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

Forums - Sony - Fat Princess ( Metacritic Review )

NKAJ on 05 August 2009
Reasonable said:
As ever (and I'm not talking about bias any particular way, for PS3 or 360) I remain amazed that review scores can have such a huge spread.

From 60 to 93? That's a huge range of views. When I see this I can't help feeling the top reviews are probably biased towards the title/console, the bottom just trying to make a point or be different, and the more middle range reviews probably a better indicator of the game.

i agree .



"They will know heghan belongs to the helghast"

"England expects that everyman will do his duty"

"we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender"

 

Around the Network
Kantor on 05 August 2009

I think this is more evidence for why Metacritic sucks.



(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective

everdom on 05 August 2009

Eurogamer reviews always seem to spark contreversy...

I still maintain that they are the only reviewer that scores on a scale of 1-10 as opposed to 5-10...



hatmoza on 05 August 2009

Again, eurogamer gives the fans something to bitch about.

It's a great online experience. It's a mixture of War Craft 2 and Halo 3. My favorite PSN title.



I am the black sheep     "of course I'm crazy, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong."-Robert Anton Wilson

Crashdown77 on 05 August 2009
Kantor said:
I think this is more evidence for why Metacritic sucks.

This made me LOL. Why are we criticizing a website that just averages other websites scores? I have to say, if Sony could "win" the console war based on the rabidity of it's fanbase, it would have crushed the competition already!

Around the Network
Kantor on 05 August 2009
Crashdown77 said:
Kantor said:
I think this is more evidence for why Metacritic sucks.

This made me LOL. Why are we criticizing a website that just averages other websites scores? I have to say, if Sony could "win" the console war based on the rabidity of it's fanbase, it would have crushed the competition already!

I'm not saying Metacritic hates the PS3!

It's just that they have to include every single reviewer under the sun, no matter how random or crap they are, and this throws off the average. Really, why do I care that Computer and Video Games thinks PS3s should come with a headset, and why should this affect an aggregate score?

I try to ignore it, but some people won't buy Fat Princess because of a metascore, and that's stupid, but it will happen, and Fat Princess is awesome!



(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective

dbot on 05 August 2009
Crashdown77 said:
Kantor said:
I think this is more evidence for why Metacritic sucks.

This made me LOL. Why are we criticizing a website that just averages other websites scores? I have to say, if Sony could "win" the console war based on the rabidity of it's fanbase, it would have crushed the competition already!

I think you would have to admit that an aggregate score of flawed reviews is not a very good way to measure a game's quality.  The entire review process is flawed.  It's best to find a few journalists that you tend to agree with to determine if you are going to buy a game.  Personally, I think arstechnica, ign, and kotaku (although I am often annoyed by their writing style) do a good job of summarizing a game's flaws and merits.  



Thanks for the input, Jeff.

 

 

Crashdown77 on 05 August 2009
Kantor said:
Crashdown77 said:
Kantor said:
I think this is more evidence for why Metacritic sucks.

This made me LOL. Why are we criticizing a website that just averages other websites scores? I have to say, if Sony could "win" the console war based on the rabidity of it's fanbase, it would have crushed the competition already!

I'm not saying Metacritic hates the PS3!

It's just that they have to include every single reviewer under the sun, no matter how random or crap they are, and this throws off the average. Really, why do I care that Computer and Video Games thinks PS3s should come with a headset, and why should this affect an aggregate score?

I try to ignore it, but some people won't buy Fat Princess because of a metascore, and that's stupid, but it will happen, and Fat Princess is awesome!


True! Always READ the reviews! Don't trust scores!

bobobologna on 05 August 2009
ZenfoldorVGI said:
CGI-Quality said:

Deserves whatever good-great scores it gets, IMO. One of the best downloadable titles available.

Of course, I still say Wipeout HD is downloadable King, but that's another thread

I vastly disagree with that. While I think comparisons between games like Wipeout HD, Trine, and Castle Crashers is fine, you really can't believe that Wipeout HD is better than Braid, can you? I can only think of about 10 games that were better than Braid, ever, on any console.

My favorite DLCs this gen have been:

1. Braid

2. Lost and the Damned

3. Point Lookout

4. Trine

5. World of Goo

6. Castle Crashers

7. Portal: Still Alive

8. Secret of Monkey Island: Special Edition

9. Wipeout HD

10. SFII:HDRemix

Now, if you've played all of those, and can still not only rank Wipeout HD as your favorite DLC, but also the "King" of DLC, then you sir, are a huge fan of the game.

Now, don't get me wrong. I can see how someone would put Wipeout HD at the 2nd spot on their list, easily, and in a rare preference based instance, I can see a handful of people even putting it at number one....but saying that it's the king of DLC when Braid exists?

Seriously, did you forget about Braid when you said that, lol?

 

You can't really think that Braid is the best downloadable game, can you?

Oh wait, you can, because it's your opinion.



Kantor on 05 August 2009
seece said:
God help Eurogamer for having an opinion ><

Yes, but their opinion is WRONG!

>_>



(Former) Lead Moderator and (Eternal) VGC Detective