every time a game flops, gamespot is biased or unreliable

[QUOTE="ljlrj"][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.

Gamer46

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.

well 2 bad

[QUOTE="Gamer46"][QUOTE="ljlrj"][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.

well 2 bad

I don't think its much a loss to not play the game... With all these great games coming out this Q4.

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.0rin

The problem is this. Nobody considered the possibility that it might be that the other sites overrated it just to avoid THIS!!!

And when Mario Galaxy gets 8.5, all hell, rightfully so, will break loose again. There's just no way that game can be anything lower than 9.5, no way. But, this is GS and if there's no gun in it, there's no good review.bretthorror

Again, you have made up your mind what the game should score before it has been finished or anyone has played longer than an hour. Yet somehow when Gamespot has fully played through the game and their score happens to not meet you preconceptions, they are the ones who are biased?

sigh.

[QUOTE="bretthorror"]And when Mario Galaxy gets 8.5, all hell, rightfully so, will break loose again. There's just no way that game can be anything lower than 9.5, no way. But, this is GS and if there's no gun in it, there's no good review.cakeorrdeath

Again, you have made up your mind what the game should score before it has been finished or anyone has played longer than an hour. Yet somehow when Gamespot has fully played through the game and their score happens to not meet you preconceptions, they are the ones who are biased?

sigh.

Trust me, come November 12, I will have played it and then I will back this up and if it didn't pan out to be great, I would totally retract my statement. I'm throwing around a number that the game is obviously going to get. You know it and I know it. You use this excuse of people not having played the games yet every time someone posts a dis on GS reviews here, but whenever someone steps up and says "well, then, look at games that I have played, Twilight Princess getting shafted, look at Metroid Prime 3 getting screwed, etc..." you say it's a matter of opinion. That's fine except that the fallback is exactly the same every time and the proof is in the pudding. It's happened twice already, so there's a good chance it'll happen again. There just aren't bad games in the main games of these franchises and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that SMG can't possibly be worse than Sunshine, which got an 8 here and averages 91.6% (109th of all time) on GR. I'm merely predicting the future and if it's anything like my MP3 (8.5) and TP (9) predictions, it's going to be correct or very close.

Saying I haven't played the game yet is an easy, easy way out of a discussion because I can't refute it. But, it really does nothing to back your argument when I do play the game and feel the same, such as in the two instances above.

Would you honestly put your money down on SMG not being amazing?

Would you honestly put your money down on SMG not being amazing?

bretthorror

No and I wouldn't have put my money on lair being poor either.

The point is you are deciding gamespot review is wrong before you, they or anyone else for that matter has had a prolonged period with the game. Or they have even given it a score!

This suggests to me that you may be somewhat predisposed to liking the game.

[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._Tobli_

The problem is this. Nobody considered the possibility that it might be that the other sites overrated it just to avoid THIS!!!

Yes, and we could believe that 911 was a result of terrorist attacks or sum mass conspiracy within the US government to keeps its citizens under complete control and thus start a war that would break fragile bonds, and allow the US to gain oil, thus securing the US's oil needs for the decades to come. Both are possible, but most people would rather just take Occam's Razor. Its alot easier for gamespot to be wrong than for there to be a conspiracy amongst every other gaming website who are secretly afraid of forum posters, and gamspot is the last bastion of reviewing integrity. Therefore the simpler explanation is more plausible.