I don't know why either, i totally agree.

Anonymous rating systems that don't check how many times you've voted are nothing more than popularity contests. The system works somewhat for ranking games of a particular console, but fails at cross-platform comparison.

Everyone knows the system sucks, so give it a rest already. -_-

Well something I thought was a little strange.

Burnout Paradise (PS3) 7.70 rating (sounds like a reasonable score)

http://vgchartz.com/games/game.php?id=13648

Burnout Paradise (360) 5.31 rating (WTF???)

http://vgchartz.com/games/game.php?id=13827

The game is pretty much the same on both systems right?

 PS3 fanboys most likely. Same thing with DMC4...though DMC4 was built on both systems at the same time while Burnout paradise was built around the PS3 hardware, letting it have an edge over the 360 version. Still, both versions are still the same game...better graphics or not.

in order to give a score to a game you should have to write a text review of the game to go along with that score of say 100 words minimum.  It would prevent troll raids, and pre release voting.  But it still has it's flaws in that it doesn't guard against overpraising fanboys.

or every vote should be tied back to the person and their history readily viewable so that the constant 1 er's and/or 10 er's can be put to shame. 

from Burnout and DMC4, I'm actually surprised there are more PS3 owners here than xbox, Considering the userbase in the English speaking world.

Rating systems are always bust because some sony fanboy will say ''Grr Mario on the wii did really well and it's not on my system, 1.'' or some wii fanboy gets annoyed at FF13 or whatever.

I also think there are problems because it is basically having a game suffer thousands of subjective views. People might rate Halo 3 a 2 because they found it boring, but really as a game it obviously deserves more than a 2.

As an example I really don't like the MGS series, never have and probably never will. I just never enjoyed the games at all. So personally I would obviously rate it lowly. However as a gamer im able to see that yes they are games with high production values and they are certainly extremely well made. So I would never rank them lowly. Simply because even though it isn't my style of game I can still appreciate that it is clearly a very good series.

Whereas I think most people would be like ''I dislike this genre, this game gets a 1'' ignoring the actual quality of the game.


Kinda funny you mention lost odyssey though since it is not hugely off from it's ranking at gamerankings. Although I could go into huge thing about how I think the entire reviewing process for LO and BD was wrong as it basically seemed to consist of ''Not a western rpg''

Games being rated unfairly
Bioshock 360 7.74

Any number of games like Wet, star wars, mercenaries 2 for PS3 All rated very highly even though they aren't out. Red steel 2 for wii, not out and rated highly.

Sponge squarepants: Atlantis squarepantis wii 8.36. Hey look it's better than bioshock =O

(already posted this but it didn't show, sorry if double post)