Can we just drop this"GS is biased" BS?

If Lemmings = Cows, then.....

NO! I"M A SUPER LEMMING, AND IF ANY GAME THAT DOESNT MEET ITS HYPE OR THESCORETHAT I THINK IT SHOULD GET, THEN WHOEVER GAVE THAT SCORE IS AUTOMATICALLY BIASED OR PAID OFF BY SONY TO GIVE IT A BAD REVIEW!

PS. Cows make me laugh, cuz they are so pathetic.

I think PC gamers are the only ones who arent hating someone right now. :lol:Wartzay

thats because we all have been trusting GS's reviews so much in the past. and now clearly they are spreading out reviews that most people don't agree with, so whose fault is it?

well im lovin the smg score, and all the flops this week, lol!

eerr no..Uncharted = 8.0 doesn't feel rightloseittoo

A colonoscopy doesn't feel right either, but it might save your life.

My point is, not "feeling right" doesn't make it wrong.

If GS isn't biased the explain R&C.DarkCloud79

[QUOTE="Wartzay"]I think PC gamers are the only ones who arent hating someone right now. :lol:hamstergeddon

Ehh, most people agree with the review, and those who don't don't really care

I don't think they are bias I just think that the reviews are not very consistent ...

One game gets - points for one thing and another game having the same issues doesn't get the - points...Or the old, this ones to hard and this one to easy stuff...

All in all though I am glad that they are hard on most games, when I'm stitting on the fence about a game I will come here and check the review just to see if the game has any glaring issues that I would not be happy with.. One that comes to mind off hand is SmackDown VS RaW,the review here has stopped me from getting the game because what the reviewer saidabout the carrer mode...

[QUOTE="loseittoo"]eerr no..Uncharted = 8.0 doesn't feel rightCorvin

A colonoscopy doesn't feel right either, but it might save your life.

My point is, not "feeling right" doesn't make it wrong.

so your basicly comparing a game to a thing in our body?

Don't you get it man. GS had to give Mass Effect that score for people would stop thinking they are bias for the 360. Next big 360 game is going to get an AAA score for sure.

[QUOTE="Corvin"]

[QUOTE="loseittoo"]eerr no..Uncharted = 8.0 doesn't feel rightloseittoo

A colonoscopy doesn't feel right either, but it might save your life.

My point is, not "feeling right" doesn't make it wrong.

so your basicly comparing a game to a thing in our body?

Yes.

[QUOTE="DarkCloud79"]If GS isn't biased the explain R&C.hamstergeddon

You haven't played the game have you?

If GS isn't biased then explain R&C.DarkCloud79

I think PC gamers are the only ones who arent hating someone right now. :lol:Wartzay

well I would rather take .5 points from Crysis and give it to a title that deserves it much more. The Witcher :P

[QUOTE="Wartzay"]I think PC gamers are the only ones who arent hating someone right now. :lol:_Pedro_

well I would rather take .5 points from Crysis and give it to a title that deserves it much more. The Witcher :P

:lol: :P

[QUOTE="Wartzay"]I think PC gamers are the only ones who arent hating someone right now. :lol:_Pedro_

well I would rather take .5 points from Crysis and give it to a title that deserves it much more. The Witcher :P

Witcher deserves AAA, but not at the expense of Crysis, which deserved its score. At the expense of WiC, which is undoubtedly a great game, but not a 9.5.

Mass Effect is a hard game to rate just as IGN says. it doe shave these problems and they are annoying but the cinematic value and the RPG elements are amazing.

All I know is that Metroid Prime 3 was a BS score I havent played ME enough to give an honest opinion.

If they are biased, it's one thing. If not, they are totally unreliable and untalented. They have been lowering some 360 scores, but at the same time Assassin's Creed got a 9... I don't know at this point where they are coming from.bretthorror

it seems like they want to stand out from all the other reviews but when they do that games are not rated fairly.

[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="DarkCloud79"]If GS isn't biased the explain R&C.DarkCloud79

You haven't played the game have you?

Don't you get it man. GS had to give Mass Effect that score for people would stop thinking they are bias for the 360. Next big 360 game is going to get an AAA score for sure.

