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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Edge reviews Halo ODST ! oh! the suspense....

twesterm said:
Solid_Raiden said:
twesterm said:
kerrak said:
My comment is not about Halo but about Edge.
I know reviews are opinions. Anyway, for those that think they are valid reviewers here are some numbers:
Exclusive full retail games on both ps3 and x360 amongst 100 best metacritic scores. Both consoles have 12 exclusives.
I will compare Metacritic average score with Edge score.

Games "favoured" by Edge (Edge > Metacritic by more than 5%):
360 3: Halo3, PGR3, HaloODST
PS3 1: LitlleBigPlanet

Games where Edge gives roughly the same score as Meta (-5%/+5% deviations)
PS3 2 : Motorstorm , Singstar
360 6 : PGR3, L4D, FableII, FM2, GeOW2, Crackdown

Games downscored by Edge (-15% to -5% of Metacritic score)
PS3 4 : Uncharted, R&C ToD, Motorstorm PR, MGS4
360 2 : TomClancy GRAW, GeOW

Games trashed by Edge (-25% to -15% of Metacritic score)
PS3 4 : Infamous, Valkyria Chronicles, Resistance, Killzone 2
360 1 : Mass Effect

Games despised by Edge (-35% to -25% of Metacritic score)
PS3 1 : Resistance 2
360 0

Adding all % differences to Metacritic, Ps3 gets -157%, 360 gets -33%, so on average PS3 gets -13,1% while 360 gets -2,7%.

Not only this, if you take a close look at what were the specific games downscored things are even more biased, as some ps3 platform defining heavy hitters are treated the worst.
For you as a gamer to take their word as an independent/unbiased magazine.

I'm curious, what would happen if you did the same thing to Eurogamer?  I actually asked someone about Edge and from what I gather they're tough on games just like Eurogamer is. 

I imagine that big difference is due to a mixture of two things:

  1. they're tough on games
  2. opinions are opinions are opinions.

and if you did the same thing with Eurogamer you would probably see something pretty close just because they are so much harder.

If they were just "harder" on games then it would show it across the board. Unless of course your suggesting that everyone else is just too "light" on ps3 games while everyone else is much harder on 360 games. Otherwise no matter how you cut it, it's inconsistant. They are close or above with most 360 titles while consistantly lower on ps3 titles. How is that consistant in any way other then that they are consitantly chewing  up and spitting out ps3 titles while enjoying 360 ones. And that's not something to be consistant at. That's consistantly being a 360 fan and bashing the other console if anything.

Most of those games you listed I'm sure you expect to get between a 9 and 10.  A bad game (or even a game that just doesn't deserve that score but still good) isn't automatically an 8, it's just something else so that variation is meaningless.

Lets just pretend that Awesome Exlclusive VII for the PS3 and Bodacious Exclusive IV for the 360 both have a 9 on metacritic.  Edge reviews them and gives Awesome Exlclusive VII a 7.5 while giving Bodacious Exlclusive IV an 8.5

According to you, that means Edge is automatically biased against the PS3 and both should either get a 9 or an 8.5 or just the same score when in reality they thought one game was a 7.5 and the other was an 8.5.

Do you see what I'm getting at?  They're different games so they can get different scores.

Just to be Devil's Advocate, while of course two seperate games can get different scores, if those scores are inconsistent with a general set of scores then it does raise questions about the scoring, particularly if you take the view that, opinions or no, they are opinions from supposed 'experts' on a common topic and should show a relative degree of consistency - i.e. either the lighting is great or its not, it can't be both.  Either the AI is good or its not, it can't be both - and so on.

As an analogy, if a film get's consistently praised in 90% of reputable reviews for having a good script, and one review site says the script is bad, you can see it as just another opinion, or you can wonder as to why?  Does that reviewer have weaker grasp of scriptwriting theory?  Did they not like the film particularly and let this influence their view on the script?  and so on.  The evidence would definately imply that there is reason to be cautious of the single poor opinoin of the script vs the universal acclaim.

Rather than just moaning, which I agree with everyone is a pain, the post on Edge vs metacritic averages is interesting to me because it appears to be factual, based on real data, and it clearly appears to show that, on average, a 360 title will review closer to or above the metacritic average than a PS3 title, which certainly does imply a bias.

Of course, that bias could be accidental.  I hate to sound elitist, but I don't really hold game reviewers on the whole as particularly 'expert' on game mechanics, etc.  and it may be no more than the PS3 reviewer is simply being harsher than the 360 reviewer, who really likes the 360 titles and his enjoyment reduces the percieved impact of any flaws.

But clearly, there is a skew there - if the shown data is correct.  I hate to actually pick up on this, as I normally really dislike the whole 'they're bought off by MS, etc' tinfoil hat nonsense.  But this analysis does show a skew.  Of course it could just be taste - that can't be discounted.  The reviewer may have genuinely felt KZ2 was simply average (to take the obvious example) while ODST is pretty stellar.

What I'd really be interested to see is a similar analysis for all major review sites / sources to see if skews are fairly common and chance over time - i.e. it is probably just different tastes, etc. - or whether only a few sites have a noticable skew from others.

 

 



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

Around the Network
Reasonable said:
twesterm said:

Most of those games you listed I'm sure you expect to get between a 9 and 10.  A bad game (or even a game that just doesn't deserve that score but still good) isn't automatically an 8, it's just something else so that variation is meaningless.

Lets just pretend that Awesome Exlclusive VII for the PS3 and Bodacious Exclusive IV for the 360 both have a 9 on metacritic.  Edge reviews them and gives Awesome Exlclusive VII a 7.5 while giving Bodacious Exlclusive IV an 8.5

According to you, that means Edge is automatically biased against the PS3 and both should either get a 9 or an 8.5 or just the same score when in reality they thought one game was a 7.5 and the other was an 8.5.

Do you see what I'm getting at?  They're different games so they can get different scores.

Just to be Devil's Advocate, while of course two seperate games can get different scores, if those scores are inconsistent with a general set of scores then it does raise questions about the scoring, particularly if you take the view that, opinions or no, they are opinions from supposed 'experts' on a common topic and should show a relative degree of consistency - i.e. either the lighting is great or its not, it can't be both.  Either the AI is good or its not, it can't be both - and so on.

As an analogy, if a film get's consistently praised in 90% of reputable reviews for having a good script, and one review site says the script is bad, you can see it as just another opinion, or you can wonder as to why?  Does that reviewer have weaker grasp of scriptwriting theory?  Did they not like the film particularly and let this influence their view on the script?  and so on.  The evidence would definately imply that there is reason to be cautious of the single poor opinoin of the script vs the universal acclaim.

Rather than just moaning, which I agree with everyone is a pain, the post on Edge vs metacritic averages is interesting to me because it appears to be factual, based on real data, and it clearly appears to show that, on average, a 360 title will review closer to or above the metacritic average than a PS3 title, which certainly does imply a bias.

Of course, that bias could be accidental.  I hate to sound elitist, but I don't really hold game reviewers on the whole as particularly 'expert' on game mechanics, etc.  and it may be no more than the PS3 reviewer is simply being harsher than the 360 reviewer, who really likes the 360 titles and his enjoyment reduces there percieved impact of any flaws.

But clearly, there is a skew there - if the shown data is correct.  I hate to actually pick up on this, as I normally really dislike the whole 'they're bought off by MS, etc' tinfoil hat nonsense.  But this analysis does show a skew.  Of course it could just be taste - that can't be discounted.  The reviewer may have genuinely felt KZ2 was simply average (to take the obvious example) while ODST is pretty stellar.

What I'd really be interested to see is a similar analysis for all major review sites / sources to see if skews are fairly common and chance over time - i.e. it is probably just different tastes, etc. - or whether only a few sites have a noticable skew from others.

 

 

Yeah, but we're just looking at the numbers so we have no idea why they give those numbers.  Review scores are meaningless without the actual review.

For all we know, 360 exclusives could just be better (I'm not saying they are so don't start :-p).  I don't know why they gave some games higher and others lower because I don't see those reviews. 

Sure, if they gave a glowing review to Resistance 2 and then gave it something 25% lower than everyone else, then yes, shenanigans, sure, but I'm guessing they gave a reason.

I'm guessing it is just accidental like you said and the fact some games get hyped much more.  Generally, a hugely hyped game will get huge scores despite the quality (assuming it's at least not bad).  Taking that theory in mind, look at your general 360 exclusive and PS3 exclusive.  It's hard to deny that PS3 exclusives get announced very early and get very hyped very quickly.  That's just how Sony works.

Look at the newest example, The Agent.  We know nothing about that game but people are already using it as one of the great new Sony franchises.  I'm sure when it's released it will get many 9's and 10's because it's hyped, it's exclusive, it's Rockstar, ect and then sites like Edge will actually review it.

If it's a 9 in their eyes, they'll give it a 9 like everyone else, but if it's a 7 in their eyes, then we have another one of those -20%+ plus outliers.  Now we could call shenanigans like everyone else, or maybe they're just hard reviewers and the game isn't as good as everyone is hyping.

