This topic is locked from further discussion.
While I myself rate it as a pretty awesome 9.0, Uncharted will average no more than a 7.5 on GS. Why? GS's reviewers are picky as hell, and have a general hate towards the PS3.
And _Tobli_, isn't Gamerscore a 360 thing? I'm not sure, but if it is, that shouldn't matter because Uncharted is PS3 only.
Red_Nine
Ah, you didn't get his joke?
Yup, gamerscore IS indeed a 360 thing. And so there lies the suggested irony.
I played the demo, and it was awesome. just plain awesome. I'm assuming that when I get my hands on this game it will be along with ratchet as the best games for ps3. I have cod4... eurgh :(. Did anyone else beat it in like 1 day? it took me like 5 hours. (which didnt' deduct points for this game, unlike other games that have taken it in the chin for the same thing). Anyhoo, if uncharted came out on 360 it would probably get a 9.0, but it's for ps3, so it will probably get a 7.9 -> 8.1. :( (besides the fact that the framerate on the 360 version would be much lower).
[QUOTE="shadystxxx"][QUOTE="lhbchen"][QUOTE="shadystxxx"][QUOTE="-DeStijl-"][QUOTE="shadystxxx"]Playing the demo doe's not give somebody the knowledge to review the final game.
And if gamespot give's it an 8.5 allot of people will make threads about how it's un-fair and the game deserves a 9.0+ because they played the demo.
People should not review final games based on a demo, just preview the demo and give your thought's.
People are setting thereself's up now to be upset at gamespot by saying the game should get a 9.0+ when they have only played 20-30 mins of a 8-10 hour game.
When gamespot review these games before release nobody that has not played the game in full has the right to argue with that score because the reviewer played the full game and you didnt.
lhbchen
No one said it did, its just for fun cuz gamespots reviews have been questionable when it comes to PS3. Lighten up, its FUNNY!
But i disagree, gamespot's review have not been questionable.
Check every review for ps3 exclusive games and gamespot are 95% on the average (give or take 3-5%) the only review that is quite a bit lower than the average is ratchet and clank gamespot gave it a 7.5(75%) and last time i looked R&C was at 90%.
I have not played r&c(not my kind of game, i appreciate what the R&C games do well but i didnt enjoy the last game or the demo it feels like a kiddy shooter to me i prefer games like that to be more of a platformer just my opinion) so i cannot agree or disagree with gs review but going off the average it's obvious they are lower than the majority, but it's just a proffesional reviewers opinion and people should respect that.
Have not been questionable? My goodness, where have you been in the past 2 years?
Just compare the scores of each console's major launch titles have received. I'll give you two: PDZ of 360 and RFOM of PS3
And Learn to read raw numbers, it won't hurt.
When there're crazy reviewers give a game 70s and even 60s, do you know how hard it is to balance the offset? Every crazy score of 70, needs exactly FOUR 95s to bring the average back to 90. Every insane 60, needs an extra SIX 95s to bring it back to 90.
Do you want some more maths? When you read the score on Gamerankings and see PS3's games have been treated like that again, again and again, anyone with some thoughts knows what's going on. Just do a histogram and check where most of the scores fall in and also check what is the mode of these numbers. And you'll see GS's score have not been always on the mark.
I agree about PDZ and RFOM.
But what you need to understand is this happens every new generation, PDZ gets a higher score in graphics and sound due to hardware improvements which bumps up the score, at the time PDZ was released its graphics were well above ps2/xbox games.
But when RFOM was released standards had risen this happens every time the first next gen system is released that systmes launch titles tend to get very high scores as technical quality improves allot.
I got 360 at launch and pdz and i thought it was a good game not a 9.0 but a good game 7.5-8.0, but at the time its graphics were a 9 or a 10 and its sound was a 9-10 but comparing it with games from today its probably a 6-7.
Am just giving my opinion there's no need to be a d*** by saying "And Learn to read raw numbers, it won't hurt."
The eye of judgement: GS score 7.5/ average 75%
Folklore: GS score 7.0/ average 76%
Motorstorm: GS 7.9/ average 83%
RFOM: GS 8.6/ average 87%
heavenly sword: GS 8.0/ average 81%
R & C: GS 7.5/ average 90%
Warhawk: GS 8.5/ average 84%
Am thinking you need to check the score's, they seem pretty accurate to me accept the R&C review.
