every time a game flops, gamespot is biased or unreliable

I think people are mad that the game is averaging 90% and above elsewhere and got 75% here

There wouldn't be so much complaining if all the sites had flopped this game

i think once (if) lemmings get a big flop they will see what its like and then we all have fun agreeing with each other.

*waits for mass effect to get 8.5*

No every time GS flops a game that does well everywhere else they are bias. Lair was a universal (almost) flop. GS flopped R&C 7.5 with the average elsewhere being over 9. That's plain out bias. Especially considering the reviewer's main complaint was that it was too easy and has TOO MANY gameplay elements (wtf?). What game isn't easy these days? Halo3 should've got knocked big time if difficulty is now primary criteria..... god damned hypocrits. R&C exclusive to 360 = 9.0.
Lazy_Boy88

i think once (if) lemmings get a big flop they will see what its like and then we all have fun agreeing with each other.

*waits for mass effect to get 8.5*

---OkeyDokey---

Yeah, the problem is that we dont hype just any game we see, we usually let the experts comment on the games before we hype stuff. But theres a good probablity it will happen, just not as often as the PS3.

i think once (if) lemmings get a big flop they will see what its like and then we all have fun agreeing with each other.

*waits for mass effect to get 8.5*

---OkeyDokey---

[QUOTE="Lazy_Boy88"]No every time GS flops a game that does well everywhere else they are bias. Lair was a universal (almost) flop. GS flopped R&C 7.5 with the average elsewhere being over 9. That's plain out bias. Especially considering the reviewer's main complaint was that it was too easy and has TOO MANY gameplay elements (wtf?). What game isn't easy these days? Halo3 should've got knocked big time if difficulty is now primary criteria..... god damned hypocrits. R&C exclusive to 360 = 9.0.
Gamer46

And that is 100% correct. Too bad lemmings have their heads too far up their butts to figure that out.

HOW RIGHT U BOTH ARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is something a 5yr old can spot. the level of biasness is astounding and quite appauling.

The problem is that GS's reviews have lost their identity. Before this gen you knew what to expect from GS, a tough but fair review. Sure a couple of games would slip through the cracks but generally speaking the reviews were spot on. Seldom would GS dramatically overrate/underrate a game. They may not have gone along with the popular line of thinking (looks at Jade Empire) but they did bring fair criticism to the table. However these days it seems that every reviewer is going to score very differently, its almost as if GS has hired only freelance writers and doesn't keep a review staff. We see a game like Halo 3, that while excellent, certainly had its share of flaws score 9.5, the second highest score possible, but then other games with similar flaws like R&C and MP3 get scored much lower. We no longer know what to expect from a GS review, which is what makes it seem like GS is biased. PBSnipes

Because their writers are garbage now. Nothing but crap.They loved Bioshock but they hate R&C for being too easy? Garbage, absolutely garbage...

[QUOTE="Lazy_Boy88"]No every time GS flops a game that does well everywhere else they are bias. Lair was a universal (almost) flop. GS flopped R&C 7.5 with the average elsewhere being over 9. That's plain out bias. Especially considering the reviewer's main complaint was that it was too easy and has TOO MANY gameplay elements (wtf?). What game isn't easy these days? Halo3 should've got knocked big time if difficulty is now primary criteria..... god damned hypocrits. R&C exclusive to 360 = 9.0.
Gamer46

And that is 100% correct. Too bad lemmings have their heads too far up their butts to figure that out.

The guy who reviewed it has never given a score greater than 8.5 though...I would take the review with a grain of salt...

i dont understand how the snooz fest Kingdom Puzzle or whatever got a 9.5. The music was enough to annoy me.RedMarzBoy

I've enjoyed that game on the DS. If its the same game then it deserved its points.

The problem is that GS's reviews have lost their identity. Before this gen you knew what to expect from GS, a tough but fair review. Sure a couple of games would slip through the cracks but generally speaking the reviews were spot on. Seldom would GS dramatically overrate/underrate a game. They may not have gone along with the popular line of thinking (looks at Jade Empire) but they did bring fair criticism to the table. However these days it seems that every reviewer is going to score very differently, its almost as if GS has hired only freelance writers and doesn't keep a review staff. We see a game like Halo 3, that while excellent, certainly had its share of flaws score 9.5, the second highest score possible, but then other games with similar flaws like R&C and MP3 get scored much lower. We no longer know what to expect from a GS review, which is what makes it seem like GS is biased. PBSnipes