Note that above is all hypothetical, but look at the exlusives on that list.  All those ones people are screaming shenanigans at are games that people love or hate and if you take away the hype, it's pretty reasonable to give them scores that aren't your hyped 9. 

We could keep calling shenanigans or just call a 7 a 7 and be done with it.



Just hold on a minute folks.
phoned my local Xtra vision tonight.
44.99 Euro it will cost me tomorrow.
That aint no full price so happy days.



 

 

 

 

AHAHAHAHAHAH!!!! this is just hillarious seeing 7/10 for MGS4 and 6/10 for other ps3 exclusive then a 9/10 for a expansion pack.....Edge will give 6/10 to uncharted 2 MARK MY WORDS!!!!



@ twesterm
Not so sure on your theory about hyped games getting better reviews.
Would that not mean games like uncharted and gears are never going to get fair reviews because of hype?
I use these games as examples only.

My point been that the Halos and COD,s of this world are built on more than hype and in fact have more to live up to because of that?
I mean the general consensus was prior to the release of ODST was 7 to 8 reviews.
I seem to remember certain members willing to eat crow if scores were high.

Just my take on it.



 

 

 

 

Around the Network
XxXProphecyXxX said:
AHAHAHAHAHAH!!!! this is just hillarious seeing 7/10 for MGS4 and 6/10 for other ps3 exclusive then a 9/10 for a expansion pack.....Edge will give 6/10 to uncharted 2 MARK MY WORDS!!!!

Seriously I don't think it will be 6/10 but a 8/10 is entirely possible. I myself platted Uncharted:DF and can say that the game did have its share of flaws. But then again even Halo had problems. But both were amazing because of what they achieved.

It seems Edge is just a tad bit harsher on Sony's exclusives. If they do give UC2 an 8 that won't be an illegitimate score. Nothing is perfect and if the flaws in UC:2 are enough in the opinion of Edge to stop it from being AAA then thats fine.

What rankles is they don't seem to be so stringent in reviews of blockbuster MS exclusives.



 

It is better to die on one's feet

then live on one's knees

ocnkng said:
XxXProphecyXxX said:
AHAHAHAHAHAH!!!! this is just hillarious seeing 7/10 for MGS4 and 6/10 for other ps3 exclusive then a 9/10 for a expansion pack.....Edge will give 6/10 to uncharted 2 MARK MY WORDS!!!!

Seriously I don't think it will be 6/10 but a 8/10 is entirely possible. I myself platted Uncharted:DF and can say that the game did have its share of flaws. But then again even Halo had problems. But both were amazing because of what they achieved.

It seems Edge is just a tad bit harsher on Sony's exclusives. If they do give UC2 an 8 that won't be an illegitimate score. Nothing is perfect and if the flaws in UC:2 are enough in the opinion of Edge to stop it from being AAA then thats fine.

What rankles is they don't seem to be so stringent in reviews of blockbuster MS exclusives.

Nah man....just look @ the ridiculous scoring they give to ps3 exclusive compare to 360 like 80% of ps3 exclusive games all got 6 or 7 but an expansion pack a 9/10? just looking @ this trends a 5/10 to uncharted 2 from them seems very likey at all.



waron said:

Halo 3 used different engine than 2 and ODST is using Halo 3 engine - Reach will use completely new engine.
to all those ps3 fanboys who can't stand the fact that ODST is really good game and considering the content of this game 40$ price is a steal(atleast in europe since i think NA is getting this game for 60$ - for once europe is better). seriously Halo 3 alone still costs 20-25$ new, dlc packs are for about 18$ so basically you are getting ODST for free.

and yes, Killzone 2 deserves 7/10(controls and shallow gameplay can't hide behind shiny graphics and effects) and MGS 4 deserves 8/10(now if MGS4 would be more like an actual game.....).

k...seriously this is getting VERY old.

 

I think people who say MGS4 isn't a game and is an "interactive movie" or any variation need to be immediately banned. It's incredibly annoying and offensive to the great game that MGS4 really is (It got 10/10s for a reason!).

 

UGH. Reported.



^ Oh CGI, what would I do without you?

And I think he should just be perma'ed. I can safely say at least 90% of his posts are trolling/flamebait.



sweet this game continues to hold the mantle of the halo series! i will definatly be getting it



I mostly play RTS and Moba style games now adays as well as ALOT of benchmarking. I do play other games however such as the witcher 3 and Crysis 3, and recently Ashes of the Singularity. I love gaming on the cutting edge and refuse to accept any compromises. Proud member of the Glorious PC Gaming Master Race. Long Live SHIO!!!!