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

Forums - Sony - Technically inferior Xbox One games have higher metacritic, WHY?

Seihaku on 20 March 2014

Different people reviewing things, they aren't going to always line-up. Also, Raymand Legends runs on anything and looks great.



Around the Network
Torillian on 20 March 2014
MoHasanie said:
Torillian said:
I'd be curious to see if platforms with more reviews consistently score lower than those with less. That's my assumption but I've never gone through and proven it and I'd be curious to see the final results if anyone ever did.

Yeah I always thought more reviews would help balance out the average by lowering the importance of the low scores. 


Very possible, I think my theory comes mostly from seeing some tiny iOS game or another with only 4 or 5 reviews consistently being the highest rated game on metacritic every month.  Seems to me like adding in more reviews would balance out the high scores in that instance.  



...

FATALITY on 20 March 2014
VitroBahllee said:
The Fury said:
Cj2i3 said:
Xbox One just makes them better, maybe not graphically. Instead it enhances these games with the controller, cloud power and snap ability. Games just are better on Xbox, and it's something ps4 will have to deal with this ten unfortunately for its users.

Input device should not determine the score of a game unless it is a defining feature (see actual Kinect games). Differences between controllers is negligible on Xbone and PS4 in basic input experience so wouldn't/should never affect a game score. Same with the 'snap' ability. A game cannot be improved by an external Xbox One feature.


So, when 360 was the only system with acheivement-like points, would it have been unfair to say a game was more fun with acheivements than without?

If so, and it didn't matter, why did Sony add trophies?


cuz some people care...



”The environment where PlayStation wins is best for this industry” (Jack Tretton, 2009)

The Fury on 20 March 2014
VitroBahllee said:

So, when 360 was the only system with acheivement-like points, would it have been unfair to say a game was more fun with acheivements than without?

If so, and it didn't matter, why did Sony add trophies?

An excellent question and one I still don't know the answer to. It's not like they add value. They are just pointless. I cannot fathom what game reviewer would score a game higher based on the fact the game has Achievements or Trophies, instead of the game itself.



Hmm, pie.

The Fury on 20 March 2014
Cj2i3 said:

I'm completely bullshitting. 

Noted, statement retracted.



Hmm, pie.

Around the Network
mornelithe on 20 March 2014
The Fury said:
VitroBahllee said:

So, when 360 was the only system with acheivement-like points, would it have been unfair to say a game was more fun with acheivements than without?

If so, and it didn't matter, why did Sony add trophies?

An excellent question and one I still don't know the answer to. It's not like the add value.

Honestly, I think both companies did it just to give gamer's a 'reward' for beating games, whereas in the past we'd unlock things.  Sure, some games still do have unlocks, but there's been a big move to make those types of things paid DLC.



The Fury on 20 March 2014
mornelithe said:

Honestly, I think both companies did it just to give gamer's a 'reward' for beating games, whereas in the past we'd unlock things.  Sure, some games still do have unlocks, but there's been a big move to make those types of things paid DLC.

We have a winning statement here. I was going to mention something similar but couldn't do it properly. I've recently played X-men Legends again and all I could think the entire time was 'If this was released today extra characters would be DLC, costumes would be DLC, all charging extra for and here I am enjoying 100% of the game for the cost of the game.'



Hmm, pie.

mornelithe on 20 March 2014
The Fury said:
mornelithe said:

Honestly, I think both companies did it just to give gamer's a 'reward' for beating games, whereas in the past we'd unlock things.  Sure, some games still do have unlocks, but there's been a big move to make those types of things paid DLC.

We have a winning statement here. I was going to mention something similar but couldn't do it properly. I've recently played X-men Legends again and all I could think the entire time was 'If this was released today extra characters would be DLC, costumes would be DLC, all charging extra for and here I am enjoying 100% of the game for the cost of the game.'

Well, I don't know if it's true for certain, but it's really the only reason I can think of to have Trophies or Achievements at all.  I mean, we used to know who beat what through a little known activity we like to call conversation ;) lol



Dr.Henry_Killinger on 20 March 2014
MoHasanie said:
leo-j said:

The general consensus of this gen is the same as last.. Extreme Xbox bias in the core community.. It has been that way with reviews since Xbox 360..

Then why were PS3 exclusives some of the highest rated games last generation? 

Because if they were multiplat they would have higher scores on Xbox obviously.



In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank

Dr.Henry_Killinger on 20 March 2014
VitroBahllee said:
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
Imaginedvl said:
Dr.Henry_Killinger said:
VitroBahllee said:


I listen to audiobooks while i game much of the time because its hard to justify playing a video game for hours on end when you could be doing a video game AND something else at the same time. You might not agree, but I can play Peggle 2 and Titanfall just fine while listening to lectures and then I am getting more out of the experience. 'Feeling the explosion wash over you' is fun, but it isn't very developmental. Just as I don't like to listen to lectures and stare at a wall, I don't like to shoot robots and listen to nothing but explosions.

If that makes me less of a 'real gamer' in your eyes, fine. It does make me happier, smarter, and more comfortable with the time I put into playing video games (UPDATE: this is saying happier than if I didn't do it, smarter than if I didn't do it, and more comfortable with my time playing games than if I didn't do it, NOT, as some seem to think, that I'm saying listening to audiobooks makes me happier and more comfortable with my time on video games than the person I'm talking to. In fact, I suspect most people are much more comfortable with their time playing games than I am, it always feels like I could be doing more productive things to me, hence the audiobooks), and that matters to me more than your opinion of my gaming 'purity.' And I'm sure Jennifer Lawrence would agree with me.

Lol, I just asked how netflix improves the game warranting a higher score. I don't know why you feel the need to validate your gaming habits.

And why do you stick on Netflix as it is one exemple... Are you really missing what he is trying to say by better experience or are you just replying with rude response like that on purpose?

And yes, I'm actually watching Twitch while playing other games (not always but it happen and I enjoy it for sure) or sports on TV....

Better experience?

I thought ratings were a measure of the quality of the game not the extra embellishments of the console they are played on.

The Xbox One's advanced console features have become a feature of every game on that system, frankly. Just as people preferred playing multi-plat games on 360 for achievements, forcing PS3 to invent trophies. The console features made every game more appealing. Just as the PS3 and 360's superior online made a game more fun by default on them than on Wii when it came to online play, same with this. Hard to accept for many, I'm sure. And not everyone will agree that those features are an added value. But many do prefer them.





In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank