@Sal
It isn't disingenuous. Just a matter of practicality. Once I included portables I would have been obliged to include persistent world games that Sony supports. You are right ratings are subjective, but ratings for these games simply aren't credible, and there is no metric for them that would be considered equitable. The problem being that credible reviewers of these titles don't just review them once, but multiple times during their life cycle. If you take the review that is presented upfront. That will not reflect the current state of a particular game. It could have gotten better, or it could have gotten worse.
The real problem for me in trying to be impartial is that Sony has a habit of running these games into the ground. They can make a bad launch game better later on in its life cycle, but near the end they always let these games go into cruise control to maximize profits. Which causes these games to corrode significantly. They simply need to be maintained, and have resources reinvested into them. Basically by the end these games often end up being virtually unplayable.
I can guarantee you if I started including games in my list with ratings of teens, twenties, or thirties. You would have seen posters going into a complete fucking meltdown. Arguing vehemently why I shouldn't have included games outside of the console. Basically I did Sony a favor, and I did myself a favor. By not going out into the side streets. Which I honestly don't think anybody would be interested in anyway.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
