Gamespot going soft on reviews?

So basically if crisis core had gotten a lower score people could have created "teh flop" threads. Now its been given AAA its a different matter.carlisledavid79

Well no. Not to me anyways. But the average score before Gamespot was an 8.5. Remember when Twilight Princess launched with the Wii and everyone was giving it a 9 or better. And then Gamespot dropped a lower number and was much harder than others on the game. This isn't about crisis core specifically but its just another example. Brawl and No More Heroes could be others.

I think they've been very soft with many games..and harsh with others.

Brawl in recent memory IMO was rated leniently for example, especially following the other SSB reviews.

[QUOTE="carlisledavid79"]So basically if crisis core had gotten a lower score people could have created "teh flop" threads. Now its been given AAA its a different matter.GoldenElementXL

Well no. Not to me anyways. But the average score before Gamespot was an 8.5. Remember when Twilight Princess launched with the Wii and everyone was giving it a 9 or better. And then Gamespot dropped a lower number and was much harder than others on the game. This isn't about crisis core specifically but its just another example. Brawl and No More Heroes could be others.

At the end of the day like pretty much every review out there, it comes down to the reviewers opinion. One mans 7.0 is another mans 9.0 (and so on)

Nothing seems really out of whack ......... No More Heroes was a surprise AAA and Assassins Creed was overrated , but other than that they have just underrated some games here and there like Ratchet and Clank.

mm, what if the hyped games do deserve the AAA..
but i do get your point.. but i don't think GS would drop the bomb on their title of being a well-known review site
by automatically giving hyped games AAA..

All of the games that have scored high lately seem to have been well deserving. Which of the games is their scoring noticably higher than the average those games have been getting?Dreams-Visions

Smash Bros. :)

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]All of the games that have scored high lately seem to have been well deserving. Which of the games is their scoring noticably higher than the average those games have been getting?Cute_Red_Panda

Smash Bros. :)

SSBB is 94.9% on GR. And the score might even have been lower given the .5 ranking system. It could have been higher too, but it is still well within the range of the average.

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]All of the games that have scored high lately seem to have been well deserving. Which of the games is their scoring noticably higher than the average those games have been getting?Cute_Red_Panda

Smash Bros. :)

Have you played Brawl yet? I have its easy to pick up and play and yet manages to have incredible depth and is just plain fun. Also with all its unlockables and many other reasons for people to come back and play it absolutley deseves what it got

[QUOTE="Cute_Red_Panda"]

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]All of the games that have scored high lately seem to have been well deserving. Which of the games is their scoring noticably higher than the average those games have been getting?Jimmi323

Smash Bros. :)

SSBB is 94.9% on GR. And the score might even have been lower given the .5 ranking system. It could have been higher too, but it is still well within the range of the average.

I was kidding...Look at Dreamvision sig. Heez...

[QUOTE="Jimmi323"][QUOTE="Cute_Red_Panda"]

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]All of the games that have scored high lately seem to have been well deserving. Which of the games is their scoring noticably higher than the average those games have been getting?Cute_Red_Panda

Smash Bros. :)

SSBB is 94.9% on GR. And the score might even have been lower given the .5 ranking system. It could have been higher too, but it is still well within the range of the average.

I was kidding...Look at Dreamvision sig. Heez...

Sorry... The sarcasm went right over my head.

[QUOTE="Jimmi323"][QUOTE="Cute_Red_Panda"]

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]All of the games that have scored high lately seem to have been well deserving. Which of the games is their scoring noticably higher than the average those games have been getting?Cute_Red_Panda

Smash Bros. :)

SSBB is 94.9% on GR. And the score might even have been lower given the .5 ranking system. It could have been higher too, but it is still well within the range of the average.

I was kidding...Look at Dreamvision sig. Heez...

;) win.

The change in the review system is kind of what is doing this. There are only so many ways that a game can be classified, and given the recent hiccoughs that GS has had, their scoring table really needs an adjustment. Bioshock wasn't worthy of a 9.0, and neither was Metroid Prime 3.....

Wait, who really cares about review scores anyway?

after learing GS takes cash, more people pay em nowZe_ALEX

At least we have giantbomb.com for our harsh-yet-true reviews. :)

haha if this is the case GOW Co would have been AAA

ME would have been AAA

Ratchet would have been AAA

madden would get AAAA

When gertsmann (spelling?) left, a lot of this site's credibility left. I assumed that all those willing to sellout stayed. So since they were trying to sell reviews, i'm assuming they are doing it now. What's to stop them? The writers with dignity for their professions already left. Only sellouts $$$ stayed. Or those who really can't leave and need the $$$ from this company to survive.grandlx2

So--just to clarify--you think Aaron, myself, Justin, Brian, and our freelancers are sellouts, rather than believing in a site that fantastic people like Greg and Jeff (and existing staff like Ricardo and Ryan M.) worked so hard to build?

