What I said prior is that they seem to lean more towards what gets them more attention. This can lean in PS3's favor as well as against it.

.5 or less is a close margin. 1.0+ is a distance. Especially for sites that only give out whole numbers which will be averaged with sites that give out decimals.

They gave KZ2 a 9/10....

15 reviews on metacritic currently, Infamous is at 86 overall, and there's only 1 review below an 80.  Eurogamer.  Whatever though: the game is good.

I wouldnt trust any of eurogamers reviews since the whole darkfall controversy.

lol @ sony fanboys.

Why does it matter if it's a distance from other reviews? Each review is written by someone who has certain tastes, likes and dislikes, and tendancies for or against certain genres. The fact that they don't align with their peers doesn't necessarily mean that they are lowballing or overrating a game, it means they have a differing opinion. Their ability to rationalize their opinion regardless of stance is important. Reviewers aren't bound by other reviewers, they are free to score it higher or lower based on their experiences.

If anything, you should blame sites like metacritic that compare aggregate scores that removes the substance in favour of a neat and tidy number.

Kind of an aside, but if you think a site does nothing but lowball games you think are great... ignore them. Find a few particular reviewers or a site that aligns with your tastes and go to them for reviews. No site or reviewer can be everything to everybody.

@van I wanted to mention that. I was actually a click away from mentioning that, but people really don't want to hear that stuff! So I just smile and move along now.

......I swear VGC has changed me.

Guess you missed the six 9s it has on Metacritic?

Lol @ you......9.2 on IGN, A- on 1up, Joystiq states best superhero game they ever played.

I dont think we read the same review o_0 .....

because there is not much positive to be said in what Eurogamer had to say about Infamous. They nitpick at every little detail.

Here is a quote...

"Despite the fact your adversaries are identified as former addicts and tramps, they also have dead-eyed projectile skill from vast distance, and often require more than one headshot. The adequate checkpointing is little comfort as you bounce off the kind of run-and-gun scenarios that Gears of War and others have done a lot better, along with torturous protect-the-bus or protect-the-engineer sieges, which are not only weighted heavily against you, but repetitive and overlong. The need to find new sources of electricity to rearm means you're too often left with the zap attack and nothing else, and there's none of the invention you might expect from the electrical context: you seldom get to use the conductivity of your surroundings to your advantage, and nobody on the other side ever thinks to pick up a Super Soaker."

Firstly, Headshots? SO WHAT if it takes more then one headshot to kill them. You are not using a GUN. It is projectile energy(lightning) which doesn't pierce the body, so no insta kills for the most part.

Second, why did he just bring up gears of War? This is not a typical 3rd person shooter. This is a action sandbox game with TPS like elements. He starts to compare the mission format to the likes of GoW which is stupid, they have such different goals. Gears of War is a progressive action TPS. Infamous is a sandbox game that trys to give you multiple options on how to go about any given mission. Infamous's main goal is to give you things to protect. Of course they have "Defend" missions fairly often, THATS WHAT HEROES DO!!!

Third, finding sources of electricy makes the game more epic for several reasons. It means you are not invincible for you run out of "ammo" or juice. This makes u vulnerable, which superheroes are most known for their vulnerablity in specific cases. In the demo, draining power had never been an issue. Its not like you cannot immediately know where a source is(if you press L3 they glow blue).

Fourth, the game seemingly has a lot of areas and things that interact with electricity. You can send shocks through a lamp post and hit someone behind it. You can shoot lighting at water(which is not ONLY available in the sewers) and shock anyone standing in it. Also making electrical fences is a really good way of neting multiple baddies. All this was seen in the demo.

And I can pull text from multiple other reviews that directly contradict these nay statements from Eurogamer.

The review doesn't soften up till the very end, after they have butchered the game.