With all the discussions of "Biased Sites" lately I have created a listing of 10 popular reviewers using the site stats from gamerankings.com ( http://gamerankings.com/itemrankings/sites.asp ).

The chart displays the sites average difference (from the average review score) for each platform minus the sites average difference for all platforms (from the average review score).

so, everyone pretty much dogs the Wii?

I've always like IGN.

Gamespy really doesn't like current gen.
EGM and 1up hate Wii
Gamespot and Play love PS3

You have to also take into account that Reviewers are become like movie critics. High brow and esoteric, so Mini-games and casual titles aren't going to cut it. Just like Action movies get that treatment by Movie Critics.

Interesting numbers. Especially 1UP, EGM, and Play Magazine. Of course I never really count review scores for much. It's more the comments that I read in reviews rather than the actual numbers.

IGN's actually in retrospect are the most interesting. I usually write off IGN's reviews, but they seem to have the most accurate reviews to average of any site on there.

As much as I hate the actual writing of IGN reviews (of most websites for that matter), IGN staff are fairly unbiased and professional on each channel. All seem to be multiplatform gamers in real life when you read their blogs.

Wow, GameSpy is hatin'.

Even if the numbers aren't always perfect on IGN, their reviews are at least 2 pages usually, and give a good idea about what the game's all about...it's flaws and good points...that's what really matters in reviews anyway.

IGN imo does the best job of reviewing a game in terms of, should its target audience buy it, would its current userbase like it. A lot of other sites can't take off their "hardcore" shooter/gamer hat.

Was 1Up the site Sony fanboys were trying to say was biased against the PS3 a few days ago? Funny that they're pretty much spot on for the average. I guess that means most sites are biased against it.