difference in reviewers and gamers score in Wii and Xbox360/Ps3 games

[Shadowblind]

Shanobi said:

Torillian said:
@Shanobi

Heavenly Sword - 7.9 average with a 7.0 from IGN
published by Sony

Animal Crossing Wii - 7.3 average with a C from 1up
developed by Nintendo

Too Human - 6.5 average with a C- from 1up
published by Microsoft

Most games published by the big three get better scores because they are generally more polished and better games. If what you said was true would sites have reviewed even close to this low for games from all three?

 

7.9 and 7.3 are not bad scores. And Pokemon Battle Colliseum, or whatever it was called, got a pretty low score too. Outside of these games though, find me other 1st party games that have gotten bad reviews.

 

I agree they are generally the more polished games, also, but what I've stated is still true.

Ignoring the many ones on XBLA and PSN...

Nintey-Nine Nights: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/99nights?q=Ninety-nine%20nights

Metacritic 61, Published by Microsoft.

Kameo: Elements of Power: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/kameoelementsofpower

Metacritic 79, Published by Microsoft

Blue Dragon

Metacritic 79, Published by Microsoft

Lost Odyssey

Metacritic 78(WTF?) Published by Microsoft

Lips

Metacritic 71, Published by Microsoft

Ninja Blade

Metacritic 68, Published by Microsoft

Shadowrun

Metacritic 66, Published by Microsoft

 

Your in the movies

Metacritic 55, Published by Microsoft

 

I'll stop there for the MS games.

--------------------------------------------------

SIREN: Blood Curse

Metacritic 78, Published by SCE

 

Singstar Queen

Metacritic 77, Published by SCE

Eye of Judgement

Metacritic 75, Published by SCE

Folklore

Metacritic 75, Published by SCE

SOCOM

Metacritic 63, Published by SCE

Lair

Metacritic 53, Published by SCE