PS3_3DO

If they are biased, it's one thing. If not, they are totally unreliable and untalented. They have been lowering some 360 scores, but at the same time Assassin's Creed got a 9... I don't know at this point where they are coming from.bretthorror

Yes, Gamespot isn't so much biased as they are basically incompetent when it comes to writing reviews. It's glaringly obvious from the written quality of their work that they expect 95% of the people to simply look at the score and ignore the review. Compare them to Eurogamer and it's just laughable, I'm sorry. Gamespot's review for Uncharted is only one page. How is that supposed to help anybody? Even their reviews for huge games like Halo 3 are miniscule and greatly lack in depth and detail compared to the other big sites.

Gamespot said one of the main reasons they changed the review system is so that people would stop looking at the scores and start reading the reviews. That's a great concept... if you write great reviews. Gamespot doesn't.

Gamespot may not be bias, but no-one can see that there are certain reviews that are seriously flawed, i mean R&C identity crysis? That really BS because for anyone who actually played the game you would see it's no where near a FPS. Uncharted seriously deserved to get higher than an 8.0. And Mass Effect? This is a great game that deserved to get an AAA rating but was a victim of a stunt to recover some credibility lost to certain users. Gamespot needs to restore stability with their reviews and imo the first way todo that is to scrap the .5 system.

[QUOTE="bretthorror"]If they are biased, it's one thing. If not, they are totally unreliable and untalented. They have been lowering some 360 scores, but at the same time Assassin's Creed got a 9... I don't know at this point where they are coming from.Zeliard9

Yes, Gamespot isn't so much biased as they are basically incompetent when it comes to writing reviews. It's glaringly obvious from the written quality of their work that they expect 95% of the people to simply look at the score and ignore the review. Compare them to Eurogamer and it's just laughable, I'm sorry. Gamespot's review for Uncharted is only one page. How is that supposed to help anybody? Even their reviews for huge games like Halo 3 are miniscule and greatly lack in depth and detail compared to the other big sites.

Gamespot said one of the main reasons they changed the review system is so that people would stop looking at the scores and start reading the reviews. That's a great concept... if you write great reviews. Gamespot doesn't.

Super Mario Galaxy was also a mere one page review. Lately, your logic seems to be correct. Before, I understand why people say they were bias towards the Wii. Now, the scores are making more sense (in their own unsensibility). If they're trying to be hard on games, I guess they're doing it in their own stupid way. Really, all it does is make 10 insanely impossible, 9.5 the highest you can get, their 9 reviews could easily be anywhere from 8-9.5 on other sites and it really just makes them unreliable for any gamer to figure out what is going on in their reviews. The mere fact that all games generally considered great through exceptional have to be spread out among 3 ratings, 8.5, 9 or 9.5 hurts them. If they were more lenient with a 10, it'd help out some.

The ultimate goal of a reviewer should be to review a game for the game's target audience. They're just confusing everyone. It started on the Wii and is now trickling down.

[QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

[QUOTE="bretthorror"]If they are biased, it's one thing. If not, they are totally unreliable and untalented. They have been lowering some 360 scores, but at the same time Assassin's Creed got a 9... I don't know at this point where they are coming from.bretthorror

Yes, Gamespot isn't so much biased as they are basically incompetent when it comes to writing reviews. It's glaringly obvious from the written quality of their work that they expect 95% of the people to simply look at the score and ignore the review. Compare them to Eurogamer and it's just laughable, I'm sorry. Gamespot's review for Uncharted is only one page. How is that supposed to help anybody? Even their reviews for huge games like Halo 3 are miniscule and greatly lack in depth and detail compared to the other big sites.

Gamespot said one of the main reasons they changed the review system is so that people would stop looking at the scores and start reading the reviews. That's a great concept... if you write great reviews. Gamespot doesn't.

Super Mario Galaxy was also a mere one page review. Lately, your logic seems to be correct. Before, I understand why people say they were bias towards the Wii. Now, the scores are making more sense (in their own unsensibility). If they're trying to be hard on games, I guess they're doing it in their own stupid way. Really, all it does is make 10 insanely impossible, 9.5 the highest you can get, their 9 reviews could easily be anywhere from 8-9.5 on other sites and it really just makes them unreliable for any gamer to figure out what is going on in their reviews. The mere fact that all games generally considered great through exceptional have to be spread out among 3 ratings, 8.5, 9 or 9.5 hurts them. If they were more lenient with a 10, it'd help out some.

