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

Forums - Gaming - I'm beginning to think game reviews are biased/skewed (or I have issues)

Legend11 on 13 June 2007
Fuzzmosis said:
Legend11, I believe you missed the point.

Although stand back, and take a look at the prettiest Game Cube game, and the prettiest Xbox360 game. Undoubtedly there's a difference. A 25x difference? Are those extra 480 million triangles/sec doing that good a job?

I wish I could comment more insightfully on the Xbox360 yet I've still never played the thing! Minus a boxing demo once.

I never said 25x better.  And even if the PS3 and 360 are as powerful as 12-15 Gamecubes they also have to display all their games at a resolution of at least 720P which is around 2.67 times as high as standard definition, so there goes some of the power right there,  Add to that the fact that the 360 actually does things in the background while you play games (for example you can download a demo while playing a game, etc).  Then there's the physics, A.I.  and other things in games that aren't apparent on the screen.  Also some graphical effects can take a lot of processing power.  And other reasons I'm too tired to even think of ;)



Around the Network
Smashchu on 13 June 2007
Legend11 said:
Well Nintendo Power gave it a 7.5...

Thats about right. They can be biased though >.>

 I'm probobly being a fan boy but I can't find reviews that I agree with any more. IGN expecially. I find their points to be a bit lacking and more based on graphics and the fact it's number 8(which I won't deny it's a bit much). When it comes to gameplay, it's actually fun. Thats why I'm a bit erked at the review.



Fuzzmosis on 13 June 2007

I'm aware you never said 25X better. Just noting on that question, how much better is it really? This isn't an enormous debate as which is superior, but how much do these stats actually impact the game on a noticable level? You're also saying AI while talking about the Graphics Processor? :)

Also, here's an honest question, does downloading in the background slow games down?



See Ya George.

"He did not die - He passed Away"

At least following a comedians own jokes makes his death easier.

Fuzzmosis on 13 June 2007

My apologies, I've gone off topic. I'm done.

Back on topic: Yay X-Play, but even then I don't always agree with them.



See Ya George.

"He did not die - He passed Away"

At least following a comedians own jokes makes his death easier.

kn on 13 June 2007

In a lame attempt to get it back on topic, what, in your opinion, would help get reviews back on track so they are more useful to everyone? Add a "fun factor"? or something along those lines? I'm fine with rating the sound and graphics of the game as they are part of the immersive experience. "Value" is a waaaay to subjective as I don't value a game that goes for 100 hours more than one that may only have 30 hours of play. Lord of the Rings: ROTK was awesome multiplayer fun but I think we got about 25-30 hours out of it. That was plenty and I feel I got my money's worth. Same for Lego Star Wars. That part of the review maybe needs to be discussed, but not part of the overall rating. "Fun factor" or how entertaining the game is (though also subjective) along with a "replay" factor and a "length of game" factor would be more of measure. In then end, though, I suspect some of you are right and I should just kick the reviews to the curb and buy what looks good and hope for the best. At least if I buy them used at GS/EB games, I can return them if they suck within 7 days.



I hate trolls.

Systems I currently own:  360, PS3, Wii, DS Lite (2)
Systems I've owned: PS2, PS1, Dreamcast, Saturn, 3DO, Genesis, Gamecube, N64, SNES, NES, GBA, GB, C64, Amiga, Atari 2600 and 5200, Sega Game Gear, Vectrex, Intellivision, Pong.  Yes, Pong.

Around the Network
Tispower on 13 June 2007
Smashchu said:
Ok, My turn.

IGn is getting worse and worse every day. Mario Party 8 review drew the line(even though everyone hated it, but hear me out). it amazed me how much he complained about the graphics. Since when were graphics a focal point of the game. He complained it didn't support 16:9. Sure bad, but I only know one person(who is a rich kid) who owns one(and even he has a 3:4). He also gave out wrong information. Example.
-Bowser isn't a playable character -_-
-Only time there is frame rate dips is when someone uses a Duelo Candy
But the worst

How about a racing game where you don't tilt the Wii remote on its side classic style? Instead, you hold the controller normally and twist your wrist to the left or right to turn. Again - what?
To bad you actually DO hold it like how you said.

But yeah, Wii reviews are always going to bitch about graphics. Expecially IGN

The only people I still trust are X-Play. The reason is they do what everyone else won't. Rate them on Gameplay. I assum most readers are going to buy the game based on gameplay. Graphics are there for 10minutes. The other 9hrs and 50min are left with the gameplay.

As said, trust us, not them. Don't let IGN or Gamespot deside your buys.