I don't mind discussing opinion's but i will not discuss them with you again, i respect your opinion but i disagree where as you just plain and simple think my opinion is wrong and resort to insult's.
We can agree to disagree, i think gamespot's reviews are fine and you think they are wrong and gamespot are involed in some PS3 conspiracy and/or just think they are biased because they want 360 to win.
What i dont understand is if you think somethings up why support there site by using it, i'm sure site's like PSU and PS3fanboy will share your opinion's.
1) I've told you the average is brought to a level lower than majority reviewers have given by some crazy low scores and I even gave you specific illustration how it's lowered. But you still use the average to compare. See? You just refuse to learn.
The eye of judgement: Mode- 80%, Median- 80%, GS 7.5
Folklore: Mode- 80%, Median 79.5%, GS 7.0
MotorStorm: Mode- 80%, Median 80%, GS 7.9
RFOM: Mode- 90%, Median 90%, GS 8.6
Heavenly Sword: Mode- 80%, Median 80%, GS 8.0
R&C: Mode- 90%, Median 90%, GS 7.5
Warhawk: Mode- 90%, Median 85%, GS 8.5
This is how you read the datas. And you'll see among almost all of them, GS has had lower scores than majority and none of them was over the median. Taking the average seriously only means you think those 50%, 60% scores, which have been taken into account towards the average, are credible enough to respect.
2) GS is not just about reviews, it's got downloads, interviews, pictures, forums, etc. that's why I've been using it. And it's your own fault thinking GS is all about "reviews". Before you want me to leave GS, get your own fact straight and stop being a fanboy of GS' or any site's reviews.
lol, some of you guys are absolutely ridiculous. Median Mode ?? lol, what are we in fifth grade? If Median and Mode mattered that much, gamerankings and every other review-compiling wesbites would be Median and modes instead of averages. But I am not gonna argue with you on that, since you believe in your "average scores dont mean squat" theory, and its cool. But just listen to what I am trying to say, and dont dismiss shadystxxx's opinion because he doesnt agree with you...
I dont know how long you've been following GS reviews but I have been doing so for the past 7 years or so, and there have been numerous AAA titles that have gotten below average scores across all platforms. Hell, this is the same website that gave the orginal MGS an 8.5 when everwhere else it was being hailed as one of the greatest games of all time. Greg kasavin, a huge MGS fanboy, gave MGS3 an 8.7 which caused an uproar unlike anything i've seen on these forums since. But guess what, after playing that game I realized that 8.7 wasnt really so off after all. I realized that the controls weren't quite perfect for the jungle setting(hell, even Kojima admitted to that)and the graphics could have been better too.
and I LOVE that game, I think its the best experience i've ever had gaming, but sometimes you need to step back, look at the game with the critics point of view (which in GS's case is as harshly as possible) and remember that GS has been THE harshest game reviewers on the web .... they have always wanted to be. They always give almost every game a lower score than avery other website of gaming magazine. This is how they have established their standards.
All you guys saying IGN is the most respected gaming website need to go back only a couple of years and see how awful and unprofessional their reviews have been. I mean they were so inconsistent that I just stopped going over to IGN. All these gaming websites try to act professional but when their favorite game comes out, they start handing out 9.9s and 10s like hot cakes.Not to say GS hasnt given out 10s, they actually gave TOny Hawk 3 a perfect 10 but then again so did everyone else and considering it was the best and most complete skate-boarding game out there at that time, i cant really complain.
Look, I am not naive enough to dismiss the obvious PS3 bias on this website recently, but the reviews have not been affected by it. I have played all the first party PS3 games that have come out recently, and I agree with each one of them. I would've given heavenly sword an 8.5 but only because I love awesome cinema-tics and becuase i dont have to maintain a standard since i have thousands of visiters waiting for myreview. what I am trying to say is that GS has always given below average scores, but they have been consistent across all platforms. look at BioShock and COD4.
