By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Metacritic: mass effect 2 (xbox 360) vs mass effect 2 (pc)

IllegalPaladin on 08 February 2010
sapphi_snake said:
Reasonable said:
Andysw said:

I just looked at the metacritic scores for the xbox 360 and pc versions of mass effect 2. To my suprise, the pc version scores a 94 vs a 96 for the xbox 360 version.


I don't get this. You have two identical versions of the same game, and yet one version scores higher than the other. Can someone explain?

This happans a lot - look at Halo PC vs Xbox for example.  The fact is PC reviewers will be reviewing vs PC titles as well as PC historic titles.  For example if you've played a while on PC Bioshock wasn't an amazing leap forward but the latest incarnation of a game like System Shock.

As such it's not uncommon for titles to be seen as less amazing on PC.  The fact the scores are so close, and high, shows that on both systems the title is very good.  As a PC gamer myself I often mind myself less impressed than console specific gamers with many titles due to this.  ME2 is really good though.

Hmm... You are aware that Halo came out on PC 2 years after it released on the Xbox right? For a port of a 2 year old game that had to compete with more recent games I'd say Halo PC scored beter than most ports would under those circumstances. If you want to give good examples use games that are released simultaneously on both PC and consoles (like say... Modern Warfare 2).

I know that you're talking about scores so maybe what I'm saying does or does not apply. I just want to say it as I own Halo PC and it isn't that good.

The Halo port was still a rather poor port regardless of when it came out. Also as the post you were quoting said, Halo PC wasn't alone on the PC like it was on the Xbox. It was also going up against big guns like Counter-Strike, Half-Life, ect. Heck, System Shock 2 came out in 1999.



Around the Network
Zlejedi on 08 February 2010
WiiStation360 said:
There are many reasons for different scores on the PC, many of which have already been mentioned. Here are a few:

1. PC and Console graphics are judge by a different scale. Consoles hardware is set when the console released, and processing power is the same for the generation. PC processing power is faster every couple of months. Console games do look better every year, but not the huge leaps the PC sees every couple of years. Console games are more likely to get a 10 for graphics, where PC games have a higher bar to get perfect scores on graphics.

ME2 = 10 graphics on the 360 (best looking 360 game)
ME2 = 9 graphics on PC (Crysis on Max setting looks better)

2. Historic grading scale. Console games are judges against other games of the same generation. PC games are judges in a historical context.

ME2 = 10! Best RPG on the 360. System defining RPG!
ME2 = 9.5 One of the best RPGs in the past few years.

3. Different expectations for extras.

For RPGS:
No modding tools = expected on the consoles.
No modding tools = letdown on the PC.

For Shooters:
No dedicated servers = expected on consoles.
No dedicated servers = intense hatred on the PC.

4. Games designed for a PC interface from the beginning score better than games that are designed for a console interface and then ported.

Dragon Age:
PC = 91
PS3 = 87
360 = 86

Mass Effect 2:
PC= 94
360 = 96

Well spoken.

Also there's point 5 user interface - huge ass letters and inventories/stat screens showing 4 or 5 items at once = good design for consoles and sd friendly. Transfering same interfaces into PC scores negative points for bad porting.



PROUD MEMBER OF THE PSP RPG FAN CLUB

mundus6 on 08 February 2010
Andysw said:

I just looked at the metacritic scores for the xbox 360 and pc versions of mass effect 2. To my suprise, the pc version scores a 94 vs a 96 for the xbox 360 version.


I don't get this. You have two identical versions of the same game, and yet one version scores higher than the other. Can someone explain?

Its the same with every 360 version of a game vs the PS3 version. The PS3 version usually score a bit higher and its only beacuse 360 always get more reviews. Its almost the same this time though, the 360 version still got more reviews, but some PC magazines gave it less than a 9 which was the lowest it got anywhere across the board on the 360. So when looking at a game on metacritic unless 1 version isn't obviously better like say the 360 version of Bayonetta, just ignore the score and look at the highest, since they are pretty much the same game anyway, heck PC version is a bit better imo.



naznatips on 08 February 2010

The answer is a lot simpler than most of you make it out to be: There are like two-dozen media sources devoted to reviewing Xbox related games, and they pretty much all automatically give a massive and great game like Mass Effect 2 a 10. PC does not have so many dedicated review sources, and thus doesn't get that extra slant.

And yes, the game plays a little better with a mouse and keyboard, and looks a little better on PC, but overall the versions are nearly identical.



Reasonable on 08 February 2010
IllegalPaladin said:
sapphi_snake said:
Reasonable said:
Andysw said:

I just looked at the metacritic scores for the xbox 360 and pc versions of mass effect 2. To my suprise, the pc version scores a 94 vs a 96 for the xbox 360 version.


I don't get this. You have two identical versions of the same game, and yet one version scores higher than the other. Can someone explain?

This happans a lot - look at Halo PC vs Xbox for example.  The fact is PC reviewers will be reviewing vs PC titles as well as PC historic titles.  For example if you've played a while on PC Bioshock wasn't an amazing leap forward but the latest incarnation of a game like System Shock.

As such it's not uncommon for titles to be seen as less amazing on PC.  The fact the scores are so close, and high, shows that on both systems the title is very good.  As a PC gamer myself I often mind myself less impressed than console specific gamers with many titles due to this.  ME2 is really good though.

Hmm... You are aware that Halo came out on PC 2 years after it released on the Xbox right? For a port of a 2 year old game that had to compete with more recent games I'd say Halo PC scored beter than most ports would under those circumstances. If you want to give good examples use games that are released simultaneously on both PC and consoles (like say... Modern Warfare 2).

I know that you're talking about scores so maybe what I'm saying does or does not apply. I just want to say it as I own Halo PC and it isn't that good.

The Halo port was still a rather poor port regardless of when it came out. Also as the post you were quoting said, Halo PC wasn't alone on the PC like it was on the Xbox. It was also going up against big guns like Counter-Strike, Half-Life, ect. Heck, System Shock 2 came out in 1999.

I believe I can near enough guarantee you that had Halo released on PC right way it would have scored pretty well but not as well as it scored on Xbox.  On Xbox it was a revolution.  On PC it would have been another very good FPS with some new features.  That's the point I'm making.

Also, as naznatips points out, quite correctly, console games get the advantage of a few almost guaranteed great reviews from the official mags that always skew a premium console titles scores upwards a little.



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...