Khuutra said:
I have no idea what you're talking about |
Neither do I.
| GenoZStriker said: ^ the orange box on the Xbox360 wasn't any better. Gamers were better of getting it for the PC. |
LOL Are you joking? Sorry dude but you have no idea what your talking about.
ymeaga1n said:
LOL Are you joking? Sorry dude but you have no idea what your talking about. |
? he's absolutely right. While the 360 version was a decent port (as opposed to the ps3 one being a horrible port)
The PC version is superior by a landslide.
Not only that, it has infinite free content and no need to pay for any of the updates/map packs, dedicated servers. mods, better community, much much much less lag and no reason to pay to use your internet twice.
Has far superior graphics, controls, sound and resolution.
How can you possibly say his statement is incorrect?
It happens when one has way more reviews. You see PS3 versions of games scoring higher than 360 all the time for the same reason.
BW_JP said:
? he's absolutely right. While the 360 version was a decent port (as opposed to the ps3 one being a horrible port)
Has far superior graphics, controls, sound and resolution.
How can you possibly say his statement is incorrect? |
I'm sure he was reffering to the PS3 version of Orange Box versus the 360 version.
As for the PC version, almost everything you said is not reviewable. You can't give scores for potential. Mods don't come with the game, so they can't be reviewed. Better community shouldn't even be mentioned, lag depends on internet connection, better controls are subjective, better sound is arguable, better graphics is actually wrong, because the 360 version of Half-Life 2 and Episode One use the updated Source engine. So only the higher resolution is actually true.
So the PC version barely wins.
On the other hand the 360 version has achievements....
I changed my mind. I personally think the 360 version is superior.
| CommonMan said: It's not a flaw, it's an aggregate. Thre are 3 "Averages": the mean, median and mode. Mathmeticians really have never decided what the "best" average is, it's a case by case basis. What metacritic shows is the mean score. Meaning take the scores, add them up and divide by how many scores there are (plus weighting but we can leave it out of this discussion). Each of the average types have strengths and weaknesses (for instance the mode is the most common number in a set, so Uncharted 2 would be 100 on this scale, in fact we'd have a lot of 100's this gen if that was the case, not very helpful) and the median is arrived at by listing the numbers and finding the right in the middle and taking the mean of those two, which isn't very helpful either as outliers would put a lot of games way lower. So unless you can come up with a brand new type of average that no mathmetician since ancient Egypt has been able to come up with, it's as good as it's going to get. |
That's basically correct, but Meta is nonetheless statistically flawed (to be fair mostly in terms of how people apply the results but also within its own right) because:
1 - number of samples is inconsistent not only between different games but different console versions. This makes it impossible to reliably compare titles. Right now FFXIII for PS3 has way more reviews, and because consoles have official mags, etc. this means statistically 360 should come out with a higher score despite being the same game with somewhat weaker graphics - that's clearly useless for comparison
2 - the real biggie in terms of their overall average, they weight some reviews using a 'secret' formula plus for reviews that are text only they 'guess' the score implied by the words. This is the biggie. This means the metacritic average is fundamentally unreliable.
Now the site does have some merit, if you understand all this (and you clearly do) and approach it's contents wisely. But few do, let's be honest.
Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...
| Fab_GS said: That's not a flaw, FFS. Not every reviewer reviewed the X360 version. |
they should, eurogamer only reviewed the ps3 version, and used the same for 360 version,
but then before ps3 always got it own review and games like bayonetta being inferior scored lower, even some games by minimal graphic differences.
| BW_JP said: only 360 only magazine/sites were given a 360 version. Every other major publication was denied rights to review an xb360 version because of the outlash it would cause. The X360 only reviews are obviously skewed and paid for. It deserves half whatever the ps3 gets. |
Yeah which is why the official PS Magazine (US) gave this a 100 and why both Official Xbox Magazine and MS Xbox World gave this a 90. Brilliant logic there Pyle.
| CommonMan said: It's not a flaw, it's an aggregate. Thre are 3 "Averages": the mean, median and mode. Mathmeticians really have never decided what the "best" average is, it's a case by case basis. What metacritic shows is the mean score. Meaning take the scores, add them up and divide by how many scores there are (plus weighting but we can leave it out of this discussion). Each of the average types have strengths and weaknesses (for instance the mode is the most common number in a set, so Uncharted 2 would be 100 on this scale, in fact we'd have a lot of 100's this gen if that was the case, not very helpful) and the median is arrived at by listing the numbers and finding the right in the middle and taking the mean of those two, which isn't very helpful either as outliers would put a lot of games way lower. So unless you can come up with a brand new type of average that no mathmetician since ancient Egypt has been able to come up with, it's as good as it's going to get. |
well said.
Many of those Metacritic reviews are based off the Japanese version as they were up WAY before the other sites, so based off the Japanese version they can't really rate a 360 version cause there isn't one.
MaxwellGT2000 - "Does the amount of times you beat it count towards how hardcore you are?"
Wii Friend Code - 5882 9717 7391 0918 (PM me if you add me), PSN - MaxwellGT2000, XBL - BlkKniteCecil, MaxwellGT2000
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2025 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
