Because GS tends to overrate 360 games (9.5 for Halo my freaking ass. Do they give a scoring section for mediocrity now?) and underrate PS3 games (8.0 for Uncharted).
Gamespot= CNET. CNET=Microsoft. Need I say more? :P
Seriously though, who cares? It's just opinions. If I read a review, all I want to know is if the game glitches or if there are framerate issues. I don't care if the reviewer liked the gameplay, story, graphics, etc...I'll be the judge of that.
What I want to know is how PS3's oblivion got a lower score than the 360 version even though EVERY site you visit for reviews will tell you it has a smoother framerate,brighter colours MORE CONTENT and so on...
When MGS4 gets a 10.5/10, it will make up for all the 8.5's on the PS3. It's not a typo, and yes, I'm just kidding. Hehe. An 8.5 is a darn good score. But that will change come June 12. The PS3 will start rising in the summer.
For PS3 reviews, I could careless about GS scores, I usually go to player reviews. Player reviews seem a hell of alot more accurate than GS reviews for PS3 titles.
Because all PS3 games get underated, the true rating is the rating that they give and just add 1 , the 1 is the biased score that automaticly gets taken away from any PS3 game.
But hey, look at the N64 it had the worst rated game , superman, but also had the highest, Legend of zelda Ocarina of time.
i stopped even looking at their reviews after they gave Ratchet and Clank a 7.5the_crosbie
Dude seriously I always came to GS for reviews on PC games. Got my PS3 and immediately hopped on here to see what they reccommended. Well it's a good thing I looked else where cause I would have never picked up Ratchet and Clank one of the best games I've played in a long time. The only thing I can find wrong with this game is, it's a bit to easy other then that this game should be 9.5.
Because GS feels like it. In fact, they even said that they are more harsh on PS games cause they dont meet their expectations. In fact, they are just angry cause Sony bragged about the graphical power of the PS3, and seing that its on par with the 360, GS just punish the games. Pretty childish indeed but its GS the ones who said so.
Most underrated PS3 games so far on Gamespot would be Lair (Yes I like this game), Uncharted: Drake's Fortune (A hard game is a bad thing now?) Ratchet and Clank: ToD (Since when is too much variety a bad thing?)
What I want to know is how PS3's oblivion got a lower score than the 360 version even though EVERY site you visit for reviews will tell you it has a smoother framerate,brighter colours MORE CONTENT and so on...smeags11
dude am not tryin to defend gamespot but the only reason the xbox version got a 9.6 is because when i was release gs wasnt usin the grading system of 8.5 9.0 .9.5
Dont forget 7.5 for Motorstorm (one of the PS3s best sellers). All 360 has to do is sneeze out a random title and it gets as good as the average PS3 game. Funny about the frame rate comments. GS has made quite a few of those remarks on PS3 games I have. Have I seen any frame rate issues? Not one. The only way I look at GS reviews is to see the compilaton of critic and user reviews. That is one thing unique to GS that is very good. GS still is a great all around site. Its organized well, has a lot of material other than reviews, and has great forums.
at the risk of gettin suspended again i will only say... it's becuz it's black lolurio1
:lol: hahahha. gold.
seriously though, if i come to GS to check out reviews for games, i ALWAYS go straight to the player reviews. sometimes i browse over GS's reviews that they do themselves, but 99% of the time i hit up the player reviews.
besides, i dont really need people to tell me what i will and wont like about a game anyway, and i certainly wouldnt let someone elses opinion of a game influence my own. as said above R&C is a fine example... it got 7.5 yet i would easily rate it 9.5, given that it was kinda easy.
FYI, Burnout Paradise got a 9.0 ;) but thats multi-plat.
I hate the new rating system. I always liked the old one. And they have problem doing reviews lately for example, 7.5 for Ratchet and Clank and every other site gave it a 9, Uncharted only got an 8 but on other sites high 8's or 9's AND Mass Effect only got 8.5, WTF?? Sure the game had it's problems but compared to what other sites were giving it, come on guys get ur act together. Sure these scores are still good but not representing the games what they should be.
[QUOTE="smeags11"]What I want to know is how PS3's oblivion got a lower score than the 360 version even though EVERY site you visit for reviews will tell you it has a smoother framerate,brighter colours MORE CONTENT and so on...MayoStar
dude am not tryin to defend gamespot but the only reason the xbox version got a 9.6 is because when i was release gs wasnt usin the grading system of 8.5 9.0 .9.5
Actually, when the PS3 version of Oblivion was released, a full year after the 360/PC version, GS was still using .1 increments for their review scores. It scored slightly lower because of the fact that it came out a year after and was essentially an older game.
I think they need to have seperate review teams like IGN does. Because usually you get a personal bias towards one system which shows in your reviews hence most of the PS3 reviews. The only reason i come to GS is because its alot easier to navigate the site than IGN.
I hate the new rating system. I always liked the old one. And they have problem doing reviews lately for example, 7.5 for Ratchet and Clank and every other site gave it a 9, Uncharted only got an 8 but on other sites high 8's or 9's AND Mass Effect only got 8.5, WTF?? Sure the game had it's problems but compared to what other sites were giving it, come on guys get ur act together. Sure these scores are still good but not representing the games what they should be.
Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't want that. But cuz there's so much hype about it being great, GS will probs say "over-hyped" and "not as good as previous MGS games".
Log in to comment