the gamespot average player review score is more accurate than any website/magazine...

eg. gamespot review give 5.7 while 689 player review give 9.2...
http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/rpg/hackguvol2/review.html

The real problem, is 1up is so desperate to get hits by putting up their reviews early, that they don't actually get all the information on the game before reviewing it.

Obviously a game should be reviewed in the context of its price or it doesn't make any sense. BBA on Wii definitely got docked for being crap as a full-priced game, and I'm sure RE4 Wii got a few extra percentage points for being only $30. Value is a piece of the review after all.

How much does it cost you to buy a blue tooth headset? According to best buy its apparently $39.99 I stand corrected. I think warhwak will sell well just beucase it brgins that head set.

I agree completely.  The value of the content is certainly part of the review.

Don't even try to call EGM bias or 1up either. They aren't bias at all. Greg Ford was taking it into consideration of the price. It was is priced to high; it loses value.

Plus, 1up gave Brave Story (PSP) a 9; while IGN gave it a 7.3.

People have opinons. Thats what reviews are.

Gamespot gave that game a 5.7?!??!?!.....dam

And EGM says that effects all there reviews.  Including Big Brain Academy.  The article makes it seem like that affects how the game is reviewed but they don't normally make mention of price in the review of the game.  However they were forced to do so in the Review of Warhawk because Sony won't release the price.

Had Big Brain Academy been given to review without a price attached it likely would of had the same critera imposed.

add one more to the "this is pointless" posts.

I mean, if you want to say that price shouldn't effect a games review that's a completly different arguement then claiming EGM and 1up are biased because they take the cost of games into their review.

I think there is a place for price however. Because otherwise your cheaper games like PSN bowling or Dig Dug would get a 2. Because they're being compared to megablockbuster games like Heavenly Sword.

Whose going to buy a game that's a 2 even if it is only like 5 dollars. Dig Dug is a lot of fun too. Plus then there is no way to state how much a difference there is from a good 5 dollar game and a bad 5 dollar game. So reviews are going to be worthless for Virtual Console/Xbox Arcade/PSN games.

It makes sense that games be judged by other games in their price range.

The whole comparing tiny downloadable games and saying they legitimize reviewing games based on price is ridiculous.

Everyone knows those games are rated on a different scale than full games.

The idea that Warhawk or any other big game is losing points cause it was priced above what the reviewer thought it should be is stupid.

The claim that price effects reviews always is just covering their ass. It has more to do with how much stuff there is in the game and how well that's done than with the price.

If Shadowrun got an 8.0 and has multiplayer only and is priced at 60 dollars, doesn't this mean it would have gotten 9 or something according to this arbitrary 1 point off rule if it was 40 dollars?

Edit:

If you don't like the price of a game don't buy it. On the other hand, if you don't like the price of a game and you tell me the game's quality is lower because of the price this is BS. Assigning a random 1 point off penalty for overpricing that makes the whole review scoring system pointless because if the score doesn't reflect the actual review of the game then it shouldn't be there.

Either just have written reviews of games without numbered scores and mention issues you have with them or score games based on your review of the quality of it and don't put ridiculous rules about pricing changing how good the game was in the first place that effectively make the point score and the written review mismatch.