The change in the review system is kind of what is doing this. There are only so many ways that a game can be classified, and given the recent hiccoughs that GS has had, their scoring table really needs an adjustment. Bioshock wasn't worthy of a 9.0, and neither was Metroid Prime 3.....

Wait, who really cares about review scores anyway?

i_like_pizza

Metroid Prime 3 didn't get a 9.0. I should know.

This is why I liked the X.X rating system more than the .5 scale

Games that are good, but not really AAA don't get a free pass in the X.X system. Score an 8.8, it means you have a great game but it's just not quite there.

Score a 7.7, means you have a great concept that needs some work but is overall well done.

For some reason just rounding and making it in .5 intervals seems like a cop out for really saying how the games are.

I don't mind the .5 intervals but I do miss the X.X ratings. They just seemed right and GS and IGN were the only ones really using them.

But either way, a great game is a great game.

I guess what Im trying to say is the old review system seemed very very precise while this is a little more based around rounding. But it may be easier for the editors to do it the new way, and there's nothing wrong with that.

[QUOTE="grandlx2"]When gertsmann (spelling?) left, a lot of this site's credibility left. I assumed that all those willing to sellout stayed. So since they were trying to sell reviews, i'm assuming they are doing it now. What's to stop them? The writers with dignity for their professions already left. Only sellouts $$$ stayed. Or those who really can't leave and need the $$$ from this company to survive.Kevin-V

So--just to clarify--you think Aaron, myself, Justin, Brian, and our freelancers are sellouts, rather than believing in a site that fantastic people like Greg and Jeff (and existing staff like Ricardo and Ryan M.) worked so hard to build?

You are talking to people who probably don't even read reviews, just look at the scores.

[QUOTE="Kevin-V"]

[QUOTE="grandlx2"]When gertsmann (spelling?) left, a lot of this site's credibility left. I assumed that all those willing to sellout stayed. So since they were trying to sell reviews, i'm assuming they are doing it now. What's to stop them? The writers with dignity for their professions already left. Only sellouts $$$ stayed. Or those who really can't leave and need the $$$ from this company to survive.II-FBIsniper-II

So--just to clarify--you think Aaron, myself, Justin, Brian, and our freelancers are sellouts, rather than believing in a site that fantastic people like Greg and Jeff (and existing staff like Ricardo and Ryan M.) worked so hard to build?

You are talking to people who probably don't even read reviews, just look at the scores.

In SW, reviews are just a number, which is sad, because there are some great game journalists on every website who probably get thier score and first paragraph read, and nothing else. Then those people go and say they have informed opinions. If there's one thing I've learned as a student journalist, it's read everything.

[QUOTE="Kevin-V"]

[QUOTE="grandlx2"]When gertsmann (spelling?) left, a lot of this site's credibility left. I assumed that all those willing to sellout stayed. So since they were trying to sell reviews, i'm assuming they are doing it now. What's to stop them? The writers with dignity for their professions already left. Only sellouts $$$ stayed. Or those who really can't leave and need the $$$ from this company to survive.II-FBIsniper-II

So--just to clarify--you think Aaron, myself, Justin, Brian, and our freelancers are sellouts, rather than believing in a site that fantastic people like Greg and Jeff (and existing staff like Ricardo and Ryan M.) worked so hard to build?

You are talking to people who probably don't even read reviews, just look at the scores.

I was going to make a topic about this as well but yeah they are getting soft because the new review system allows for it, eg. a game with a score of 8.8 is now 9/10 but if you ask me it's the new reviewers I mean look at Kevin Van Ord, so many AAA's from him and higher than should be scores.

I was going to make a topic about this as well but yeah they are getting soft because the new review system allows for it, eg. a game with a score of 8.8 is now 9/10 but if you ask me it's the new reviewers I mean look at Kevin Van Ord, so many AAA's from him and higher than should be scores.

St_muscat

If Jeff had given Crisis Core a 9 I bet this thread would not have been made.

[QUOTE="St_muscat"]

I was going to make a topic about this as well but yeah they are getting soft because the new review system allows for it, eg. a game with a score of 8.8 is now 9/10 but if you ask me it's the new reviewers I mean look at Kevin Van Ord, so many AAA's from him and higher than should be scores.

rocktimusprime

If Jeff had given Crisis Core a 9 I bet this thread would not have been made.