Warhawk, resistance and motostorm were all great games and they got GREAT ratings from GS. I had a lot of fun with Warhawk but I had problems with a couple of things, same with Motorstorm. Resistance, IMO, was just NOT a 9.0 game. Maybe all these other lame websites that love giving out 9s, think its 9 but to me and most of us here at GS, we love to think that there is one website that wouldnt give out a 9 because every fanboy of the gameis expecting it to.
and lastly, please READ the reviews. GS has the most comprehensive reviews on each and every game , when all these other game mags have 2 paragraphs worth of BS. IGN, 1up and all other jokes of critic websites dont ever go intodetail like GS does and it reflects on their bloated scores. so dont hold all your stock in the score alone,click on the link, and read through the review. otherwise, you willbe just like all the mainstream casual games who look at the 8.0 score and decide not to buy the game because its not AAA.
remember, in a consoles 6-7 year life, if it gets 10 AAA games it makes spending the price of the console justifiable. 30-40 90+ scores means the websitehas no credibility.
[QUOTE="lhbchen"][QUOTE="shadystxxx"][QUOTE="lhbchen"][QUOTE="shadystxxx"][QUOTE="-DeStijl-"][QUOTE="shadystxxx"]Playing the demo doe's not give somebody the knowledge to review the final game.
And if gamespot give's it an 8.5 allot of people will make threads about how it's un-fair and the game deserves a 9.0+ because they played the demo.
People should not review final games based on a demo, just preview the demo and give your thought's.
People are setting thereself's up now to be upset at gamespot by saying the game should get a 9.0+ when they have only played 20-30 mins of a 8-10 hour game.
When gamespot review these games before release nobody that has not played the game in full has the right to argue with that score because the reviewer played the full game and you didnt.
henry4th
No one said it did, its just for fun cuz gamespots reviews have been questionable when it comes to PS3. Lighten up, its FUNNY!
But i disagree, gamespot's review have not been questionable.
Check every review for ps3 exclusive games and gamespot are 95% on the average (give or take 3-5%) the only review that is quite a bit lower than the average is ratchet and clank gamespot gave it a 7.5(75%) and last time i looked R&C was at 90%.
I have not played r&c(not my kind of game, i appreciate what the R&C games do well but i didnt enjoy the last game or the demo it feels like a kiddy shooter to me i prefer games like that to be more of a platformer just my opinion) so i cannot agree or disagree with gs review but going off the average it's obvious they are lower than the majority, but it's just a proffesional reviewers opinion and people should respect that.
Have not been questionable? My goodness, where have you been in the past 2 years?
Just compare the scores of each console's major launch titles have received. I'll give you two: PDZ of 360 and RFOM of PS3
And Learn to read raw numbers, it won't hurt.
When there're crazy reviewers give a game 70s and even 60s, do you know how hard it is to balance the offset? Every crazy score of 70, needs exactly FOUR 95s to bring the average back to 90. Every insane 60, needs an extra SIX 95s to bring it back to 90.
Do you want some more maths? When you read the score on Gamerankings and see PS3's games have been treated like that again, again and again, anyone with some thoughts knows what's going on. Just do a histogram and check where most of the scores fall in and also check what is the mode of these numbers. And you'll see GS's score have not been always on the mark.
I agree about PDZ and RFOM.
But what you need to understand is this happens every new generation, PDZ gets a higher score in graphics and sound due to hardware improvements which bumps up the score, at the time PDZ was released its graphics were well above ps2/xbox games.
But when RFOM was released standards had risen this happens every time the first next gen system is released that systmes launch titles tend to get very high scores as technical quality improves allot.
I got 360 at launch and pdz and i thought it was a good game not a 9.0 but a good game 7.5-8.0, but at the time its graphics were a 9 or a 10 and its sound was a 9-10 but comparing it with games from today its probably a 6-7.
Am just giving my opinion there's no need to be a d*** by saying "And Learn to read raw numbers, it won't hurt."
The eye of judgement: GS score 7.5/ average 75%
Folklore: GS score 7.0/ average 76%
Motorstorm: GS 7.9/ average 83%
RFOM: GS 8.6/ average 87%
heavenly sword: GS 8.0/ average 81%
R & C: GS 7.5/ average 90%
Warhawk: GS 8.5/ average 84%
Am thinking you need to check the score's, they seem pretty accurate to me accept the R&C review.
