Were any of those games not known as exclusives at the time of review? If so they should probably be excluded.
I'm also not sure why the list would be missing some 3DS games because of reason #2. 3DS games are Nintendo games in the same way that Fire Emblem Warriors is a Nintendo game for example. What games do you consider Nintendo games as opposed to Nintendo exclusives, and how does it relate to the 3DS games you're referring to that are missing?
Radiant Historia and The Alliance Alive are just two I can think of, titles where were released exclusively on a Nintendo console but not by Nintendo.
I see, so you think he picked games that were published by Nintendo and/or featured a Nintendo IP?
I'll let him answer whether or not that was his intention, but right now I agree with you that the games you mentioned should count.
The only joke I made was the "Bias against Xbox exclusives" portion.
The difference is that I implied it immediately. It wasn't an afterthought that I edited in afterwards. Not sure how you thought I would take your comment as a joke without the second line you edited in afterwards, which indeed I did not see, but if you say it was intended as a joke I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
Here's the thing. Me disagreeing with your method of gauging bias does not mean that I'm automatically saying that they are biased.
I some times disagree with methods regarding opinions I agree with, and they often presume I disagree with the opinion as well.
Although in this case I don't agree with any conclusion. But I would entertain the idea by looking at proposed evidence. And I think the way Barkley tallied scores is a more relevant way to gauge this because there are more ways to give preferential treatment than just the highest possible score.
I think it's fair to say that Edge in recent times generally give lower scores across the board than most publications. (That may very well be because they make use of the full scale of the scoring system better.) And also that in the past year or so they've given Playstation exclusives notably lower scores than for Nintendo. That may just be a coincidence. If anyone wants to extend that list back a few more years, I'd be interested in seeing if it changes.
Either way, scores by themselves don't say much to me. I'd have to read the review to know if the game is to my liking and if the reviewer considered the things I like a positive or negative.
Persona 5 : Meta - 93 Edge - 80
Nier Automata : Meta - 88 Edge - 80
Arms Meta: 77 Edge: 90
I thought you were joking about the first part too, which is why I actually made the first comment (which was unfinished).
It does not matter that you agree with me, or you don't agree with my *method* or whatever that means. The point is the important part here, which is twofold: That Edge is consistent and diverse in their scoring across all platforms. This goes from all the way back to today. The perfect score list was simply a reflection of this. Now if you believe that there is some sort of difference in the scoring of these two platforms, then I will only refer to your earlier comment. There are too many factors to be weighed in here, such as different writers etc. We have can sum up an endless amount of games (a bigger sample size than Barkley's obviously), without picking and choosing certain ones, and find that there is really no suggested bias (going by their list on MC). They score lower, that's it. They have outliers here and there, but that doesn't mean much on the whole. If you still think that they score Sony games lower on average (not saying you perse), then I can only conclude two things: Coincidence (most likely) or they just think Nintendo made the better game. Would the last point make it seem that they are biased, not really. It could be a number of things that made the score so. It is therefore ridiculous to suggest that some reviewer at Edge woke up with the mindset to score some game lower because it is a non-Nintendo game.
Because of the many factors that are unknown to me at the time, and in absence of a larger sample list of reviews in recent years, I wouldn't conclude that those are the only two scenarios.
Last edited by Hiku - on 21 April 2018
But I'll say this. If people on the internet can have a certain mindset, then someone working at Edge or any other publication can as well.
Edge is more heavily weighed on Metacritic, and they are at least aware of that, and the fact that their reviews can get extra attention because of this. But if they presumably take advantage of this, it could be for sensationalism rather than platform bias.
The list Barkley provided was interesting though, but it was a pretty small sample size, so I wouldn't draw any conclusions based on it. A larger list would more interesting.
But personally, if we're going to compare lists I'd be more interested to see how so called 'critically acclaimed' games measure up to each other. Which is hard to define, but perhaps games that score 85 or above. The reason those titles would be more interesting to me is because they tend to generate more buzz and attention. And if we're talking exclusives, an ability to drive console sales.