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

Forums - Gaming - Vgchartz have no credibilty in reviews

Citan on 30 March 2010

Vgchartz reviewers have no credibility.

When they reviewed bayonetta they understood that a review shall not be based on opinion.

A review is a quality check.

So bayonetta got higher score on xbox than PS3.

 

But afraid of getting bad feedback they gave FFXIII same score on both platforms.

Then rocketpig came in and wrote a horrible article about review system (which I will

write about later) in order to defend vgchartz and people were like "hooray" "great article"

when he clearly don`t know what review or passion means.

People swallow everything on this site because they think it`s an adult site.

Adults know how to review.

 

 



Around the Network
twesterm on 30 March 2010

The differences in FFXIII are pretty negligible while the differences in Bayonetta are not. Simple as that.

Or are you saying that every site that rated FFXIII the same on both consoles have no credibility? What do you think of the fact that right now FFXIII has a higher metacritic rating on the 360 than the PS3?



 

twesterm on 30 March 2010

Just to add (I don't edit because I fear you may be replying now and might miss this) writing reviews isn't you find something you don't like doesn't mean docking the game 0.1 points.

Reviewing a game doesn't go like this:

  • The game is about a 9.0
  • The 360 has two extra discs so -0.2 points
  • The 360 has slightly worse graphics, -0.1 points
  • The 360 gets an 8.7 and the PS3 gets a 9.0

It just doesn't work like that.  There are differences in the two and hopefully the review points out the differences if they actually matter (though I wouldn't condemn the review if it doesn't) but the games doesn't automatically get dinged a point for every little difference.  There are minor differences in the two versions but they're just minor. 

They aren't major enough to actually affect the end product so there's no point in changing the score.



 

Porcupine_I on 30 March 2010
twesterm said:

Just to add (I don't edit because I fear you may be replying now and might miss this) writing reviews isn't you find something you don't like doesn't mean docking the game 0.1 points.

Reviewing a game doesn't go like this:

  • The game is about a 9.0
  • The 360 has two extra discs so -0.2 points
  • The 360 has slightly worse graphics, -0.1 points
  • The 360 gets an 8.7 and the PS3 gets a 9.0

It just doesn't work like that.  There are differences in the two and hopefully the review points out the differences if they actually matter (though I wouldn't condemn the review if it doesn't) but the games doesn't automatically get dinged a point for every little difference.  There are minor differences in the two versions but they're just minor.

They aren't major enough to actually affect the end product so there's no point in changing the score.

Obviously it worked like that for Batman: Arkham Asylum



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

stof on 30 March 2010
Citan said:

Vgchartz reviewers have no credibility.

When they reviewed bayonetta they understood that a review shall not be based on opinion.

A review is a quality check.

So bayonetta got higher score on xbox than PS3.

 

 

Actually, a review is an opinion. It's the reviewers opinion. A good review is one where the reviewer gives an educated and well thought out opinion.



I'm a mod, come to me if there's mod'n to do. 

Chrizum is the best thing to happen to the internet, Period.

Serves me right for challenging his sales predictions!

Bet with dsisister44: Red Steel 2 will sell 1 million within it's first 365 days of sales.

Around the Network
twesterm on 30 March 2010
Porcupine_I said:
twesterm said:

Just to add (I don't edit because I fear you may be replying now and might miss this) writing reviews isn't you find something you don't like doesn't mean docking the game 0.1 points.

Reviewing a game doesn't go like this:

  • The game is about a 9.0
  • The 360 has two extra discs so -0.2 points
  • The 360 has slightly worse graphics, -0.1 points
  • The 360 gets an 8.7 and the PS3 gets a 9.0

It just doesn't work like that.  There are differences in the two and hopefully the review points out the differences if they actually matter (though I wouldn't condemn the review if it doesn't) but the games doesn't automatically get dinged a point for every little difference.  There are minor differences in the two versions but they're just minor.

They aren't major enough to actually affect the end product so there's no point in changing the score.

Obviously it worked like that for Batman: Arkham Asylum

When you point something out like that it's generally helpful if you actually point out why instead of just acting smug...



 

O-D-C on 30 March 2010

A review is an opinion, the opinion of the writer, example, I played and reviewed Dark Void Zero, didn't like it and found some valid faults with it and justified the score I gave it, a score which is vastly different from other sites, but in end it all boils down to this, I liked it, they didn't

Reviews are opinion pieces not a holy number that is attached to games to boost their metacritic scores or to fuel fanboy wars.



slowmo on 30 March 2010

Wow 4 reviews and the entire site loses credibility to you, very balanced opinion there. I'm quite pleased you aren't on the reviewing staff!

I personally would have collected more hard evidence to make such a claim, for example linking multiple reviews you have issues with would be a start.



Porcupine_I on 30 March 2010
twesterm said:
Porcupine_I said:
twesterm said:

Just to add (I don't edit because I fear you may be replying now and might miss this) writing reviews isn't you find something you don't like doesn't mean docking the game 0.1 points.

Reviewing a game doesn't go like this:

  • The game is about a 9.0
  • The 360 has two extra discs so -0.2 points
  • The 360 has slightly worse graphics, -0.1 points
  • The 360 gets an 8.7 and the PS3 gets a 9.0

It just doesn't work like that.  There are differences in the two and hopefully the review points out the differences if they actually matter (though I wouldn't condemn the review if it doesn't) but the games doesn't automatically get dinged a point for every little difference.  There are minor differences in the two versions but they're just minor.

They aren't major enough to actually affect the end product so there's no point in changing the score.

Obviously it worked like that for Batman: Arkham Asylum

When you point something out like that it's generally helpful if you actually point out why instead of just acting smug...

I would like to point out that the Game  "Batman: Arkham Asylum" has recieved different scores in the Review on VGChartz.com because of minor differences.

 



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

ClaudeLv250 on 30 March 2010

Reviews are a marriage of facts and opinion. Having a review that is strictly one or the other is useless to the reader.



Tag - "No trolling on my watch!"