| SubiyaCryolite said: Wow, you guys see a lot of bias and I see none. Do you want EG to fall on their knees and worship their lord and savior Kaz Hirai? Look at Celadors post. Eurogamer isn't dense, they know good games when they see them but they still have valid criticisms. Lets not kid ourselves, the PS4 hasn't yet hit its stride,. We haven't reached PS1, PS2 and PS3 levels of "OMG look at all these f@#kin exclusives" yet. We are getting there but I still the system as an infant in that regard. Microsoft may have blown its load early but at least all their top tier IPs have had a pure 8th gen release. And unlike most PS exclusives you dont have to worry about them reviewing well. |
Microsoft's major IP's have got released but one of them was just a remake and not a new game. As for reviewing well? Sony's major IP's Gran Turismo, God Of War & Uncharted all review well, just like Halo, Gears Of War and Forza do. Besides are reviews everything, or does personal opinion still matter?
The Xbox article treated the lack of exclusives for most of the year as perfectly fine, while the PS article criticised its lineup because the first exclusive of the year The Order was a dud, and minimalized the importance of Bloodborne and Until Dawn because they were "hardcore and not mainstream".
Gears remake was treated as a great reason to own an Xbox, but God Of War III & Uncharted NDC were either not mentioned or their importance understated, even though Uncharted NDC includes 3 games instead of one and has gameplay improvements in one of the games it includes.
Then with little else to criticise they had to say that Horizon's name was lame, I mean that is a really dumb statement and not even true. Then they say No Man's Sky would sell well if nothing else, prejudging it with little to back it up and being negative without reason. In the Xbox article they are praising Microsoft's 2016 lineup again prejudging it and being too optimistic about it, as many of them could be duds.
They also state the obvious hardware difference not being anything to care about even though in their own DF articles the differences in various multiplatform games being major.
Also when you write such articles, good journalism demands the criticisms or praise to be more subtle, and not doing so in every statement of the article but only where their are points raised, which aren't true for either of these articles.
EDIT: Also they say that The Last Guardian's release is ambiguous even though it has been said that it will come in 2016, the author didn't even research properly. You can't make statements like that when their is evidence of the opposite being true.