I don't mind discussing opinion's but i will not discuss them with you again, i respect your opinion but i disagree where as you just plain and simple think my opinion is wrong and resort to insult's.
We can agree to disagree, i think gamespot's reviews are fine and you think they are wrong and gamespot are involed in some PS3 conspiracy and/or just think they are biased because they want 360 to win.
What i dont understand is if you think somethings up why support there site by using it, i'm sure site's like PSU and PS3fanboy will share your opinion's.
1) I've told you the average is brought to a level lower than majority reviewers have given by some crazy low scores and I even gave you specific illustration how it's lowered. But you still use the average to compare. See? You just refuse to learn.
The eye of judgement: Mode- 80%, Median- 80%, GS 7.5
Folklore: Mode- 80%, Median 79.5%, GS 7.0
MotorStorm: Mode- 80%, Median 80%, GS 7.9
RFOM: Mode- 90%, Median 90%, GS 8.6
Heavenly Sword: Mode- 80%, Median 80%, GS 8.0
R&C: Mode- 90%, Median 90%, GS 7.5
Warhawk: Mode- 90%, Median 85%, GS 8.5
This is how you read the datas. And you'll see among almost all of them, GS has had lower scores than majority and none of them was over the median. Taking the average seriously only means you think those 50%, 60% scores, which have been taken into account towards the average, are credible enough to respect.
2) GS is not just about reviews, it's got downloads, interviews, pictures, forums, etc. that's why I've been using it. And it's your own fault thinking GS is all about "reviews". Before you want me to leave GS, get your own fact straight and stop being a fanboy of GS' or any site's reviews.
Ihbchen, you owned this Shady guy. He's probably 1 of the 4 poeple who doesn't believe a bias existing on gamespot, and his math is definitely questionable.
As to finishing games before review. Let me see, gamespot used to run articles about editors/reviewers and how what they like, how they rate games and what games they play. If you go back to read the articles, some of the reviewers specifically said that they don't finish many games when they review them. WHy? Because it's impossible to do so. Particularly on games that they don't really enjoy or like, they don't finish them at all.
Let's not forget many long RPG and MMORPGs, they play for like 20 hours and give a review. And that amounts 5% of content and playtime the MMORPG would offer.
I can show you specific examples on games that reviewers clearly didn't finish (not even close to finish), check out the brave story on PSP, the reviewer from GS never finished it so that he doesn't know what the game offered in the latter part of the game, while many critics think the game great and offers many turns and twists.
"Ihbchen, you owned this Shady guy" sniff,sniff, lick,lick.
Only PS3 fangirl's think there's a conspiracy.
I never gave any math, i gave number's from two different site's, when did i do math's to question, i just showed how gamespot are very close to the average 95% of the time, he decided to spin it with his average speil, which he owned himself as he proves that gamespot are close to the average.
His point was gamespot scores are not accurate as the "insane 50/60%" bring the avreage way down, but looking at his "math" there's not 1 gamespot score in the 50's/60's.
Ihbchensay's "Taking the average seriously only means you think those 50%, 60% scores, which have been taken into account towards the average, are credible enough to respect."
WHAT 50%, 60% score's, WHAT are you talking about, not one gamespot score was below 70% for any of the games we mentioned.
And again you have no proof gamespot never finished games before reviewing them.
Again i said they will finish the majority or at least play 80%/90% of a game except game's like oblivion meaning rpg's/mmo's with hundreads of hours of gameplay.
I don't know why i answer, it's impossible to debate with delusional fangirls, they spout there vomit over and over again regardless of any facts or opinions of other's, and as evident they l**k e**h*t**r*s ****,
lol, some of you guys are absolutely ridiculous. Median Mode ?? lol, what are we in fifth grade? If Median and Mode mattered that much, gamerankings and every other review-compiling wesbites would be Median and modes instead of averages. But I am not gonna argue with you on that, since you believe in your "average scores dont mean squat" theory, and its cool. But just listen to what I am trying to say, and dont dismiss shadystxxx's opinion because he doesnt agree with you...
