IGN GIVES LAIR A 4.9

[kn]

Diomedes1976 said:

 

I have given enough examples in my prior post .Read and learn ,dont play with statistics everyone can do that thats the magic thing about numbers .I dont care if they have given Blast Factor ,Lemmings and Calling All Cars a whole point higher and that makes the statistic look like that .The fact is that games that are indentical in the PS3 and the 360 as GRAW2 after their own words somehow receive nearly a whole point higher on the 360 .And in the big games they tend to bash the PS3 more than suitable .

I will play the demo if it is released and if I like it I will buy it .

Goodness, Diomedes -- do you take your blinders off much?  You couldn't possibly be any more clueless as to how statistics work.  "Statistically" individual examples are anecdotal at best and are generally worthless.  Quoting/using single reviews, such as this one, is the only way "magic things" happen with numbers.  Fanboys can say the game is awful because of this review.  Other Fanboys can say No, It's great based on another review.  The whole raison d'etre of statistical measure is to prove/disprove observed single events as random or within the realm of expectated results.  The gamerankings deviation from the norm is a large sample and has less error.  I don't know the sample size but I suspect it is big enough at this point to be very statistically significant.  It's like saying IGN flipped a quarter and got heads and Gamespot did the same and got tails.  One event each and at polar opposites.  You certainly wouldn't assume by either event that ALL Gamespot flips are heads or ALL IGN flips are tails.  You would be foolish to believe so use either as a measure.  Instead, you take a whole bunch of single events and look at the trend over time.  Amazing enough, if you have both sites flip that coin 1000 times, they are going to both come pretty darn close to 500/500 heads/tails.

Therein lies the reason WHY gamerankings deviation measures are so valuable in the first place.  It is a TRUE and ACCURATE measure of how individual sites rate their games in relation to the "norm" or "average".  Yep, it's possible they make mistakes on a single review basis but again, over time, IGN looks pretty good as a yardstick based on their history vs. the averages.