Old News, Is Gamespot rating games harder these days or are they just rating *certain* games harder ? Not saying Gamespot are Sony haters just I see alot of their reviews alittle lower on Vita games then most other sites.
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Ive notice that also. But, as a frequenter of IGN more than GS, their employees are definitely fanboys/fangirls of whatever platform they cover. If you are bias in favor for sony then I would go with IGN's rating. If you want a more objective view then go with GS. IMHO I go with IGN cuz I am a fanboy. However when Im on the fence I tend to go with GS so that I know if its worth 60 dollars or not.
GS did in fact say earlier this year that they were going to try harder to use the full ten point scale, and that we would "be seeing a lot more 7's". Keep in mind, 7 means "Good" on their scale, and a 7.5 is on the high end of good.Randolph
Thats fair, I just hope they rate everything evenly (not say bag on the Vita yet give 3DS insane scores) if their trying to be harder on games thats fine with me.
[QUOTE="Randolph"]GS did in fact say earlier this year that they were going to try harder to use the full ten point scale, and that we would "be seeing a lot more 7's". Keep in mind, 7 means "Good" on their scale, and a 7.5 is on the high end of good.Blake135
Thats fair, I just hope they rate everything evenly (not say bag on the Vita yet give 3DS insane scores) if their trying to be harder on games thats fine with me.
The 3DS games have been scoring mostly in the 7 and 8 range. Even Mario 3D Land got an 8.0 score. I admit, at first I thought "ONLY an eight?". Then I realized that an 8 meant "great", and that was just fine.Said it before, saying it again "gamespot reviews are not trustworthy" they underrate every single game, for every single console. digimonkey12That depends on your definition of "underrated". Just because almost every game site rates a certain game at the 8-9 level, and a different group decide not to rate those games as highly, doesn't mean that the game is being underrated by the second group. You need to ask yourself whether we should be setting higher standards for our games, instead of rating every 'good' game or Call of Duty clone a 9 or 10. I'd give certain games as examples, but I'd rather not start a war.
GS did in fact say earlier this year that they were going to try harder to use the full ten point scale, and that we would "be seeing a lot more 7's". Keep in mind, 7 means "Good" on their scale, and a 7.5 is on the high end of good.Randolph
So I guessing we can expect this years Call of Duty to get a 7 - 7.5? :roll:
Well, Modern Warfare 3 did get an 8.5, so it might be going down. :PSo I guessing we can expect this years Call of Duty to get a 7 - 7.5? :roll:
slaves
Good. More respect earned for GS for continuing to go against point inflation.
Phoenix534
Hmm yeah true, but looking back it seems last gen as a whole they rated games so much higher, I looked at GS's best rated games of all time, and you will be surprised how many 9.9s/10 there are!
Just take the average of IGN's and GS's scores and that will give you a better idea of what the game is.:P
Whatever Gamespot gives a game, it always backs it up w/ criticism so, if you actually read the review rather than just look at the number, you'll know if it's a 7.0 you'll hate or a 7.0 you'll like. I rather like their reviews and have bought a few lower rated titles (and enjoyed them) because of them.
After seeing Gamespot assign reviewers to its games that don't even enjoy the system they're playing (see: Uncharted's reviewer), I've completely stopped paying any attention to their reviews.
And as I've said before, he doesn't hate Vita games. He hates the Vita's interface.After seeing Gamespot assign reviewers to its games that don't even enjoy the system they're playing (see: Uncharted's reviewer), I've completely stopped paying any attention to their reviews.
THA-TODD-BEAST
[QUOTE="THA-TODD-BEAST"]And as I've said before, he doesn't hate Vita games. He hates the Vita's interface.After seeing Gamespot assign reviewers to its games that don't even enjoy the system they're playing (see: Uncharted's reviewer), I've completely stopped paying any attention to their reviews.
JustPlainLucas
Yeah, and he mentioned Angry Birds and his desire for more titles like that instead of Uncharted, etc. It's hard to take someone like that seriously if he reviews games for a system he dislikes because of its interface and lack of dirt cheap, simplistic games. He's the last person I'm going to get my gaming advice and suggestions from.