I dont know how long you've been following GS reviews but I have been doing so for the past 7 years or so, and there have been numerous AAA titles that have gotten below average scores across all platforms. Hell, this is the same website that gave the orginal MGS an 8.5 when everwhere else it was being hailed as one of the greatest games of all time. Greg kasavin, a huge MGS fanboy, gave MGS3 an 8.7 which caused an uproar unlike anything i've seen on these forums since. But guess what, after playing that game I realized that 8.7 wasnt really so off after all. I realized that the controls weren't quite perfect for the jungle setting(hell, even Kojima admitted to that)and the graphics could have been better too.
and I LOVE that game, I think its the best experience i've ever had gaming, but sometimes you need to step back, look at the game with the critics point of view (which in GS's case is as harshly as possible) and remember that GS has been THE harshest game reviewers on the web .... they have always wanted to be. They always give almost every game a lower score than avery other website of gaming magazine. This is how they have established their standards.
All you guys saying IGN is the most respected gaming website need to go back only a couple of years and see how awful and unprofessional their reviews have been. I mean they were so inconsistent that I just stopped going over to IGN. All these gaming websites try to act professional but when their favorite game comes out, they start handing out 9.9s and 10s like hot cakes.Not to say GS hasnt given out 10s, they actually gave TOny Hawk 3 a perfect 10 but then again so did everyone else and considering it was the best and most complete skate-boarding game out there at that time, i cant really complain.
Look, I am not naive enough to dismiss the obvious PS3 bias on this website recently, but the reviews have not been affected by it. I have played all the first party PS3 games that have come out recently, and I agree with each one of them. I would've given heavenly sword an 8.5 but only because I love awesome cinema-tics and becuase i dont have to maintain a standard since i have thousands of visiters waiting for myreview. what I am trying to say is that GS has always given below average scores, but they have been consistent across all platforms. look at BioShock and COD4.
Warhawk, resistance and motostorm were all great games and they got GREAT ratings from GS. I had a lot of fun with Warhawk but I had problems with a couple of things, same with Motorstorm. Resistance, IMO, was just NOT a 9.0 game. Maybe all these other lame websites that love giving out 9s, think its 9 but to me and most of us here at GS, we love to think that there is one website that wouldnt give out a 9 because every fanboy of the gameis expecting it to.
and lastly, please READ the reviews. GS has the most comprehensive reviews on each and every game , when all these other game mags have 2 paragraphs worth of BS. IGN, 1up and all other jokes of critic websites dont ever go intodetail like GS does and it reflects on their bloated scores. so dont hold all your stock in the score alone,click on the link, and read through the review. otherwise, you willbe just like all the mainstream casual games who look at the 8.0 score and decide not to buy the game because its not AAA.
remember, in a consoles 6-7 year life, if it gets 10 AAA games it makes spending the price of the console justifiable. 30-40 90+ scores means the websitehas no credibility.
I thought the same thing when i read his median/mode comment, i though wow has somebody just done thereGCSE in maths(GCSE highschool maths exam in england done at 15-16 years old).
I agree there have been a bit bias from gamespot in term's of comment's made on the hotspot and stuff like that, but i do not see a bias in gamespot's reviews.
IMO i wish gamespot and other site's would just get rid of the score's and just have a text review, that way we would get rid of all the forum user's who click the link for the review and head over to the board's to discuss the score without reading the reviewer's text.
[QUOTE="shadystxxx"][QUOTE="lhbchen"][QUOTE="shadystxxx"][QUOTE="-DeStijl-"][QUOTE="shadystxxx"]Playing the demo doe's not give somebody the knowledge to review the final game.
And if gamespot give's it an 8.5 allot of people will make threads about how it's un-fair and the game deserves a 9.0+ because they played the demo.
People should not review final games based on a demo, just preview the demo and give your thought's.
People are setting thereself's up now to be upset at gamespot by saying the game should get a 9.0+ when they have only played 20-30 mins of a 8-10 hour game.
When gamespot review these games before release nobody that has not played the game in full has the right to argue with that score because the reviewer played the full game and you didnt.
lhbchen
No one said it did, its just for fun cuz gamespots reviews have been questionable when it comes to PS3. Lighten up, its FUNNY!
But i disagree, gamespot's review have not been questionable.
