thats fine aragod but my point still stands. it was of great interest to me, thanks for posting it
aragod said:
Guess not everyone has the resources to put hundreds of hours into this. Anyway even from these "30" titles, you can see that the graph lines are pretty much static, which can say a lot. These graphs cover pretty much every notable exclusive or release, so we are talking about the "important" titles. If you care to add more titles, please do so. Until than, you haven't proven any flaw. It's like crying about public opinion research that only covers 50 000 people out of 50 000 000. |
If he doesn't have the resources to do an actual comprehensive study, perhaps he shouldn't be casting aspirations of bias?
And actually, upon further inspection it looks like he's not even meeting own criteria for the comparison. For example, Lost Odyssey should be in that 360 list, but it missing despite it's metascore of 78. EDGE only gave it a 6, meaning it'd also work against his "bias" claims.... how convenient. ;)
Seriously, does it matter? The obsession some people on here have with review scores and Metacritic is frightening.
| jester2358 said: jarrod, that would be true if the case study was of the industry as a whole. but a vertical slice, and one taken from the very best the industry has to offer, is an accurate representation of a bias in review score. i wonder if i could use this info to create an equation that could guess edges next score lol. however aragod I believe you should take a vertical slice from a development perspective. for example only use first(possibly 2nd) party studies games from sony and microsoft compared to multiplatform games. anyway , good read. |
The problem here is he's looking at an extremely tiny data set to make his bias argument. And on top of that, his data set seems cherrypicked with a little double checking of it, it's not even an accurate representation of the upper 30 titles.
So flawed study, with flawed data, to support flawed conclusions. The whole thing's seething with bias.
hum ... quite conclusive indeed
I was gonna say it shows nothing, but, no, it is quite interesting
Time to Work !
hum ... quite conclusive indeed
I was gonna say it shows nothing, but, no, it is quite interesting
Time to Work !
jarrod said:
If he doesn't have the resources to do an actual comprehensive study, perhaps he shouldn't be casting aspirations of bias? And actually, upon further inspection it looks like he's not even meeting own criteria for the comparison. For example, Lost Odyssey should be in that 360 list, but it missing despite it's metascore of 78. EDGE only gave it a 6, meaning it'd also work against his "bias" claims.... how convenient. ;) |
This wasn never labeled as a comprehensive study, and his aspiration of bias is subject to his research which was conducted under given circumestances, which are described in the opening statement. I'm urging you to improve upon this research by adding all that you think is missing, unless you can prove that his graphs are wrong, your statement isn't justified.
Lost Odyssey should be in that 360, but his choice to exclude it was probably limitation content wise. Also EDGE only gave it 7, your claim was false, how convenient...
If you try to undermine this, atleast take the effort not to fail on your first FACTUAL statement. Kk thx bye!
MY HYPE LIST: 1) Gran Turismo 5; 2) Civilization V; 3) Starcraft II; 4) The Last Guardian; 5) Metal Gear Solid: Rising
@jarod,
I m not sure the top30 is not "enought" to draw a conclusion ...
what I dont know is if we can trust him or not
Time to Work !
If you dont like their reviews and think they're biased, why dont you just you know... ignore them. seriously people, just enjoy your games.
Congratulations on learning to make graphs with Excel. Now put it to good use
my signature went on strike, it's demanding 3% raise
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