The ultimate goal of a reviewer should be to review a game for the game's target audience. They're just confusing everyone. It started on the Wii and is now trickling down.

[QUOTE="bretthorror"][QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

[QUOTE="bretthorror"]If they are biased, it's one thing. If not, they are totally unreliable and untalented. They have been lowering some 360 scores, but at the same time Assassin's Creed got a 9... I don't know at this point where they are coming from.hamstergeddon

Yes, Gamespot isn't so much biased as they are basically incompetent when it comes to writing reviews. It's glaringly obvious from the written quality of their work that they expect 95% of the people to simply look at the score and ignore the review. Compare them to Eurogamer and it's just laughable, I'm sorry. Gamespot's review for Uncharted is only one page. How is that supposed to help anybody? Even their reviews for huge games like Halo 3 are miniscule and greatly lack in depth and detail compared to the other big sites.

Gamespot said one of the main reasons they changed the review system is so that people would stop looking at the scores and start reading the reviews. That's a great concept... if you write great reviews. Gamespot doesn't.

Super Mario Galaxy was also a mere one page review. Lately, your logic seems to be correct. Before, I understand why people say they were bias towards the Wii. Now, the scores are making more sense (in their own unsensibility). If they're trying to be hard on games, I guess they're doing it in their own stupid way. Really, all it does is make 10 insanely impossible, 9.5 the highest you can get, their 9 reviews could easily be anywhere from 8-9.5 on other sites and it really just makes them unreliable for any gamer to figure out what is going on in their reviews. The mere fact that all games generally considered great through exceptional have to be spread out among 3 ratings, 8.5, 9 or 9.5 hurts them. If they were more lenient with a 10, it'd help out some.

The ultimate goal of a reviewer should be to review a game for the game's target audience. They're just confusing everyone. It started on the Wii and is now trickling down.

But, that won't happen and can't happen. Because, let's just say Halo 4 absolutely blows 3 away, then by then they'll be worried that something better might come along. If you went by that logic, SMG would be leaps and bounds above any platformer ever made, and if that doesn't get it a 10, I am unsure what could possibly get one. If you go like this, the 10 can't be awarded.

[QUOTE="DarkCloud79"]

[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="DarkCloud79"]If GS isn't biased the explain R&C.hamstergeddon

You haven't played the game have you?

Don't you get it man. GS had to give Mass Effect that score for people would stop thinking they are bias for the 360. Next big 360 game is going to get an AAA score for sure.

PS3_3DO

yes, its all part of their master plan :roll:

So without playing the game or, appearently, reading any other reviews you blindly trust in a reviewer that complains about "teh indentity crysis".

Looks like we have a GS fanboy here, what are you guys called?

[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="DarkCloud79"]

[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="DarkCloud79"]If GS isn't biased the explain R&C.DarkCloud79

You haven't played the game have you?

Don't you get it man. GS had to give Mass Effect that score for people would stop thinking they are bias for the 360. Next big 360 game is going to get an AAA score for sure.

PS3_3DO

yes, its all part of their master plan :roll:

So without playing the game or, appearently, reading any other reviews you blindly trust in a reviewer that complains about "teh indentity crysis".

Looks like we have a GS fanboy here, what are you guys called?

Looks like we have a GS fanboy here, what are you guys called?

DarkCloud79

Dude, you gotta roll with that and try to get people to vote on a name. That's an awesome idea. I would propose "scabs" because they tend to be going against the grain of a lot of gamers on here.

Most people seem to agree that Assassin's Creed is very repetitive, there are a lot of reviews that have blasted the game as being shallow, PS3 version has many problems, yet it gets AAA on Gamespot.Then we have people saying Mass effect is GOTY, has great replay value, one of the best stories ever in a game and it gets 8.5

I honestly don't know why people put any importance on review scores, how many bad reviews do you need to read before you realise they have no idea how to score games?. Just read the text, forget the score as it means nothing.

[QUOTE="DarkCloud79"][QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="DarkCloud79"]

[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="DarkCloud79"]If GS isn't biased the explain R&C.hamstergeddon

You haven't played the game have you?

Don't you get it man. GS had to give Mass Effect that score for people would stop thinking they are bias for the 360. Next big 360 game is going to get an AAA score for sure.

