erikers said: mike_intellivision said: I got my January Game Informer today. Now let me say that I get the magainze becuase I get the discount program card. And believe me, I can earn it back in a month. Half of the 10 editors did not have any Wii games in their top 10. Think about it -- half the editors for the magazine don't think that Super Mario Galaxy -- the most highly reviewed game of this generation -- is one of the top 10 games of the year. This even though both reviewers gave it a 9.75 in this issue and it was the Game of the Month. (Both of those editors had it in their top 10s, including one who had it as the top game of the year). And only two games appear to have earned higher scores -- BioShock (X-Play's GoTY, BTW) and CoD4 both had perfect 10s. Some of the editors even listed games in their picks that had review scores of less than 9 in GI. Now I am not going to say SMG is the best game of the year. But if does appear there is an anti-Wii bias coming through with more and more publications. I have felt recently that GI has "been in the tank" for the PS3. And when they said in the opening that ... "this year saw some outstanding games help Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo jockey for position in the ongoing console war." Note the order. Any thoughts? Mike from Morgantown God forbid people don't choose your favorite games in their own personal favorites list. Get over it.

I wouldn't if that's what it was. It was instead "The Best 10 games of the year." Not "Your favorite 10 games of the year."

I gave up on the idea that the media would ever stop having a bias against Nintendo LONG ago.

mike_intellivision said: I got my January Game Informer today. Now let me say that I get the magainze becuase I get the discount program card. And believe me, I can earn it back in a month. Half of the 10 editors did not have any Wii games in their top 10. Think about it -- half the editors for the magazine don't think that Super Mario Galaxy -- the most highly reviewed game of this generation -- is one of the top 10 games of the year. This even though both reviewers gave it a 9.75 in this issue and it was the Game of the Month. (Both of those editors had it in their top 10s, including one who had it as the top game of the year). And only two games appear to have earned higher scores -- BioShock (X-Play's GoTY, BTW) and CoD4 both had perfect 10s. Some of the editors even listed games in their picks that had review scores of less than 9 in GI. Now I am not going to say SMG is the best game of the year. But if does appear there is an anti-Wii bias coming through with more and more publications. I have felt recently that GI has "been in the tank" for the PS3. And when they said in the opening that ... "this year saw some outstanding games help Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo jockey for position in the ongoing console war."  Note the order. Any thoughts? Mike from Morgantown

I think a simple explanation is those other Reviewers maybe never played it.

FishyJoe said: How many Nintendo ads is there in the magazine? I have never seen this magazine before.

360    3
PS3     0
PSP     2
Wii      0
DS      1
Multi   4
PC      2
PS2    1

 I think it's just a case of the majority of the editors being 360/PS3 centric.  No reason to cry foul, although I will admit that I was suprised by some of the choices that occured  in their lists... and that 5 of the 10 didn't have the second-highest ranked game of all time on it.

Overall, i didn'y care though.  I got the subscription as a gift and its not getting continued.  Half the magazine is previews of games that are more than a year away (for systems I can't afford.... yet), and I prefer my info to be near-release.  Then I don't get disappointed by failure to live up to hype. 

iberz said: mike_intellivision said: I got my January Game Informer today. Now let me say that I get the magainze becuase I get the discount program card. And believe me, I can earn it back in a month. Half of the 10 editors did not have any Wii games in their top 10. Think about it -- half the editors for the magazine don't think that Super Mario Galaxy -- the most highly reviewed game of this generation -- is one of the top 10 games of the year. This even though both reviewers gave it a 9.75 in this issue and it was the Game of the Month. (Both of those editors had it in their top 10s, including one who had it as the top game of the year). And only two games appear to have earned higher scores -- BioShock (X-Play's GoTY, BTW) and CoD4 both had perfect 10s. Some of the editors even listed games in their picks that had review scores of less than 9 in GI. Now I am not going to say SMG is the best game of the year. But if does appear there is an anti-Wii bias coming through with more and more publications. I have felt recently that GI has "been in the tank" for the PS3. And when they said in the opening that ... "this year saw some outstanding games help Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo jockey for position in the ongoing console war." Note the order. Any thoughts? Mike from Morgantown I think a simple explanation is those other Reviewers maybe never played it.