[QUOTE="PBSnipes"]The problem is that GS's reviews have lost their identity. Before this gen you knew what to expect from GS, a tough but fair review. Sure a couple of games would slip through the cracks but generally speaking the reviews were spot on. Seldom would GS dramatically overrate/underrate a game. They may not have gone along with the popular line of thinking (looks at Jade Empire) but they did bring fair criticism to the table. However these days it seems that every reviewer is going to score very differently, its almost as if GS has hired only freelance writers and doesn't keep a review staff. We see a game like Halo 3, that while excellent, certainly had its share of flaws score 9.5, the second highest score possible, but then other games with similar flaws like R&C and MP3 get scored much lower. We no longer know what to expect from a GS review, which is what makes it seem like GS is biased. madterps

Because their writers are garbage now. Nothing but crap.They loved Bioshock but they hate R&C for being too easy? Garbage, absolutely garbage...

"Try as it might, Tools of Destruction doesn't achieve the same level of greatness as its predecessors. It's too easy, the story falls flat, and the "throw everything in including the kitchen sink" style of gameplay takes too much of the focus off the tight platforming and fun combat. "

I was a huge fan of the Ratchet & Clank on the PS2, but from his review, it seems like they kind of ruined the already near-perfect formula that the other games had.

[QUOTE="Gamer46"]

[QUOTE="Lazy_Boy88"]No every time GS flops a game that does well everywhere else they are bias. Lair was a universal (almost) flop. GS flopped R&C 7.5 with the average elsewhere being over 9. That's plain out bias. Especially considering the reviewer's main complaint was that it was too easy and has TOO MANY gameplay elements (wtf?). What game isn't easy these days? Halo3 should've got knocked big time if difficulty is now primary criteria..... god damned hypocrits. R&C exclusive to 360 = 9.0.
The_Ish

And that is 100% correct. Too bad lemmings have their heads too far up their butts to figure that out.

The guy who reviewed it has never given a score greater than 8.5 though...I would take the review with a grain of salt...

Yet it flies past every other posters head for some reason (I agree with you)... The reviewer probably thinks a 9.0 point range is for games that are revolutionary or without flaws...

Every reviewer even on GS will probably give a different score for this game.

But since they can't all work on one game review you get 1 person working on a review.

Don't take the numbers TOO seriously. Read the review... Its a better representation of the game.

[QUOTE="The_Ish"][QUOTE="Gamer46"]

[QUOTE="Lazy_Boy88"]No every time GS flops a game that does well everywhere else they are bias. Lair was a universal (almost) flop. GS flopped R&C 7.5 with the average elsewhere being over 9. That's plain out bias. Especially considering the reviewer's main complaint was that it was too easy and has TOO MANY gameplay elements (wtf?). What game isn't easy these days? Halo3 should've got knocked big time if difficulty is now primary criteria..... god damned hypocrits. R&C exclusive to 360 = 9.0.
animateria

And that is 100% correct. Too bad lemmings have their heads too far up their butts to figure that out.

The guy who reviewed it has never given a score greater than 8.5 though...I would take the review with a grain of salt...

Yet it flies past every other posters head for some reason (I agree with you)... The reviewer probably thinks a 9.0 point range is for games that are revolutionary or without flaws...

Every reviewer even on GS will probably give a different score for this game.

But since they can't all work on one game review you get 1 person working on a review.

Don't take the numbers TOO seriously. Read the review... Its a better representation of the game.

True, I agree. It has some of the same complaints about the game that GS has had for other games, and alot of the same praises. I'd say that if it was any other reviewer, it would probably have gotten 9-9.5, 8.5 at worse...but even then I tend to keep my own modifier depending on the review, the reviewer, and other scores...so I might add something like .3 or something...

No every time GS flops a game that does well everywhere else they are bias. Lair was a universal (almost) flop. GS flopped R&C 7.5 with the average elsewhere being over 9. That's plain out bias. Especially considering the reviewer's main complaint was that it was too easy and has TOO MANY gameplay elements (wtf?). What game isn't easy these days? Halo3 should've got knocked big time if difficulty is now primary criteria..... god damned hypocrits. R&C exclusive to 360 = 9.0.
Lazy_Boy88

What a terrible post.. you actually believe Ratchet and Clank is going to average a 9.0 at gamerrankings? I guarantee by sunday it drops to mid 8s

0rin I wouldn't say its so much a personal bias as it is different standards. For example I probably would have given a game like Heavenly Sword around a 6 or 7, because the game had little innovation, was extremely short and holds little replayvalue. Personally the big 3 things I look for in a game are gameplay, innovation and value, we can call these my gaming "core values". The gameplay needs to work, the game doesn't have to reinvent the wheel but it needs to be functional. I also look for innovation, that could be anything from a great story to a gameplay mechanic to the level design, I want a game to do something new and exciting. Finally I look for value, and with achievements and the like it is very easy to add replay value to a game, so when a game like HS comes along with 6 hours of gameplay and no replay value I'll heavily penalize it. I'm not dishing out $70 (taxes included) for a 6 hour game.