He's saying that he wants to see more games like those on a system that's trying to fight off mobile phone gaming. He may prefer simplistic games on his phone to a clunkier system, but that doesn't necessarily mean he's automatically biased against games on the Vita itself. I've played Uncharted: Golden Abyss myself, and although I gave it an 8.0, I can clearly see why he gave it a 7. Need I remind you that 12 other sites listed on Metacritic have given the game a similar or lower score? It's not just Mark Walton who wasn't floored by the game, and I can assure you it's not because he "hates the Vita." Once you start playing the game, the clunky interface no longer applies to... oh what the hell am I doing explaining this to you... You already made up your mind that he's biased. And that right there is a form of bias.Yeah, and he mentioned Angry Birds and his desire for more titles like that instead of Uncharted, etc. It's hard to take someone like that seriously if he reviews games for a system he dislikes because of its interface and lack of dirt cheap, simplistic games. He's the last person I'm going to get my gaming advice and suggestions from.
THA-TODD-BEAST
[QUOTE="THA-TODD-BEAST"]He's saying that he wants to see more games like those on a system that's trying to fight off mobile phone gaming. He may prefer simplistic games on his phone to a clunkier system, but that doesn't necessarily mean he's automatically biased against games on the Vita itself. I've played Uncharted: Golden Abyss myself, and although I gave it an 8.0, I can clearly see why he gave it a 7. Need I remind you that 12 other sites listed on Metacritic have given the game a similar or lower score? It's not just Mark Walton who wasn't floored by the game, and I can assure you it's not because he "hates the Vita." Once you start playing the game, the clunky interface no longer applies to... oh what the hell am I doing explaining this to you... You already made up your mind that he's biased. And that right there is a form of bias.Yeah, and he mentioned Angry Birds and his desire for more titles like that instead of Uncharted, etc. It's hard to take someone like that seriously if he reviews games for a system he dislikes because of its interface and lack of dirt cheap, simplistic games. He's the last person I'm going to get my gaming advice and suggestions from.
JustPlainLucas
Yeah, someone who wrote the article he did about the Vita has no business reviewing that system's games in my opinion.
[QUOTE="THA-TODD-BEAST"]And as I've said before, he doesn't hate Vita games. He hates the Vita's interface.After seeing Gamespot assign reviewers to its games that don't even enjoy the system they're playing (see: Uncharted's reviewer), I've completely stopped paying any attention to their reviews.
JustPlainLucas
The last paragraph in the Uncharted review does not make sense. The reviewer claims the game is almost like the console versions but does not quite live up to the task.
"It's not quite the full-blown Uncharted experience on the move that you might have hoped for, but it's damn close." You cannot say a game is close the console version and give it a seven. If the narrative is as weak as this reviewer claimed, then it would not be close to the console versions.
I have been playing the game for the last couple of hours. It is really engaging and entertaining. Its bright and colorful and inventive and hard to put down. It is, plain and simple, FUN. I wont give the game a numeric score, but i will say it is a "must play" for any Vita owner. You guys can argue scores, but i think its more fun to play the game instead.
Do you read what you write? So ONLY the people who love a system unconditionally should review the games for that platform? That's called fanboyism. Mark was being completely objective about his Uncharted review, but you're still hung up on that article. What would you say if someone wrote a positively gleaming article about the Vita but gave the game the same score?Yeah, someone who wrote the article he did about the Vita has no business reviewing that system's games in my opinion.
THA-TODD-BEAST
Sure you can, because a seven is still a good score. And Golden Abyss is closer to Drake's Fortune than the last two installments, and GS gave that game an 8. Golden Abyss is close to that, so it got a 7. Again, 7's a good score.The last paragraph in the Uncharted review does not make sense. The reviewer claims the game is almost like the console versions but does not quite live up to the task.
"It's not quite the full-blown Uncharted experience on the move that you might have hoped for, but it's damn close." You cannot say a game is close the console version and give it a seven. If the narrative is as weak as this reviewer claimed, then it would not be close to the console versions.
gamenerd15
whats with them rating all Vita games in the 70's?MarzarmyBecause they're good games getting good scores...
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment