Hiku said:
VGPolyglot said:
Radiant Historia and The Alliance Alive are just two I can think of, titles where were released exclusively on a Nintendo console but not by Nintendo.
|
I see, so you think he picked games that were published by Nintendo and/or featured a Nintendo IP? I'll let him answer whether or not that was his intention, but right now I agree with you that the games you mentioned should count.
OTBWY said:
I thought you were joking about the first part too, which is why I actually made the first comment (which was unfinished).
It does not matter that you agree with me, or you don't agree with my *method* or whatever that means. The point is the important part here, which is twofold: That Edge is consistent and diverse in their scoring across all platforms. This goes from all the way back to today. The perfect score list was simply a reflection of this. Now if you believe that there is some sort of difference in the scoring of these two platforms, then I will only refer to your earlier comment. There are too many factors to be weighed in here, such as different writers etc. We have can sum up an endless amount of games (a bigger sample size than Barkley's obviously), without picking and choosing certain ones, and find that there is really no suggested bias (going by their list on MC). They score lower, that's it. They have outliers here and there, but that doesn't mean much on the whole. If you still think that they score Sony games lower on average (not saying you perse), then I can only conclude two things: Coincidence (most likely) or they just think Nintendo made the better game. Would the last point make it seem that they are biased, not really. It could be a number of things that made the score so. It is therefore ridiculous to suggest that some reviewer at Edge woke up with the mindset to score some game lower because it is a non-Nintendo game.
|
Because of the many factors that are unknown to me at the time, and in absence of a larger sample list of reviews in recent years, I wouldn't conclude that those are the only two scenarios. But I'll say this. If people on the internet can have a certain mindset, then someone working at Edge or any other publication can as well. Edge is more heavily weighed on Metacritic, and they are at least aware of that, and the fact that their reviews can get extra attention because of this. But if they presumably take advantage of this, it could be for sensationalism rather than platform bias.
The list Barkley provided was interesting though, but it was a pretty small sample size, so I wouldn't draw any conclusions based on it. A larger list would more interesting. But personally, if we're going to compare lists I'd be more interested to see how so called 'critically acclaimed' games measure up to each other. Which is hard to define, but perhaps games that score 85 or above. The reason those titles would be more interesting to me is because they tend to generate more buzz and attention. And if we're talking exclusives, an ability to drive console sales.
|
"Edge is more heavily weighed on Metacritic, and they are at least aware of that, and the fact that their reviews can get extra attention because of this. But if they presumably take advantage of this, it could be for sensationalism rather than platform bias."
This could be said over any major publication. Any big outlet that does reviews basically. Hell, even the evening news can be part of that argument. I don't think it is here or there: they are a magazine, they have to sell. But that can't be the reason why they make the reviews that they do. Their audience trusts them and listen to what they have to say. It is perhaps that trust that Edge relies on to sell their magazine. It is a slippery slope.
As for Barkley's list, the sample size is to small, so we agree on that. As for comparing critically acclaimed games being compared, why not start with their highest scores? That would be the best place to start would it not? It is the first thing I looked at (perfect scores), cause of their reputation of being harsher than most.