| Esmoreit said: This is still a very flawed way of looking at the numbers. Most of OoT's grades come from magazines. This is due the fact that there weren't a lot of game review sites back in 1998. The grades from magazines generally also come in later... And as you yourself already stated - the first grades from GTA were higher then those of OoT. These were mostly websites. It is, in a way very flawed both statisticly and ethicly to compare two different types of media. I can also state with a certain certainty that magazines are generally a bit harsher as they have more time for testing. So in a way, OoT should be even more commended for being up there as it was looked at longer. |
I was thinking of bringing this up too, but I only had a theory that later magazine reviews actually had reviewers that spent more time playing the game. I didn't really know if my theory was true or not. Do you really know that the magazine reviewers get to spend more time on the game?
Because, in that case, obieslut is even more full of fail. He's saying we should remove the scores of the reviews that actually got the time to fully critic the game.
Tag: Hawk - Reluctant Dark Messiah (provided by fkusumot)