PS3_3DO

yes, its all part of their master plan :roll:

So without playing the game or, appearently, reading any other reviews you blindly trust in a reviewer that complains about "teh indentity crysis".

Looks like we have a GS fanboy here, what are you guys called?

I don't recall EGM mentioning a crisis. I do remenber they gave it a 9 and called it one of the true plaformers right now, almost pixar movie with fluid animations.

So without playing the game or, appearently, reading any other reviews you blindly trust in a reviewer that complains about "teh indentity crysis".

Looks like we have a GS fanboy here, what are you guys called?

DarkCloud79

Blindly trust? no :| I seem to recall several other sources at least mentioning Ratchet's mid-life crisis, so I accepted it as truth. (For the Record I think it was EGM)hamstergeddon

I don't recall EGM mentioning a crisis. I do remenber they gave it a 9 and called it one of the true plaformers right now, almost pixar movie with fluid animations.

[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"]

Blindly trust? no :| I seem to recall several other sources at least mentioning Ratchet's mid-life crisis, so I accepted it as truth. (For the Record I think it was EGM)DarkCloud79

I don't recall EGM mentioning a crisis. I do remenber they gave it a 9 and called it one of the true plaformers right now, almost pixar movie with fluid animations.

[QUOTE="DarkCloud79"]

So without playing the game or, appearently, reading any other reviews you blindly trust in a reviewer that complains about "teh indentity crysis".

Looks like we have a GS fanboy here, what are you guys called?

hamstergeddon

From your post it seems we haven't a GS fanboys here, but a fully fledged sony hater.

That brings the question, why are you defending a review of a bad game you where never going to get?

[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="DarkCloud79"]

So without playing the game or, appearently, reading any other reviews you blindly trust in a reviewer that complains about "teh indentity crysis".

Looks like we have a GS fanboy here, what are you guys called?

DarkCloud79

From your post it seems we haven't a GS fanboys here, but a fully fledged sony hater.

That brings the question, why are you defending a review of a bad game you where never going to get?

[QUOTE="DarkCloud79"][QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="DarkCloud79"]

So without playing the game or, appearently, reading any other reviews you blindly trust in a reviewer that complains about "teh indentity crysis".

Looks like we have a GS fanboy here, what are you guys called?

hamstergeddon

From your post it seems we haven't a GS fanboys here, but a fully fledged sony hater.

That brings the question, why are you defending a review of a bad game you where never going to get?

Just now you where saying that you agreed with GS review due to the identity crisis.

[QUOTE="bretthorror"]If they are biased, it's one thing. If not, they are totally unreliable and untalented. They have been lowering some 360 scores, but at the same time Assassin's Creed got a 9... I don't know at this point where they are coming from.Zeliard9

Yes, Gamespot isn't so much biased as they are basically incompetent when it comes to writing reviews. It's glaringly obvious from the written quality of their work that they expect 95% of the people to simply look at the score and ignore the review. Compare them to Eurogamer and it's just laughable, I'm sorry. Gamespot's review for Uncharted is only one page. How is that supposed to help anybody? Even their reviews for huge games like Halo 3 are miniscule and greatly lack in depth and detail compared to the other big sites.

Gamespot said one of the main reasons they changed the review system is so that people would stop looking at the scores and start reading the reviews. That's a great concept... if you write great reviews. Gamespot doesn't.

Ya they're review seems really shallow

[QUOTE="DarkCloud79"]

Looks like we have a GS fanboy here, what are you guys called?

bretthorror

Dude, you gotta roll with that and try to get people to vote on a name. That's an awesome idea. I would propose "scabs" because they tend to be going against the grain of a lot of gamers on here.

Hey you're right.

If I wasn't so lazy I'd start a thread to give name to the guys defending GS recent reviews.

[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="DarkCloud79"][QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="DarkCloud79"]

So without playing the game or, appearently, reading any other reviews you blindly trust in a reviewer that complains about "teh indentity crysis".

Looks like we have a GS fanboy here, what are you guys called?

DarkCloud79

From your post it seems we haven't a GS fanboys here, but a fully fledged sony hater.

That brings the question, why are you defending a review of a bad game you where never going to get?

Just now you where saying that you agreed with GS review due to the identity crisis.