Now obviously like all other reviews, thats my opinion. I know there are people here who thought HS was a fantastic game and was underrated. Obviously we are both entitled to our opinions. However the problem arises when a review like mine that may go against the grain is part of a major publication. For this we can use another example, Halo 3 and R:FOM. Lets say I was the reviewer at GS for R:FOM, I probably would have scored it low AA (probably an 8 or 8.2) because of the lack of originality (for the record I would have scored Halo 3 mid-high AA). R:FOM was an obvious attempt to cash in on Halo's success, the game had little innovation, one of my core values for games. Now when the Halo 3 review comes up at a 9.5, we're going to see many Resistance fans claiming GS is a biased reviewer because in my opinion Resistance was only an 8 or 8.2, while another reviewer thought Halo was worthy of a 9.5.

Because of the lack of standards here at GS (seemingly since the start of the new review system) a reviewers opinion and core values show through much more clearly. Under the old system you would have to rank various features separately, meaning that while I personally would have scored HS a 6.5, under the old review system the ranking may have gone:

Gameplay: 8

Graphics: 9

Sound: 8

Value: 6

Tilt: 7

Now this pretty much dictates a score in the A-AA range, significantly higher than my original review. Under the old system I was still able to show my core values, but they didn't completely dictate the score because I am forced to review each part of the game separately. Sure the package as a whole my not havebeen to my liking, but HS definitely had somegreat parts to it.The old review system took some of the opinion out of the review and made it more factual, the new review system allows a reviewers core values to show through.

not lemmings have they taste of a flop lolljlrj

Crackdown?

[QUOTE="ljlrj"]not lemmings have they taste of a flop lolwhocares4peace

Crackdown?

Link toHypethreads??

[QUOTE="whocares4peace"]

[QUOTE="ljlrj"]not lemmings have they taste of a flop lolArt_424

Crackdown?

Link toHypethreads??

Both of those were hyped AA and failed to meet said score.

crack down is worse than lair IMO. c'mon now be real, the only reason y it sold half as many copies was because of TEH HALOZZTREE DEMO.

crack down is worse than lair IMO. c'mon now be real, the only reason y it sold half as many copies was because of TEH HALOZZTREE DEMO.

mclovin401

No, Crackdown is a million times better than Lair.

crack down is worse than lair IMO. c'mon now be real, the only reason y it sold half as many copies was because of TEH HALOZZTREE DEMO.

mclovin401

if i would have an 360 that y i would buy that game but it 2 late halo 3 is out

[QUOTE="mclovin401"]

crack down is worse than lair IMO. c'mon now be real, the only reason y it sold half as many copies was because of TEH HALOZZTREE DEMO.

ljlrj

if i would have an 360 that y i would buy that game but it 2 late halo 3 is out

You'd be missing a pretty solid game then. It's nothing revolutionary or outstanding but it's still a good game in its own right.

Wow. I actually agree with you. This is exactly how I feel. Only I also think that these "freelance writers" are biased themselves. So whilst Gamespot as a whole (the people who run it) may not be biased, their writers/reviewers definitely are, and I think they should run their reviews past a "review review crew" to stop overly-biased or "unjust" reviews from going public. It would save them a lot of face with their public. As of now, I really lost a lot of faith in GS's reviews. They no longer seem as credible as other sites. Not just because "OMG TEH PS3 GAEM FLOPZED" but because a 7.5 for a game that gets 9.0 almost everywhere else is just completely off-kilter. there is DEFINITELY something wrong here. LOZ:TP BARELY got a lower-than-expected score, and people freaked. But that was understandable. The guy had a few more problems with it than other people. But to stick out THIS far from the status-quo... that is just plain unfair.

How could the Gamespot higher-up's allow this kind of behavior? It thought the idea of running a business was to try to satisfy all customers, not play favorites. I mean, I know this is a tender subject, but am I in the wrong thinking that this one review was highly unjust?

I understand motorstorm, and definitely lair, Heavenly Sword? fine. Resistance was a little low, but understandable.