I am very suprised to your reference about 16:9. Here in the UK I haven't many 4:3 screens on sale for some time now (the few that are on sale, are normally fairly small screens), at least since the start of 2007. Also, most PC screens are now 16:9, rather than 4:3, so I can understand their complaint, as that is a pretty major issue, tbh. On top of that, even though we have a 4:3 TV, most of our TV on Freeview is 16:9, so we effectively lose some of the TV size, so if the game isn't widescreen, then you'll lost some of your TV playing it in 4:3.

To show how little 4:3 screens are sold, look here:

http://www.sony.co.uk/view/ShowProductCategory.action?site=odw_en_GB&category=TVP+LCD+TV

That is the entire Sony LCD TV range, and there's only *one* 4:3 screen, which is desribed as an "Entry level portable BRAVIA"! So if the game makers couldn't be bothered to make the game support 16:9, which shouldn't be too hard to do, it does shock me.

 



One person's experience or opinion never shows the general consensus

PSN ID: Tispower

MSN: tispower1@hotmail.co.uk

akuma587 on 13 June 2007

Gamespot is the worst. IGN is pretty good. I do agree that FPS's receive too much credit too often. Unfortunately, it is somewhat unavoidable. They usually are pretty pleasing to the eye and to the player. I think things will change in the future though given the Wii's success rate. Some of the Wii games are just plain bad though, all of you have to admit. I do think reviewers will eventually open up to "casual" titles that are well made, and enjoyable for everyone. A lot of them even gave Wii sports in the 7.5's and such.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

DKII on 13 June 2007

They may only be selling 16:9 screens now but most people only replace their TV's every 10 years so the majority will still have 4:3 displays for a few years still at least.



Smashchu on 13 June 2007
Tispower said:
Smashchu said:
Ok, My turn.

IGn is getting worse and worse every day. Mario Party 8 review drew the line(even though everyone hated it, but hear me out). it amazed me how much he complained about the graphics. Since when were graphics a focal point of the game. He complained it didn't support 16:9. Sure bad, but I only know one person(who is a rich kid) who owns one(and even he has a 3:4). He also gave out wrong information. Example.
-Bowser isn't a playable character -_-
-Only time there is frame rate dips is when someone uses a Duelo Candy
But the worst

How about a racing game where you don't tilt the Wii remote on its side classic style? Instead, you hold the controller normally and twist your wrist to the left or right to turn. Again - what?
To bad you actually DO hold it like how you said.

But yeah, Wii reviews are always going to bitch about graphics. Expecially IGN

The only people I still trust are X-Play. The reason is they do what everyone else won't. Rate them on Gameplay. I assum most readers are going to buy the game based on gameplay. Graphics are there for 10minutes. The other 9hrs and 50min are left with the gameplay.

As said, trust us, not them. Don't let IGN or Gamespot deside your buys.


I am very suprised to your reference about 16:9. Here in the UK I haven't many 4:3 screens on sale for some time now (the few that are on sale, are normally fairly small screens), at least since the start of 2007. Also, most PC screens are now 16:9, rather than 4:3, so I can understand their complaint, as that is a pretty major issue, tbh. On top of that, even though we have a 4:3 TV, most of our TV on Freeview is 16:9, so we effectively lose some of the TV size, so if the game isn't widescreen, then you'll lost some of your TV playing it in 4:3.

To show how little 4:3 screens are sold, look here:

http://www.sony.co.uk/view/ShowProductCategory.action?site=odw_en_GB&category=TVP+LCD+TV

That is the entire Sony LCD TV range, and there's only *one* 4:3 screen, which is desribed as an "Entry level portable BRAVIA"! So if the game makers couldn't be bothered to make the game support 16:9, which shouldn't be too hard to do, it does shock me.

 


 

Hmmm. That's odd. Here in Florida I never asee a 16:9 TV. I don't I saw a single one when I bought my new TV.

Smashchu on 13 June 2007
akuma587 said:
Gamespot is the worst. IGN is pretty good. I do agree that FPS's receive too much credit too often. Unfortunately, it is somewhat unavoidable. They usually are pretty pleasing to the eye and to the player. I think things will change in the future though given the Wii's success rate. Some of the Wii games are just plain bad though, all of you have to admit. I do think reviewers will eventually open up to "casual" titles that are well made, and enjoyable for everyone. A lot of them even gave Wii sports in the 7.5's and such.

Agreed, except I don't like IGN(still no Gamespot, but they are getting there). FPS do recive WAY to much credit. Gears of War(in my mind) is a little more hyped then it needs to be. I found the game kind of dull(might just be the level) and dark. Hey, developers, can I SEE what I'm playing. That's just me though. I think a lot are just hyped to death. Killzone is the best example.

And, yes some Wii games are bad. But, to reviewers it's usually the wrong ones. Cooking Mama, from what I've seen, is actually a pretty cool game. Sure, it's shallow, but it's still fun. The ports are the ones that are bad. the casual games like Cooking Mama aren't.