http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3168384&p=37

they gave it B+

apearently they have addressed every concern with the 360 version of the game titled just "overlord"

Metacritic:

Overlord 360: 76

Overlord PS3: 72 and falling

Enhanced huh?

starcraft said: Metacritic: Overlord 360: 76 Overlord PS3: 72 and falling Enhanced huh?

that's because it's not as good now as it was when it was released. If they didn't enhance the game, it would probably be at 69 by now.

the game looks decent. it looks like it's at least worth a rent.

I love your use of Metacritic Starcraft since you just blindly take the end number and don't care about how the two are different. If you'd looked you'd know that the PS3 version has far fewer reviews (obviously) and those sites that reviewed both are only 3, Eurogamer (same score) IGN (360 better) 1up (PS3 better). So the PS3's lower score won't really mean much until the sites that gave the original game it's higher scores (Play, G4, Cheatcodecentral) weigh in on the new version.

I also love your assertion of "and dropping" as though you can see trends based on this one number you've looked up.

editted edition: I just wanted to add that I'm not interested in this game and don't really give a crap which one ends up better.  I simply wanted to call into question Starcraft's extremely basic and flawed analysis.

starcraft said: Metacritic: Overlord 360: 76 Overlord PS3: 72 and falling Enhanced huh?

this is not what I said the reviewrs said that they have resolved most of the complaint with the 360 version.NOT ME.

beside there are far less reviews for the game than the 360 one so what you did was just a blind fanboy cherry picking

Actually I did look at the number of reviews. 

IN my opinion (and in Metacritic's opinion) a dozen reviews is enough to get a first impression of where a game will go.  Also, there are exceedingly few titles who's aggregate scores trend upwards after the first ten or so reviews are out.  This is due to the fact that publishers generally stipulate that lower scoring reviews cannot be released until after the release of a game.

As for my "flawed analysis?"  I offered no analysis.  I tend to think that an aggregate is more important than direct reviewer by reviewer comparisons.  Especially when you consider (and you clearly did not) that some publications (like 1UP) have DIFFERENT reviewers scoring each version.

No apology necessary Torillian, you're stunned silence will suffice.

Enhanced huh?

is your analysis. You're right, often games will trend downwards, but that's mainly applied to games that come in with a lot of hype, since the first few reviews may or may not succumb to that hype, and is alot less pronounced for other games. In recent history I know that MGS4 actually trended upward due to a few early lower reviews.

And you're telling me that same sites with different reviewers is enough reason to invalidate comparing two scores from the same sites, but you can use aggregates of completely different sites and that's fine?

Truthfully you have no idea how it will trend, and don't even bring in the idea that a game that was previously released on another platform usually has lower scores even if enhanced simply because the original excitement for the game is long gone.

@starcraft

overlord review of 1up:

360:

B

http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3160589

Overlord :raising hell(PS3)

B+


so wait for the similar reviewers to review the game.

starcraft said: Metacritic: Overlord 360: 76 Overlord PS3: 72 and falling Enhanced huh?

 Ohhh perfect time to quote you. Putting too much faith in those trivial numbers if ya ask me

starcraft said: Metacritic: Overlord 360: 76 Overlord PS3: 72 and falling Enhanced huh?

http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/928401.asp

http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages2/935677.asp

Sigma on its own is a far superior game, yet because it's a remake it has lost most of its edge, thats why the score has gone down, pretty simple no?

Even you should have been able to figure that out.