R&CF:TOD getting a 7.5? That is simply disgusting. I would say the same thing if a game like Halo 3 or Mass Effect were to get a 7.5. These games had a lot of time put into them, just to have some game site totaly slander the title with a lower-than-necessary score? Don't you think reviewers should put a little more thought into their reviews? or at least explain a little more in-depth what exactly crawled up their... nevermind, but anyway, so does this make me a total fanboy? or is this thinking reasonable?
0rin

Agreed. This is what I posted on another board:

This is why video game journalism is a joke compared to other industries. It really seems like reviews and their scores are at the whim of the reviewer, and one of the main jobs of an editor is to make sure the scores are normalized across reviewers so different scores by different reviewers can potentially be compared (otherwise what's the point of having numerical scores?). Gamespot is one of the biggest (if not the biggest) site for games and for them to publish a one-page review of one of the biggest games - hype-wise, production-wise, score-wise (not counting GS, of course), probably sales-wise - is an insult to everybody who spent years of their lives polishing the game.

Like it or not, journalists are the internal spokespeople for the gaming industry; their reviews have a lot of weight and can determine a game's failure or success, which can itself mean the failure/success of the companies behind it. Inconsistency and downright laziness is painting us in a bad light.

[QUOTE="0rin"]Wow. I actually agree with you. This is exactly how I feel. Only I also think that these "freelance writers" are biased themselves. So whilst Gamespot as a whole (the people who run it) may not be biased, their writers/reviewers definitely are, and I think they should run their reviews past a "review review crew" to stop overly-biased or "unjust" reviews from going public. It would save them a lot of face with their public. As of now, I really lost a lot of faith in GS's reviews. They no longer seem as credible as other sites. Not just because "OMG TEH PS3 GAEM FLOPZED" but because a 7.5 for a game that gets 9.0 almost everywhere else is just completely off-kilter. there is DEFINITELY something wrong here. LOZ:TP BARELY got a lower-than-expected score, and people freaked. But that was understandable. The guy had a few more problems with it than other people. But to stick out THIS far from the status-quo... that is just plain unfair.

How could the Gamespot higher-up's allow this kind of behavior? It thought the idea of running a business was to try to satisfy all customers, not play favorites. I mean, I know this is a tender subject, but am I in the wrong thinking that this one review was highly unjust?

I understand motorstorm, and definitely lair, Heavenly Sword? fine. Resistance was a little low, but understandable.

R&CF:TOD getting a 7.5? That is simply disgusting. I would say the same thing if a game like Halo 3 or Mass Effect were to get a 7.5. These games had a lot of time put into them, just to have some game site totaly slander the title with a lower-than-necessary score? Don't you think reviewers should put a little more thought into their reviews? or at least explain a little more in-depth what exactly crawled up their... nevermind, but anyway, so does this make me a total fanboy? or is this thinking reasonable?
Datheron

Agreed. This is what I posted on another board:

This is why video game journalism is a joke compared to other industries. It really seems like reviews and their scores are at the whim of the reviewer, and one of the main jobs of an editor is to make sure the scores are normalized across reviewers so different scores by different reviewers can potentially be compared (otherwise what's the point of having numerical scores?). Gamespot is one of the biggest (if not the biggest) site for games and for them to publish a one-page review of one of the biggest games - hype-wise, production-wise, score-wise (not counting GS, of course), probably sales-wise - is an insult to everybody who spent years of their lives polishing the game.

Like it or not, journalists are the internal spokespeople for the gaming industry; their reviews have a lot of weight and can determine a game's failure or success, which can itself mean the failure/success of the companies behind it. Inconsistency and downright laziness is painting us in a bad light.

I'm not sure if I entirely agree with you two.

Movie reviewers are not unbiased towards their personal views.

That goes for Music reviewers and Automobile reviewers too.

Many journalists in different work also have a problem with the same issue.

Crackdown was extremely fun!xX0LDSCH00LXx

Yup, I thought the singleplayer was good and the online co-op only added to the fun. Hope they make a sequel and expand on the game a bit more.

cows they have not been on the losing team for a while so they dont know what else to do...

ahhh they miss there ps1 ps2 days..

GS reviews have become extremely biased against the PS3.
I think the review needs to be looked at, and how they arrive at the score they did.
If they stick with such a review, its a warning to all Sony fans in the board.
When the next blockbuster comes out for the Ps3...probably Uncharted, lets see how other sites rated it compared to
GS. If the change is overall and extremely drastic one in scores (cough like 7.5 to 9), it will be time to realize GS reviewers

A:need to be sacked.
B: Jump ship and go to another unbiased reviewing company.

This review is just ridiculous.

No every time GS flops a game that does well everywhere else they are bias. Lair was a universal (almost) flop. GS flopped R&C 7.5 with the average elsewhere being over 9. That's plain out bias.
Lazy_Boy88

How does that make them biased? Not all reviewers share the same opinions: get over it.

