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

Forums - Sony - Killzone 2 off to a great start..... METACRITIC score of 97!!!!

Vetteman94 on 22 January 2009
Hyruken said:
papflesje said:
@ hyruken: want to know something else "weird"? The fact that two other people are automatically wrong and your opinion is apparently automatically correct.

Because that is how you are talking at this point.

 

Well that would be the case wouldn't it. They claim the magazines can be trusted for being non biased when in fact there is known history of the magazines taking bribes for scores. So that makes my questioning of the legitimacy valid does it not?

It is like saying a criminal who admits to a crime didn't actually commit a crime.

So seeing as it is a discussion board we are discussing it. I gave my view based on history/facts they gave theirs based on their own opinion. That doesn't make me automatically correct, far from it. Just means as i stated in my 1st post when we get reviews from the other websites/magazines were have a more clear indication of how it will do. I already said i expect it to do very well.

So i think its "more wierd" that you posted something that has nothing to do with anything other then trying to attack me....

Actually what you are saying is once a criminal commits a crime he will always commit the same crime when the opportunity presents itself.  Which is not always the case.

Not to mention that you have yet to provide proff of the bribes you are talking about

 



Around the Network
twingo on 22 January 2009

PSX Extreme (PL) Killzone 2 Review 9.5/10 http://www.n4g.com/ps3/News-264323.aspx



swearitsoul on 22 January 2009

Can the score change if more reviews are added to it, eg go higher and lower?



IllegalPaladin on 22 January 2009
swearitsoul said:
Can the score change if more reviews are added to it, eg go higher and lower?

 

Unless all reviewers give it the EXACT same score, it's going to change.



joshin69 on 22 January 2009

Hyruken, as i have repeated over and over i am talking about OPSM UK, who slated driv3r, and gave it a v poor score. I cant talk about the American side of future as they are not future (still Imagine) to my opinion. and yes i work in the industry as well. I guess i should have said OPSM UK a couple of more times



 

 assumption is the mother of all f**k ups 

Around the Network
Hyruken on 22 January 2009
papflesje said:
The first claim you made was that they were made by sony. When that was retorted, then you said they didn't make the content, and then you switched it to accepting bribes.

So you're just sticking to your guns ("these magazines are not trustworthy" basically), based on other accusations. It may be perfectly true that they have accepted bribes, but since you were wrong that they were made by Sony, who's to say that you are right about the other part.

 

 Again your missing what i said which was "the word official makes me believe they might have something to do with Sony". Not really sure what your talking about with the rest of your reply.

Im saying the reviews can't be used as an indication of the games succes due to the affiliation with Sony which they have due to being Official and the history of the magazines i.e OPM. Is that really that difficult to understand?



Hyruken on 22 January 2009
Vetteman94 said:
Hyruken said:
papflesje said:
@ hyruken: want to know something else "weird"? The fact that two other people are automatically wrong and your opinion is apparently automatically correct.

Because that is how you are talking at this point.

 

Well that would be the case wouldn't it. They claim the magazines can be trusted for being non biased when in fact there is known history of the magazines taking bribes for scores. So that makes my questioning of the legitimacy valid does it not?

It is like saying a criminal who admits to a crime didn't actually commit a crime.

So seeing as it is a discussion board we are discussing it. I gave my view based on history/facts they gave theirs based on their own opinion. That doesn't make me automatically correct, far from it. Just means as i stated in my 1st post when we get reviews from the other websites/magazines were have a more clear indication of how it will do. I already said i expect it to do very well.

So i think its "more wierd" that you posted something that has nothing to do with anything other then trying to attack me....

Actually what you are saying is once a criminal commits a crime he will always commit the same crime when the opportunity presents itself.  Which is not always the case.

Not to mention that you have yet to provide proff of the bribes you are talking about

 

No im saying once someone has admitted to wrong doing he is seen to be innocent in others eyes i.e in this instance we are told the magazine has never done anything wrong therefore it is innocent, understand?

And the internet is your friend, type the things in and your see it, but here you go

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_plc#Controversy

 



Hyruken on 22 January 2009
joshin69 said:
Hyruken, as i have repeated over and over i am talking about OPSM UK, who slated driv3r, and gave it a v poor score. I cant talk about the American side of future as they are not future (still Imagine) to my opinion. and yes i work in the industry as well. I guess i should have said OPSM UK a couple of more times

 

 Future make Official Playstation Magazine in the US as well as everywhere else......Just in america they call is Future US. I was talking about Future as a whole company not broken into sections, they are technically all the same thing as i stated. As i also stated i was talking about OPM as i mentioned the UK OPM gave it 9/10 meaning they are more credible. So i guess i should of mentioned OPM a few more times.



Rainbird on 22 January 2009

@Hyruken

The OPM reviews are as credible as any other reviews. If you look at their scoring history, you will see that exclusives are not treated favorably over multiplats, nor are their scores very much out of line with the general scoring. This is of course debatable, since the OPM US gave Motorstorm: Pacific Rift a 6/10, and it has a meta score of 81.



papflesje on 22 January 2009
Hyruken said:
papflesje said:
The first claim you made was that they were made by sony. When that was retorted, then you said they didn't make the content, and then you switched it to accepting bribes.

So you're just sticking to your guns ("these magazines are not trustworthy" basically), based on other accusations. It may be perfectly true that they have accepted bribes, but since you were wrong that they were made by Sony, who's to say that you are right about the other part.

 

 Again your missing what i said which was "the word official makes me believe they might have something to do with Sony". Not really sure what your talking about with the rest of your reply.

Im saying the reviews can't be used as an indication of the games succes due to the affiliation with Sony which they have due to being Official and the history of the magazines i.e OPM. Is that really that difficult to understand?

 

Doesn't change the fact that you started out saying that this was "from the same magazine which just so happens to be made by Sony. Sony reviewing a Sony game? Would you expect there to be like 5/10 scores? Obviously not."

And you subsequently kept changing and adapting your answer to keep it as a discredit to the magazine.

Whatever you want, just don't try to rectify the fact that you've stated wrong things in this thread.