Check every review for ps3 exclusive games and gamespot are 95% on the average (give or take 3-5%) the only review that is quite a bit lower than the average is ratchet and clank gamespot gave it a 7.5(75%) and last time i looked R&C was at 90%.
I have not played r&c(not my kind of game, i appreciate what the R&C games do well but i didnt enjoy the last game or the demo it feels like a kiddy shooter to me i prefer games like that to be more of a platformer just my opinion) so i cannot agree or disagree with gs review but going off the average it's obvious they are lower than the majority, but it's just a proffesional reviewers opinion and people should respect that.
Have not been questionable? My goodness, where have you been in the past 2 years?
Just compare the scores of each console's major launch titles have received. I'll give you two: PDZ of 360 and RFOM of PS3
And Learn to read raw numbers, it won't hurt.
When there're crazy reviewers give a game 70s and even 60s, do you know how hard it is to balance the offset? Every crazy score of 70, needs exactly FOUR 95s to bring the average back to 90. Every insane 60, needs an extra SIX 95s to bring it back to 90.
Do you want some more maths? When you read the score on Gamerankings and see PS3's games have been treated like that again, again and again, anyone with some thoughts knows what's going on. Just do a histogram and check where most of the scores fall in and also check what is the mode of these numbers. And you'll see GS's score have not been always on the mark.
I agree about PDZ and RFOM.
But what you need to understand is this happens every new generation, PDZ gets a higher score in graphics and sound due to hardware improvements which bumps up the score, at the time PDZ was released its graphics were well above ps2/xbox games.
But when RFOM was released standards had risen this happens every time the first next gen system is released that systmes launch titles tend to get very high scores as technical quality improves allot.
I got 360 at launch and pdz and i thought it was a good game not a 9.0 but a good game 7.5-8.0, but at the time its graphics were a 9 or a 10 and its sound was a 9-10 but comparing it with games from today its probably a 6-7.
Am just giving my opinion there's no need to be a d*** by saying "And Learn to read raw numbers, it won't hurt."
The eye of judgement: GS score 7.5/ average 75%
Folklore: GS score 7.0/ average 76%
Motorstorm: GS 7.9/ average 83%
RFOM: GS 8.6/ average 87%
heavenly sword: GS 8.0/ average 81%
R & C: GS 7.5/ average 90%
Warhawk: GS 8.5/ average 84%
Am thinking you need to check the score's, they seem pretty accurate to me accept the R&C review.
I don't mind discussing opinion's but i will not discuss them with you again, i respect your opinion but i disagree where as you just plain and simple think my opinion is wrong and resort to insult's.
We can agree to disagree, i think gamespot's reviews are fine and you think they are wrong and gamespot are involed in some PS3 conspiracy and/or just think they are biased because they want 360 to win.
What i dont understand is if you think somethings up why support there site by using it, i'm sure site's like PSU and PS3fanboy will share your opinion's.
1) I've told you the average is brought to a level lower than majority reviewers have given by some crazy low scores and I even gave you specific illustration how it's lowered. But you still use the average to compare. See? You just refuse to learn.
The eye of judgement: Mode- 80%, Median- 80%, GS 7.5
Folklore: Mode- 80%, Median 79.5%, GS 7.0
MotorStorm: Mode- 80%, Median 80%, GS 7.9
RFOM: Mode- 90%, Median 90%, GS 8.6
Heavenly Sword: Mode- 80%, Median 80%, GS 8.0
R&C: Mode- 90%, Median 90%, GS 7.5
Warhawk: Mode- 90%, Median 85%, GS 8.5
This is how you read the datas. And you'll see among almost all of them, GS has had lower scores than majority and none of them was over the median. Taking the average seriously only means you think those 50%, 60% scores, which have been taken into account towards the average, are credible enough to respect.
2) GS is not just about reviews, it's got downloads, interviews, pictures, forums, etc. that's why I've been using it. And it's your own fault thinking GS is all about "reviews". Before you want me to leave GS, get your own fact straight and stop being a fanboy of GS' or any site's reviews.
Where's the arithmetic mean in your math's, there are 3 different type's of averages, i assume you have not got that far in math's ****
Here's an example for you so you know all 3 different type's of average's, or did you leave the mean out on purpose as that's how gamerankings etc get there data.