That in itself is unproffesional and a "crime". If I worked as an editor for a videogame magazine the first thing i would do is buy every system i don't currently have and buy every big exclusive making sure to dedicate atleast some time to each. Anyone who doesn't really shouldn't really grow past being head of one of the departments they do play and shouldn't be involved in a list like this. It seems like basic logic to me. Maybe i'm just a proffesionalist though. I'd feel the same way if Halo 3 wasn't on someones list... or... Orange Box. It's just a basic for being a proffesional in this kind of buissness.

Lingyis said: so? it's subjective. doesn't seem like Nintendo minds it, why should you? clearly millions other don't care about their opinions either.

ahah, you never know. The magazine is from Australia? Lets see when Australia receives its next shipment..... Whuahahahahahaha 

I've had this same thought in the recent months although for completely different and more prominent reasons.

My biggest outcry was their holiday buyers guy article. Several scentences made in that article showed absoulute bias against the Wii and favor for 360.

I don't have time to go into details, hoever, I will post direct quote later this afternoon.

I read GI, and it does seem to be somewhat biased aganst the Wii. Any Wii game review is laced with a healthy dose of weasel words. They tend to use them even when they give a good review resulting in a mixed message. Look for them, they are there.

They also do alot of...um...you know like when someone criticizes the president depite the fact that the topic they are discussing has nothing to do with the president, it's like that (forgive me for not knowing the technical term for this). They take these sort of left-field potshots at the wii frequently. The often make a point of comparing the graphics of the Wii to the PS3 and take this to the point where it annoys me. (Get over it guys, PS3 and 360 have vastly superior graphics than the Wii, I get it. Though I disagree about the margin. It's significant, but nowhere near as significant as it is often made out to be). Their reviews are often reminiscent of reading an editorial page in a newspaper.

I'd prefer to have an actual reference or two to illustrate my point, but alas I do not have one on hand. 

I'll be happy to critique one of their reviews and point out exactly what I'm talking about whenever I get the chance if anybody is actually interested; as soon as I can that is.

I don't detect any GI bias towards the 360 or the PS3 for the most part. There probably is some as different people inevitably tend to pick favorites, myself included (any console that has Zelda).

By the way this sort of bias crops up all over the place and not just in game reviews. Just read any news article and at least half the time you'll see it if you know what to look for. And just because you might agree with the bias doesn't mean it isn't bias. It can't be stopped, it can't be reasoned with.

Damn, I just wasted like ten minutes of my life writing and editing this, go me. 

Some quick points in response.

First of all, if it is opinion, that’s fine. But since these lists were within the Top 50 Games section, I thought it looked more like a ranking … or at least was unclear.

As for those not knowing about how good games were without playing them, I don’t own a 360 or PS3, but I know that Bioshock, Assassin’s Creed, Ratchet & Clank, and Halo 3 are all praiseworthy. Reading magazines and websites is not that difficult.

Game Informer has been somewhat against the Wii since Nintendo would not give them early access to games last year for review. They did a big pre-release splash on the PS3. It was another month, post-release before the Wii received similar treatment. I wonder if this has any – or just appealing to the more likely consumer – is behind some of these lists and reviews. (Let’s play to market and not objectivity).

Related to this was a brief in the same issue stating a rumor that Nintendo might be the first with a system next generation. It mentioned Microsoft’s dominance. Let’s see, Wii has outsold 360 it 10 of 11 months in 2007. That’s domination? (I can’t remember the exact wording, but there was also a positive comment about PS3 sales in the same brief, if I recall correctly).

It is interesting though, that the Gamestop stores try to emphasize the newer traditional gaming systems, but have far more customers asking about Wiis and far more floor space for the PS2.

Mike from Morgantown

edge magazine is bias against wii as well I think, Not one game has got the result it deserved