Forums - Gaming Discussion - Edge #319 - Dark Souls Remastered cover - Scores: God of War, Far Cry 5, more.

I wonder if they mention the Switch version delay or if there are any previews of the version.

Low for Scribblenauts. Meh for detective Pikachu.



Proud to be the first cool Nintendo fan ever

Number ONE Zelda fan in the Universe

DKCTF didn't move consoles

Prediction: No Zelda HD for Wii U, quietly moved to the succesor

Predictions for Nintendo NX and Mobile


Around the Network

 

Valdath said:
Barkley said:

GoW was only 1 point behind Arms!, couldn't quite get that 9/10. A real shame!

Arms got an 9? lmao

Mario + Rabbids too, lol.

Whats wrong with that? Arms was a good fighting game, and M+R is a great turn based Tactical RPG. 



Pocky Lover Boy! 

OTBWY said:
Hiku said:

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.

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.
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.

"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."

This could be said over any major publication. Any big outlet that does reviews basically. Hell, even the evening news can be part of that argument. I don't think it is here or there: they are a magazine, they have to sell. But that can't be the reason why they make the reviews that they do. Their audience trusts them and listen to what they have to say. It is perhaps that trust that Edge relies on to sell their magazine. It is a slippery slope.

As for Barkley's list, the sample size is to small, so we agree on that. As for comparing critically acclaimed games being compared, why not start with their highest scores? That would be the best place to start would it not? It is the first thing I looked at (perfect scores), cause of their reputation of being harsher than most.

Yes it can be said for any major publication that's weighed more heavily on Metacritic (Or the mainstream media). So if someone there wants to have a particularly weighted impact, they know they can. In cases where there are a number of questionable scores, it'll cause some people to raise their eyebrows. And the more influential the review is, the more negative attention it tends to get. But a more common reason for purposefully attracting attention through controversial actions is probably for the sake of your own business.
For example, the reason Edge chose not to have God of War on the cover probably doesn't have anything to do with the fact that they don't consider it a particularly remarkable game, not even in the same league as ARMS, but rather that they figured that most other magazines would feature Kratos on the cover, so by having Dark Souls they'll stand out from the rest.

As for comparing critically acclaimed games, starting with their perfect scores is most convenient since you already provided us with the list. I don't know if I'd say it's the 'best' considering it leaves out the vast majority of reviews, so we'll get a very small sample size. If you're particularly interested in perfect scores because Edge notoriously give lower scores, the same should apply to the number of 9's they give out. And 8's, etc. Not only are their sample sizes larger, but I'd say lower scores tend to be more interesting to look at in the context of this 'conspiracy theory'. Because they have the potential to make the biggest difference for the most noteworthy games, that tend to reside in the upper end of the review spectrum.
For example, for a game that sits on 95 on MC like God of War, a score of 8 would make a bigger difference than a score of 10. And certainly a 7. Which brings back memories of Jim Sterling.

Anyway, you can understand why people who may be concerned with some of Edge's recent reviews may not be concerned with what happened a decade or two ago? Let's say Reggie Fils-Aimé started writing for Edge under cover during this console generation. If he didn't work for Edge 6 years ago, those kind of reviews wouldn't be an issue then. Over the years management, editors and writers come and go. Even review guidelines and the entire grading system can change.
When it comes to games with perfect scores, I don't know how far back in time you'd be interested in relevance to the concern some people currently have in this topic. If I had a list of their 9's, 8's, 7's, etc, I would only really be interested in looking back a few years. Even the entirety of the current collective console generation would probably be a lot of work to tally up.

For this current generation (or the generation between systems that compete with PS4), they've given out 4 perfect scores to platform/console exclusive titles.

Bayonetta 2 (WiiU)
Bloodborne (PS4)
Zelda: Breath of the Wild (NSW)
Mario Odyssey (NSW)

Nothing particularly odd about the split imo. Especially since it's a small sample pool. Though on a sidenote, from what I've played I wouldn't give Bayonetta 2 or Bloodborne 10's. But I'm not shocked if they do. Especially considering they loved the original Bayonetta just as much. And I personally can't think of any PS4 games I'd give perfect 10's to. Then again, the last game I would have given a 10 at the time of release may have been Ocarina of Time. So I'm a lot more stingy when it comes to giving out 10's than Edge.

If you want to look to the previous generation which stretches back over a decade, if we look at exclusives which was what Barkley was focusing on in his comparison, they gave 10's to 6 games.

Halo 3 (360)
Super Mario Galaxy (Wii)
Little Big Planet (PS3)
Super Mario Galaxy 2 (Wii)
The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword (Wii)
The Last of Us (PS3)

Nothing in particular stands out to me about this list either, other than the split being more even.

Last edited by Hiku - on 21 April 2018

Edge has always had a bias against Sony games.



Shikamo said:

From these games I played Sea of Thieves and Far Cry 5, and I'm playing God of War, in my opinion 6 for Far Cry 5 is fair, 7 for Sea of Thieves It's a little more than the game deserves, and 8 for God of War it's less than the game deserves. Well, that's nothing more than my opinion.

Scores:

God of War - 8

Sea of Thieves - 7

Far Cry 5 - 6

A Way Out - 6

Extinction - 3

Scribblenauts Showdown - 3

Minit - 6

Detective Pikachu - 6 

 

Source

Edge really is contrarian bullshit.

7 for Sea of Thieves is too kind. Shit's a fucking $60 early access garbage on par with No Man's Sky. Yet they dare put it up against a full fledged game like God of War who gets an 8? Only 1 point higher than Sea of Thieves? Fucking really. LMAO.



Around the Network

This thread reminds me of when Jim Sterling gave Breath of the Wild a 7/10.



iron_megalith said:
Shikamo said:

From these games I played Sea of Thieves and Far Cry 5, and I'm playing God of War, in my opinion 6 for Far Cry 5 is fair, 7 for Sea of Thieves It's a little more than the game deserves, and 8 for God of War it's less than the game deserves. Well, that's nothing more than my opinion.

Scores:

God of War - 8

Sea of Thieves - 7

Far Cry 5 - 6

A Way Out - 6

Extinction - 3

Scribblenauts Showdown - 3

Minit - 6

Detective Pikachu - 6 

 

Source

Edge really is contrarian bullshit.

7 for Sea of Thieves is too kind. Shit's a fucking $60 early access garbage on par with No Man's Sky. Yet they dare put it up against a full fledged game like God of War who gets an 8? Only 1 point higher than Sea of Thieves? Fucking really. LMAO.

Maybe different people reviewed it?



Pocky Lover Boy! 

So based on this I have to assess that Edge's scoring scale is 7 = shit, 8 = goty candidate



My 8th gen collection

RolStoppable said:
Barkley said:

Nah they only use integers, reviewers that use decimal points are clearly more accurate.

That doesn't refute what I said. Edge uses the middle and the lower half of their scale more often than other publications.

How does that make them credible. Facts are showing that they are not credible.



VGPolyglot said:
JRPGfan said:

So Edge are Pro-Nintendo and Anti-Sony? it looks that way.

The post you're quoting shows Nintendo games are also scored below average, so I don't know how you could come to those two simultaneous conclusions.

If we don’t include Super Bomberman, it is an average of 4 points less than MC. Since Edge only does integers, it can be said that Edge = MC when it comes to Nintendo. Across the Sony first parties in the list, the average is 14 points less than MC. Yeah, definite bias there.

On top of that, they chose to have a remaster on their cover. Yeah...