slowmo said:
Mazty said:
slowmo said:
I don't disagree on that point but it happens all the time. Heavy Rain is a perfect example of a recent PS3 exclsuive that received undeserving 10's yet people jumped on Edge for not bowing down to the hype and following the crowd. This is a game I would add that loses all impact on the second playthrough as the chief gaming mechanic is the story and not the actual gameplay elements. It was released with numerous bugs too I would add that seemingly didn't reduce the score either.
My point is it's obvious there is some terrible reviewing going on with PS3 exclusives that is raising the Metacritic average in some cases. When you accept that this could be a serious issue then PS3 reviews on Metacritic could be trending higher thus offsetting the relative balance Edge places on its reviews.
I would add though that reviewing in general is becoming a joke anyway which is why anything that uses Metacritic to prove a point will always have me in opposition. Arguably the only games this generation that deserved a 10 that I've played are Uncharted 2, Gears Of War, Rock Band 2, Bioshock, Oblivion, Super Mario Galaxy. I have played the following notable titles that don't deserve a 10 imo: Halo 3, Killzone 2, MGS4, Mario Kart, GTAIV.
|
I'd say though that the 360 has just a large, if not larger, amount of undeserved high scores, such as Halo 3 etc.
I think what is bizarre is that Edge will be willing to go hype-out crazy with some games like Bayonetta and Halo 3, but be very reserved when it comes to PS3 titles. Granted that the PS3 scores may actually be closer to what people believe the game may deserve, but it still shows bias towards one console over another, which really brings into question the integrity of the magazine.
Though as you said reviewing is becoming an utter joke with many, many games getting rediculous praise such as Halo 3, Killzone 2 (great multiplayer, crap single player), the wii in general. GTA4, MW2 etc. I'm willing to bet though Starcraft 2 will show all the poor journalists out after playing the woeful beta though, but I digress.
I think people would be much better off ignoring reviews all together and just rent games.
|
I couldn't say for sure as I'm not that bothered to check all their scores but yes Halo 3 with hindsight was a 9/10 game due to the poor single player campaign which didn't improve on the criticism Halo 2 was given IMO. Bayonetta from what I've read could be deserving of a 10 but I've not played it so cannot comment. At the end of the day I read Games TM for my reviews as they generally are spot on with their opinion in comparison to my tastes. This is the main issue I take with people shouting bias, everyone has different tastes and instead of trying to make publications toe the line to your opinion just seek out and read ones you enjoy and suit your tastes instead.
I've long held the view that reviews would be better for removing the numbers and forcing people to actually read the text that a writer spends his precious time creating for their enjoyment. I bought Assassins Creed 1 on the basis of the text in a review that only gave it 4/10, the criticisms that were cited at the game I knew wouldn't bother me and so I'm glad I took that time to read it. It didn't make that 4/10 a bad review or biased though as it was just a writer giving an honest opinion of what the game meant to him, obviously the "flaws" bothered him more than me.
|
the bolded part... abso-fucking-loutely. The whole quick score, 60 seconds news, soundbite, etc. trend for information is just terrible.
I read the text of film reviews or game reviews if I actually want to understand their view of the game. The score I treat with suspicion as to be honest, even the best reviewers can't help but be inconsistent in how they apply them so far as I've observed, and of course they are almost always taken out of context.