For example: Find the mean of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10.
Sum of values: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10 = 55
Number of values = 10
Mean of values = 55 / 10 = 5.5
say what you will about GS's reviews, they are easily THE most respected game critics on the web. and even though there is a not-so-subtle XBOX bias surrounding this website right now, their Sony exclusive games reviews have been on the spot, or at least the scoreshave been pretty much the same as the critic average (aside from R&C which got a totally F-ed up review, Warhawk, heavenly Sword and Lair have all gotten scores that reflect the general critic consensus.)
I would say a 9.0 unless of course, Jeff Gerstmann reviews it. He would probably bring it down to 8.5, but this game is certainly not an 8.0.
what do you guys think?
S0lidSnake
I'll be careful about GS reviews. you forgot to mention AC review where theirs where 9.0 which is higher than a lot of the popular gaming sites like ign and egm. bottom line, GS reviews for ps3 are not very trustworthy to me.
Ha.... I just knew that Uncharted was going to receive an 8.0. Kudos to mrvic87. But seriously, it got the score that it deserved. So remember kiddies, don't get all wild and outraged.
I did think that the R&C score was a bit low. Even though R&C doesn't interest me much, I played the demo anyway and thought that it was a really fun. I would have thought that the game would have been an 8.5, possibly 9.0.
I feel stupid now taking GS's side and defending them.
hats off to all you guys who predicted an 8.0.
[QUOTE="lhbchen"][QUOTE="shadystxxx"][QUOTE="lhbchen"][QUOTE="shadystxxx"][QUOTE="-DeStijl-"][QUOTE="shadystxxx"]Playing the demo doe's not give somebody the knowledge to review the final game.
And if gamespot give's it an 8.5 allot of people will make threads about how it's un-fair and the game deserves a 9.0+ because they played the demo.
People should not review final games based on a demo, just preview the demo and give your thought's.
People are setting thereself's up now to be upset at gamespot by saying the game should get a 9.0+ when they have only played 20-30 mins of a 8-10 hour game.
When gamespot review these games before release nobody that has not played the game in full has the right to argue with that score because the reviewer played the full game and you didnt.
shadystxxx
No one said it did, its just for fun cuz gamespots reviews have been questionable when it comes to PS3. Lighten up, its FUNNY!
But i disagree, gamespot's review have not been questionable.
Check every review for ps3 exclusive games and gamespot are 95% on the average (give or take 3-5%) the only review that is quite a bit lower than the average is ratchet and clank gamespot gave it a 7.5(75%) and last time i looked R&C was at 90%.
I have not played r&c(not my kind of game, i appreciate what the R&C games do well but i didnt enjoy the last game or the demo it feels like a kiddy shooter to me i prefer games like that to be more of a platformer just my opinion) so i cannot agree or disagree with gs review but going off the average it's obvious they are lower than the majority, but it's just a proffesional reviewers opinion and people should respect that.
Have not been questionable? My goodness, where have you been in the past 2 years?
Just compare the scores of each console's major launch titles have received. I'll give you two: PDZ of 360 and RFOM of PS3
And Learn to read raw numbers, it won't hurt.
When there're crazy reviewers give a game 70s and even 60s, do you know how hard it is to balance the offset? Every crazy score of 70, needs exactly FOUR 95s to bring the average back to 90. Every insane 60, needs an extra SIX 95s to bring it back to 90.
Do you want some more maths? When you read the score on Gamerankings and see PS3's games have been treated like that again, again and again, anyone with some thoughts knows what's going on. Just do a histogram and check where most of the scores fall in and also check what is the mode of these numbers. And you'll see GS's score have not been always on the mark.
I agree about PDZ and RFOM.
But what you need to understand is this happens every new generation, PDZ gets a higher score in graphics and sound due to hardware improvements which bumps up the score, at the time PDZ was released its graphics were well above ps2/xbox games.
But when RFOM was released standards had risen this happens every time the first next gen system is released that systmes launch titles tend to get very high scores as technical quality improves allot.
I got 360 at launch and pdz and i thought it was a good game not a 9.0 but a good game 7.5-8.0, but at the time its graphics were a 9 or a 10 and its sound was a 9-10 but comparing it with games from today its probably a 6-7.
