ZenfoldorVGI said:
My problem with this is Edge game Fable 2 a 9/10.
Now, I understand awarding innovation....but if you're reviewing "harshly" and giving Fable 2 a 9/10, then you are also reviewing ignorantly.
I loved Fable 2, but honestly, I don't think it's a AAA game, lol. I'm not a harsh critic. I'm not. I'm actually pretty much a fanboy critic. The clunky menus, short length, and a few other things would make me give the game a 8.9/10, because I just think that, while fantastic, the game could definitely have been a lot better.
Now, they give Fallout 3 a 7/10. Wow. I mean, I really think there is a line where things change from very valid opinion, to fact, and I think that the opinion that Fallout 3 is at least better than Fable 2, is teetering on that line of opinion and fact. Much less....significantly worse, as this review seems to indicate.
So, my issue here isn't harsh reviewing. It's consistency. It seems this magazine has different reviewers who don't exactly agree on their review scale.
In this issue, it seems the scale has been dialed down by about 2 points from the most recent issues.
Eurogamer, Edge's sister site, which usually agrees with their reviews, Gave both Fable 2 and Fallout 3 the same score. 100/100.
So, wtf happened this month.
It's not that everything is under-rated, but a few games definitely are, even by their usual scale. How the hell did they come up with these scores.
...Fallout 3 is not a 7/10, on any review scale. It makes me wonder why. Was it technical issues on the PC or PS3? WTF could have possibly led to that decision.
Not only is it the lowest review the game has ever gotten, but Fable 2....a worse game, which keeping in mind this is being said by a known "360 fanboy," got a 9/10!?
If either game had gotten an 8/10, then I could live with it, but as it stands, those reviews are just ridiculous.
|
