By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Ping_ii on 15 March 2010
Edit Thread
DarthVolod said:
ElRhodeo said:
Hm, another possible explanation is that Edge isn't biased, they just thought the PS3 games were worse than the 360 games. Shock!

That's called a 'result', something that comes AFTER examining / testing.
'Bias' means judging BEFORE you tried it.

You know, according to your (very popular) definition of 'bias', any comparison that doesn't result in "all contestants are equally good" is biased. That's pointless.

 

Thanks for pointing out exactly what is wrong with the majority of these bias claims. We are to assume that all PS3 and Xbox 360 exclusives are of equal quality ... unlikely.

 

In a way it is no surprise 360 games would be reviewed higher since, for the most part, 360 exclusives are safe games in very popular genres like shooters (Halo, Left 4 dead, and Gears of War series) while PS3 games have been a bit more high risk / experimental recently. (Heavy Rain, MAG, White Knight Chronicles, Demon's Souls).

I just don't see the bias even with the questionable graphs. It would be far more suspicious to me if both PS3 and 360 console exclusives were given nearly the same scores. If they just handed out 9's and 10's to every game regardless of quality then they would just be Game Informer. 

 

And before I am accused of anything, I own both consoles and play on both and blah blah blah. 

Ehhhh what M.A.G isn't part of the popular genre?

anyways this is edge magazine who's main excuse is that innovation = a huge plus for them, so why would they give shooters a high scores when it doesn't even do anything new at all while Sony new IP's are offering something different as you said gets hammered?, even the shooters on ps3 gets low reviews for not doing anything new yet the same doesn't apply for left4dead,modern warfare,halo? give me a break. There see I prove them biased yet again.