Am just giving my opinion there's no need to be a d*** by saying "And Learn to read raw numbers, it won't hurt."
The eye of judgement: GS score 7.5/ average 75%
Folklore: GS score 7.0/ average 76%
Motorstorm: GS 7.9/ average 83%
RFOM: GS 8.6/ average 87%
heavenly sword: GS 8.0/ average 81%
R & C: GS 7.5/ average 90%
Warhawk: GS 8.5/ average 84%
Am thinking you need to check the score's, they seem pretty accurate to me accept the R&C review.
I don't mind discussing opinion's but i will not discuss them with you again, i respect your opinion but i disagree where as you just plain and simple think my opinion is wrong and resort to insult's.
We can agree to disagree, i think gamespot's reviews are fine and you think they are wrong and gamespot are involed in some PS3 conspiracy and/or just think they are biased because they want 360 to win.
What i dont understand is if you think somethings up why support there site by using it, i'm sure site's like PSU and PS3fanboy will share your opinion's.
1) I've told you the average is brought to a level lower than majority reviewers have given by some crazy low scores and I even gave you specific illustration how it's lowered. But you still use the average to compare. See? You just refuse to learn.
The eye of judgement: Mode- 80%, Median- 80%, GS 7.5
Folklore: Mode- 80%, Median 79.5%, GS 7.0
MotorStorm: Mode- 80%, Median 80%, GS 7.9
RFOM: Mode- 90%, Median 90%, GS 8.6
Heavenly Sword: Mode- 80%, Median 80%, GS 8.0
R&C: Mode- 90%, Median 90%, GS 7.5
Warhawk: Mode- 90%, Median 85%, GS 8.5
This is how you read the datas. And you'll see among almost all of them, GS has had lower scores than majority and none of them was over the median. Taking the average seriously only means you think those 50%, 60% scores, which have been taken into account towards the average, are credible enough to respect.
2) GS is not just about reviews, it's got downloads, interviews, pictures, forums, etc. that's why I've been using it. And it's your own fault thinking GS is all about "reviews". Before you want me to leave GS, get your own fact straight and stop being a fanboy of GS' or any site's reviews.
Where's the arithmetic mean in your math's, there are 3 different type's of averages, i assume you have not got that far in math's ****
Here's an example for you so you know all 3 different type's of average's, or did you leave the mean out on purpose as that's how gamerankings etc get there data.
For example: Find the mean of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10.
Sum of values: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10 = 55
Number of values = 10
Mean of values = 55 / 10 = 5.5
LOL really hard @ your poor understanding of statistics! You can go back and check something called data analysis. It's about how to read the datas, it's about reading the pattern of the data. Your 1~10 example makes ZERO sense cuz it's an artificial scattered set. But unfortunately in RL that's not the case.
Lemme give you an illustration one more time: take the sample space of 10 reviewers. Five 90s, Three 85s, One 80 and One crazy 60. Let's say GS give the 80.
What's the mean of these 10 review scores? It's 84.5. It seems that the 80 is not that far away, eit? But Does it reflect the opinions of these 10 reviewers when ABSOLUTE MAJORITY (8 out of 10) of them has given a score over the average? The answer is a simple NO. The reason why it's 84.5 is simply because that one single 60 which should be discarded. W/O the 60, the average is 87.2. A 7.2 out of 100 difference would clearly shows that a score of 80 is off the mark.
So you see how the average is easily manipulated and means nothing in this situation? That's exactly whats' happening in the average scores of MetaCritics and GameRankings. Lots of X360 games are receiving 100s and high 90s from places like OXM and Major Pro-XO magazines but PS3 games are getting those crazy 60s and 70s even 50s. That's why I use mode and median rather than mean to judge if GS' review is biased or not. Cuz those two REPRESENT the mainstream opinions. To be more precise, data analysis tools can help you find out the 95% Confidence Interval for the real average.
I wouldn't mind saying this again: you know jacksh*t about reading/analyzing raw numbers properly and refuse to learn. Yup and go embrace your so-appreciated GS review. Who cares!
I feel stupid now taking GS's side and defending them.
hats off to all you guys who predicted an 8.0.
S0lidSnake
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment