we need more so the scoring is more fair, like adding Graphics and Sound would be nice. I know that's all included in Presentation, but I think it should be seperate.

(Again the reviewer's do an excellent job at reviewing a game, and I'd never be able to be as good as them at reviewing, but it's just the scoring that bothers me.)

 

Value isn't just replay value though, it's also the overall experience or bang for buck.  If a game doesn't have replayability it should definitely have a long story and be a great overall experience to be "AAA" (whatever that means) wouldn't you say?



To Each Man, Responsibility

I don't care about the ratings, but not for the reasons that you listed.



4 ≈ One

I'm not going to criticize or compaign VGC's review scoring. It gives a quick overall impression of what that one review thought of the game. The devil is in the details and so far, of those I've read, the reviews are all thorough and fair in their assessment.

Which is more than I can say of even some IGN reviews, let alone other review sites.

No one will ever find a review site or reviewer that they agree with 100% of the time. But as long as the reviews are impartial and informative, they are useful and belong here.

I just wish they were reviewing new or upcoming releases (as well or) instead of old games.