Yeah it wouldn't have but I'm also talking about Assassins creed and No More Heroes as well, NMH was a great original game but it had some major flaws (terrible over world which was like a hub but then way to big for a hub) and IMO a rushed and kinda crap last level (rank 1). Assassins well repetitive is the word. There not bad games and they are probably more like AA games instead of AAA to me and a lot of other reviewers (gamerankings). But nothing against Kevin V he is a good reviewer its just that sometimes he's way to harsh (SCL) and then sometimes way to forgiving/not harsh enough NMH and AC.

[QUOTE="rocktimusprime"][QUOTE="St_muscat"]

I was going to make a topic about this as well but yeah they are getting soft because the new review system allows for it, eg. a game with a score of 8.8 is now 9/10 but if you ask me it's the new reviewers I mean look at Kevin Van Ord, so many AAA's from him and higher than should be scores.

St_muscat

If Jeff had given Crisis Core a 9 I bet this thread would not have been made.

Yeah it wouldn't have but I'm also talking about Assassins creed and No More Heroes as well, NMH was a great original game but it had some major flaws (terrible over world which was like a hub but then way to big for a hub) and IMO a rushed and kinda crap last level (rank 1). Assassins well repetitive is the word. There not bad games and they are probably more like AA games instead of AAA to me and a lot of other reviewers (gamerankings). But nothing against Kevin V he is a good reviewer its just that sometimes he's way to harsh (SCL) and then sometimes way to forgiving/not harsh enough NMH and AC.

Same thing though. If Jeff had given AC and NMH 9's they would be reverred as the word of god.

Reviews are the opinion of one editor. If you don't like the review, nobody says you have to agree (unless your trying to own in SW....) I feel that more and more we see the current reviewers getting bashed just because they aren't Jeff G, or Ryan Davis, or Alex Navarro.

[QUOTE="St_muscat"][QUOTE="rocktimusprime"][QUOTE="St_muscat"]

I was going to make a topic about this as well but yeah they are getting soft because the new review system allows for it, eg. a game with a score of 8.8 is now 9/10 but if you ask me it's the new reviewers I mean look at Kevin Van Ord, so many AAA's from him and higher than should be scores.

rocktimusprime

If Jeff had given Crisis Core a 9 I bet this thread would not have been made.

Yeah it wouldn't have but I'm also talking about Assassins creed and No More Heroes as well, NMH was a great original game but it had some major flaws (terrible over world which was like a hub but then way to big for a hub) and IMO a rushed and kinda crap last level (rank 1). Assassins well repetitive is the word. There not bad games and they are probably more like AA games instead of AAA to me and a lot of other reviewers (gamerankings). But nothing against Kevin V he is a good reviewer its just that sometimes he's way to harsh (SCL) and then sometimes way to forgiving/not harsh enough NMH and AC.

Same thing though. If Jeff had given AC and NMH 9's they would be reverred as the word of god.

Reviews are the opinion of one editor. If you don't like the review, nobody says you have to agree (unless your trying to own in SW....) I feel that more and more we see the current reviewers getting bashed just because they aren't Jeff G, or Ryan Davis, or Alex Navarro.

But would they have given those games AAA? probably not, but yeah then they wouldn't have gotten bashed for it so I agree with you on that. But I believe that the old reviewers wouldn't have given all of these games AAA, but nothing against the now reviewers.

well theres always game informer....Arclight_Blue

LOL IMO game informer is terrible.

Well on the PS3 game reviews absolutely not, ginig them low scores but the game is just awesome. On the XBOX 360 games, ABSOLUTELY.

[QUOTE="Arclight_Blue"]well theres always game informer....St_muscat

LOL IMO game informer is terrible.

[QUOTE="carlisledavid79"]So basically if crisis core had gotten a lower score people could have created "teh flop" threads. Now its been given AAA its a different matter.GoldenElementXL

the real issue is inconsistancy, they give halo 3 9.5 BRAWL 9.5 but then give R&C 7.5! and ME 8.5.

CCFFVII is a decent game but it isn't a AAA game. maybe they are comapring it to the rest of the psp library. id give it an 8.5 which is alot scince i usualy don't like FF games.

Well no. Not to me anyways. But the average score before Gamespot was an 8.5. Remember when Twilight Princess launched with the Wii and everyone was giving it a 9 or better. And then Gamespot dropped a lower number and was much harder than others on the game. This isn't about crisis core specifically but its just another example. Brawl and No More Heroes could be others.