By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
thismeintiel on 22 November 2013
Edit Thread
globalisateur said:
Dark_Feanor said:

Polygon gave

Ryse a 6 -  0,1 lower than avarege meta score,

Dead Rising 3  a 7,5 - 0,3 lower than avarage meta score.

LocoCycle and Crison Dragon both 4. - 0,8 and 1,5 lower than avarage meta score.

Is that enough? Is this fair?


You made an excellent point. Of course they can't give by average worse scores to Sony VS Microsoft, but they do on occasions rate lower some Sony important games and rate higher others less important:

TLOU was an important Sony game: rated 2.5 less than metacritic

Killzone was the most important Sony game at launch: rated 2 points lower

Forza was the most important X1 launch game and they gave a 9/10 score, almost 1 point more.

Resogun was not important, indie game: rated even higher than metacritic (because they have to up that Killzone downed average scores...)

COD on PS4 rated 0.5 lower for inconsistent reasons than X1 because it is a really important game for both companies.

LocoCycle and Crison Dragon are given low scores to re-equilibrate Forza and maybe upcoming high scores for important X1 games from Polygon.

 

They are smart at Polygon and know people in forums make averages of their scores. Serious theory.

Very good point.  The fact that they rated Killzone, the biggest PS4 exclusive for Sony, lower than Knack and Ryse says it all really. 

@ OP

While the remote control mistake wasn't a big deal, the way they reacted to it definitely shows their bias.  I mean controlling a console with a TV remote is not a big feature, but they acted like an 80 year old grandma should get a One as a gift because of this feature.  Then when confronted with the truth, they just wanted to act like very few remotes would work and wanted the subject to go away.  Of course, anyone who tries to downplay the fact that MS gave them a huge sum of money to even start their site is showing their own bias.

Edit: There's also the fact that they seem to change their review scores based on how much flack they get for them.  Never trust a site that does this.  Especially when they do it selectively.