For now the metascores sit at :
Xb one - 86
X360 - 88 (only 6 reviews at time of thread) http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/titanfall
In essence it's all the same score, there's no real difference between 86 and 88 at the end of the day. But do you think, if 360 version, which is obviously technically inferior to PC and Xb one, gets the best metascore it's more about expectation than objective critical analysis of the game?
But it also means the 360 has a winner on its hands and the game 360 gamers are getting is a very worthy entry into the 360 library. It is not really possible for a mere couple of weeks delay to turn a lackluster version into a version that stands up well against its technically superioir counterparts. So it seems to me the 360 delay was all about pushing the Xb one version than about polishing the 360 version. Which is fine, but I do wish companies would be honest about this sort of thing. Do you think gamers would have some how punished MS / EA for being up front and saying that the Xb one version was effectively being a timesd console exclusive for a few weeks purely because they wanted to give the Xb one some breathing room and not have to compete against it's last gen counterpart?
“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell
"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."