Another review ,by the british site computer&videgames .Score ,9.3 .
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=174256
Another review ,by the british site computer&videgames .Score ,9.3 .
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=174256
ngage sux said: Does anyone know when ign are publishing their review? they have traditionally given ratchet high reviews ( up your arsenal recieved a 9.6) |
IGN has already published their review ,9.4 out of ten .
Diomedes1976 said: Another review ,by the british site computer&videgames .Score ,9.3 . http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=174256 |
They own PSM 3 UK, which wrote the review and has already been counted
add me
HappySqurriel said:
Does everyone have to agree with you on what a "Great" game is? There are times when I agree with people's complaints (when you see Halo 3 and Metroid Prime 3 get very similar comments in the review and the games end up with dramatically different scores) but typically it is just someone who is angry that the game they hyped for so long is not going to live up to their expectations. |
The 10 from Play combined with the 8 from Edge leaves the game still at a 9 for average score.
In any case this gameranking thing is quite unscientific even by their own approach ...it only counts british and american sites .Never counts Famitsu or the mags from other parts of the world (rest of Europe ,Australia etc ) .
Now you know why I only read IGN's reviews, and always read the text without paying too much attention to the score.
Gamespot has gotten into the habit of reviewing games like some movie critics do movies - they forget to factor in the fact that if it's a fun game to play it's a good game no matter what "technical" flaws they find in it. R&C being too similar to previous games isn't a flaw if the previous games were also great. And complaining about it being too easy and having mini-games--you'd think they were reviewing a Wii game! Ha.
They did the same kind of thing with Zelda and MP3 though those scores stayed a bit higher. They do seem to like to rate hyped games lower too but that never seems to happen to MS games....In the end the scores don't matter, the text does, and even Gamespot's review says it's the best R&C game and a great game must-buy etc.
Diomedes1976 said: In any case this gameranking thing is quite unscientific even by their own approach ...it only counts british and american sites .Never counts Famitsu or the mags from other parts of the world (rest of Europe ,Australia etc ) . |
So... in otherwords it's not Gamespot that's bias against the PS3, but all of the English speaking countries of the world.
sieanr said:
Shockingly you're both wrong. Cnet is a publicly traded company, of which Microsoft does not own a part of. For example, Cnet gave the PS3 a higher review score than both the 360 and Wii, so theres you're pro sony bias. Oh, and theres no way this score was handed out to generate more traffic. Everything happens because of anit-sony FUD, its what makes the world go round. |
ok so leo might be wrong (could have sworn M$ owns 15% of C|Net) but w/e. All i know is that I hate gamespot and always has. I only trust IGN with reviews and have since the SNES days.
ssj12 said:
ok so leo might be wrong (could have sworn M$ owns 15% of C|Net) but w/e. All i know is that I hate gamespot and always has. I only trust IGN with reviews and have since the SNES days. |
Hey I think everyones all for listening to people saying that Gamespot likes to low rate high rated games for traffic. But to claim they are MS based, when their difference off the average of PS3 and 360 games are nearly undistinguishable is just crazy.
Kasz216 said:
So... in otherwords it's not Gamespot that's bias against the PS3, but all of the English speaking countries of the world. |
He's just saying the in gamerankings, their overall statistics are unreliable, he never said anything about it being biased against PS3. Although in truth the Xbox is most popular in Britain and America but this has very little to do with game reviews
add me