So does cubed3 thinks rounding 9.9 equals 9, or did they adjust the review?

[LordTheNightKnight]

TheRealMafoo said:

LordTheNightKnight said:

TheRealMafoo said:

Why does that bother you? If you are letting GTAIV motivate you to post this, you need to review your priorities in life my friend :)

God, the old fanboy assunmption fallacy. I'm almost tempeted to flip you off for "deciding" my motivation for this, but I will not since I'm not going to be rude here.

This is based on the objective numbers, and the objective laws which they are run. Just because you think there is bias driving that only proves you think there is bias, not that there actually is.

 

I am glad you didn't flip me off, as you would have because you think I am "reading" something into your post that you say is not there. And all I did, was ask a question. I did not presume to know the answer. It would have been rather hypocritical of you to do so ;)

We know nothing about that site. For all we know, they could have always based there internal scores on a 100 point system, and then floored it to two levels of fidelity. So a 7.88, would be a 7.8 on there site. Going forward, they might floor all there new reviews as well. Meaning a 6.86 would be a 6. If that's there internal policy, meaning they would have done that on all games from the start, they are well within there right to do so without it being lazy.

I am sure you don't care about that one little site, you probably care more about how that site effect GameRankings.com.

It still has a 97.4 on that site and in the top 3 games ever made, so it's regarded as a great game. What's your concern?

 

The thing was that if some had stated likely causes, simply to offer possibilities, that would be okay. Instead, there seemed to be insistance that the mere existance of those possibilities proved my arguments wrong, when I was also discussing posibilities. It was even in the OP.

You don't counter a list of possibilities with more possibilities (not just you, all of those doing this). You bring in proof of wether any possibility is the actual cause or if it is not the actual cause.

That was what I was trying to bring here, and a lot of them just assumed I was biased, and tried to force this discussing into crashing down, instead of actually discussing it.