[QUOTE="Lazy_Boy88"]No every time GS flops a game that does well everywhere else they are bias. Lair was a universal (almost) flop. GS flopped R&C 7.5 with the average elsewhere being over 9. That's plain out bias. Especially considering the reviewer's main complaint was that it was too easy and has TOO MANY gameplay elements (wtf?). What game isn't easy these days? Halo3 should've got knocked big time if difficulty is now primary criteria..... god damned hypocrits. R&C exclusive to 360 = 9.0.
Gamer46

And that is 100% correct. Too bad lemmings have their heads too far up their butts to figure that out.

Totally agree.

[QUOTE="Lazy_Boy88"]No every time GS flops a game that does well everywhere else they are bias. Lair was a universal (almost) flop. GS flopped R&C 7.5 with the average elsewhere being over 9. That's plain out bias.
Mass_Effect

How does that make them biased? Not all reviewers share the same opinions: get over it.

Dude u get over it, just because u dont own a ps3, doesnt mean we have to take this crap. I mean first off if your going to let anyone rate a game from any gaming site atleast let that person be some1 who enjoys those type games, that way when they rate the game, they can honestly rate it with no bs and also give the good and bads about why he didnt like the game, that way when the game gets rated atleast we would understand because everyone knew he was into platform games. U dont just pick a guy that enjoys sports games and hand him a platformer game and expect him to rate the game good, because like u said, there are different reviewers with different opinions, well thats the same way it goes if u give a sports games lover a platforming game to rate, u think he is going to give it a fair score? No because he isnt into that type of game. Its like giving some1 who is into fps games to rate a final fantasy game, dude I can guarantee u that he will rate it low if he isnt into rpg games because it would be to boring for him.

[QUOTE="Mass_Effect"]

[QUOTE="Lazy_Boy88"]No every time GS flops a game that does well everywhere else they are bias. Lair was a universal (almost) flop. GS flopped R&C 7.5 with the average elsewhere being over 9. That's plain out bias.
squallff8_fan

How does that make them biased? Not all reviewers share the same opinions: get over it.

Dude u get over it, just because u dont own a ps3, doesnt mean we have to take this crap. I mean first off if your going to let anyone rate a game from any gaming site atleast let that person be some1 who enjoys those type games, that way when they rate the game, they can honestly rate it with no bs and also give the good and bads about why he didnt like the game, that way when the game gets rated atleast we would understand because everyone knew he was into platform games. U dont just pick a guy that enjoys sports games and hand him a platformer game and expect him to rate the game good, because like u said, there are different reviewers with different opinions, well thats the same way it goes if u give a sports games lover a platforming game to rate, u think he is going to give it a fair score? No because he isnt into that type of game. Its like giving some1 who is into fps games to rate a final fantasy game, dude I can guarantee u that he will rate it low if he isnt into rpg games because it would be to boring for him.

You can migrate over to the IGN forum if you think there is a problem in GS.

For disgruntled PS3 fans... I think thats the best way to show your displeasure towards GS.

Dude...im still amazed at the score...7.5? So if a game gives you options to do alot, but u r not forced to....it gets marked down? At this point, i think i will have to adjust my MGS4 hype from AAA to B... I would hype it A but these days, its like playing the lotto.-Serpahim-

Too much can take away from the focus of the game. Especially if the variations seem pointless and uninteresting.

I personally can't say its too much or not though...

[QUOTE="squallff8_fan"][QUOTE="Mass_Effect"]

[QUOTE="Lazy_Boy88"]No every time GS flops a game that does well everywhere else they are bias. Lair was a universal (almost) flop. GS flopped R&C 7.5 with the average elsewhere being over 9. That's plain out bias.
animateria

How does that make them biased? Not all reviewers share the same opinions: get over it.

Dude u get over it, just because u dont own a ps3, doesnt mean we have to take this crap. I mean first off if your going to let anyone rate a game from any gaming site atleast let that person be some1 who enjoys those type games, that way when they rate the game, they can honestly rate it with no bs and also give the good and bads about why he didnt like the game, that way when the game gets rated atleast we would understand because everyone knew he was into platform games. U dont just pick a guy that enjoys sports games and hand him a platformer game and expect him to rate the game good, because like u said, there are different reviewers with different opinions, well thats the same way it goes if u give a sports games lover a platforming game to rate, u think he is going to give it a fair score? No because he isnt into that type of game. Its like giving some1 who is into fps games to rate a final fantasy game, dude I can guarantee u that he will rate it low if he isnt into rpg games because it would be to boring for him.

You can migrate over to the IGN forum if you think there is a problem in GS.

For disgruntled PS3 fans... I think thats the best way to show your displeasure towards GS.

I will, dont have to tell me u bill gate di** swanger.