I typed of the 10/10 OXM bioshock review

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

jigglebilly1983

I dont think bioshock is being produced by microsoft....

[QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

yahoomail

I dont think bioshock is being produced by microsoft....

Read it more carefully. OXM, the people who wrote the review, are pretty much on M$ payroll. thats why its the OFFICIAL xbox magazine. Official single console game publications pretty much ALWAYS score games higher than other multi-platform publications or websites.

[QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

yahoomail

I dont think bioshock is being produced by microsoft....

Yeah it isn't.

[QUOTE="yahoomail"][QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

jigglebilly1983

I dont think bioshock is being produced by microsoft....

Read it more carefully. OXM, the people who wrote the review, are pretty much on M$ payroll. thats why its the OFFICIAL xbox magazine. Official single console game publications pretty much ALWAYS score games higher than other multi-platform publications or websites.

Is that why Fight Night Round 3 got a 10 there?

EDIT: crap double post

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

jigglebilly1983

[QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"][QUOTE="yahoomail"][QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

tmatte

I dont think bioshock is being produced by microsoft....

Read it more carefully. OXM, the people who wrote the review, are pretty much on M$ payroll. thats why its the OFFICIAL xbox magazine. Official single console game publications pretty much ALWAYS score games higher than other multi-platform publications or websites.

Is that why Fight Night Round 3 got a 10 there?

pretty much yeah.

Who cares what a MS funded magazine gives for a score on a game that is appearing on their console???? NOT I

Thats not to say that the game wont be great.... to be honest, I really am reserving judgement after seeing a few reviews from more credible sources first.

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

jigglebilly1983

True but PC Gamer UK gave it 95%, 1% less then their highest rated games of all time.. And they are by no means on any payroll that would make them bias on one way or the other.

[QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

foxhound_fox

Man you guys need to learn to read! please point out to me where in my post i said that BioShcock was a M$ Game? me sayingOXM being on M$ payrol does not equate to that. OXM is the OFFICIAL xbox magazine, they ONLY review XBOX 360 games and ONLY report on XBOX 360 news with the APPROVAL OF M$. the same could have been said for OPM before it died. Official game publications are more often than not more biased to review their games better than their multi-platform brethren like Play, EGM, and Gamespot.

[QUOTE="yahoomail"][QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"][QUOTE="foxhound_fox"][QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

yahoomail

Man you guys need to learn to read! please point out to me where in my post i said that BioShcock was a M$ Game? me sayingOXM being on M$ payrol does not equate to that. OXM is the OFFICIAL xbox magazine, they ONLY review XBOX 360 games and ONLY report on XBOX 360 news with the APPROVAL OF M$. the same could have been said for OPM before it died. Official game publications are more often than not more biased to review their games better than their multi-platform brethren like Play, EGM, and Gamespot.

True but PC Gamer UK gave it 95%, 1% less then their highest rated games of all time.. And they are by no means on any payroll that would make them bias on one way or the other.

Hey, even if they do HAVE to score it higher.....everyone else seems to like it...

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

jigglebilly1983

BioShock is nothing to do with microsoft and no, they are not paid by microsoft at all. >_>

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"][QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

jigglebilly1983

Man you guys need to learn to read! please point out to me where in my post i said that BioShcock was a M$ Game? me sayingOXM being on M$ payrol does not equate to that. OXM is the OFFICIAL xbox magazine, they ONLY review XBOX 360 games and ONLY report on XBOX 360 news with the APPROVAL OF M$. the same could have been said for OPM before it died. Official game publications are more often than not more biased to review their games better than their multi-platform brethren like Play, EGM, and Gamespot.

By your logic..they should have scored all other sharing platform games with a biased opinion..Since thats not the case (Fight Night) your point is bunk.

[QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

Ninja-Vox

BioShock is nothing to do with microsoft and no, they are not paid by microsoft at all. >_>

Yeah, but OXM does and is.

[QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

Ninja-Vox

BioShock is nothing to do with microsoft and no, they are not paid by microsoft at all. >_>

I fail to see how you do not see a connection to it.. Isn't it beneficial for Microsoft to give a good review to a highly acclaimed game that is being released for the Xbox360 the only console system that will have the game.. And being released on the PC which is for windows, a OS platform that is devolped by Microsoft.. Don't you think it would be beneficial for them to hype the game a bit to get sales in the system>?

[QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

foxhound_fox

Get a clue, Its exclusive to 360 so yes MS has an advantage to hype it for console sales.

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

jigglebilly1983

[QUOTE="Ninja-Vox"][QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

jigglebilly1983

BioShock is nothing to do with microsoft and no, they are not paid by microsoft at all. >_>

Yeah, but OXM does and is.

Explain to me how deliberately scoring bioshock highly is beneficial to microsoft. If the game blows and people buy it because of the score, they will only become annoyed at the poor review and not buy the magazine anymore. And microsoft do not pay the writers of the magazine. It is the other way round. The magazine writers are independent and are owned by a publishing company which pays microsoft a cut of their profit in exchange for being the OFFICIAL magazine.

Jeez...

[QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

whocares4peace

[QUOTE="whocares4peace"][QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

Blanco98

PC GAMING UK scored it 95%, 1% lower than thier highest scored game ever.

[QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"][QUOTE="foxhound_fox"][QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

Pro_wrestler

Man you guys need to learn to read! please point out to me where in my post i said that BioShcock was a M$ Game? me sayingOXM being on M$ payrol does not equate to that. OXM is the OFFICIAL xbox magazine, they ONLY review XBOX 360 games and ONLY report on XBOX 360 news with the APPROVAL OF M$. the same could have been said for OPM before it died. Official game publications are more often than not more biased to review their games better than their multi-platform brethren like Play, EGM, and Gamespot.

By your logic..they should have scored all other sharing platform games with a biased opinion..Since thats not the case (Fight Night) your point is bunk.

Out of everyone who reviwed the xbox 360 version of FNr3, they are the only people to give it a 10 or the equivalent there of. Bunked. sorry but no.

[QUOTE="Blanco98"][QUOTE="whocares4peace"][QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

yahoomail

PC GAMING UK scored it 95%, 1% lower than thier highest scored game ever.

omg lyk dats cuz da pc writers are HERMITS!!!111111oneshift

I fail to see how you do not see a connection to it.. Isn't it beneficial for Microsoft to give a good review to a highly acclaimed game that is being released for the Xbox360 the only console system that will have the game.. And being released on the PC which is for windows, a OS platform that is devolped by Microsoft.. Don't you think it would be beneficial for them to hype the game a bit to get sales in the system>?

sSubZerOo

BioShock is not a system seller. No, sorry guys but you're just wrong here. Microsoft does not pay to have games reviewed higher. A) That wouldn't work at all as people would simply buy the game, be disappointed, and never listen to another OXM review again and B) All other reviews will conflict this one if they have indeed scored it highly becase they were bribed, and it would be incredibly obvious that that is the case.

If microsoft are an evil company which bribe people to write good reviews, Crackdown would not have received a mediocre score, or shadowrun a pretty bad score for that matter. That was a microsoft games studios game for crying out loud.

[QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"][QUOTE="Ninja-Vox"][QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

Ninja-Vox

BioShock is nothing to do with microsoft and no, they are not paid by microsoft at all. >_>

Yeah, but OXM does and is.

Explain to me how deliberately scoring bioshock highly is beneficial to microsoft. If the game blows and people buy it because of the score, they will only become annoyed at the poor review and not buy the magazine anymore. And microsoft do not pay the writers of the magazine. It is the other way round. The magazine writers are independent and are owned by a publishing company which pays microsoft a cut of their profit in exchange for being the OFFICIAL magazine.

Jeez...

The writers and editors are still lemms at heart. whatever way the business works, how can you expect an honest review from a magazine that only caters to one audience of people. Besides, unless things have changed, in addition to payin M$ money, they also have to let M$ approve a great deal of the content as well before the issue goes to press.

[QUOTE="yahoomail"]

[QUOTE="Blanco98"][QUOTE="whocares4peace"][QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

tmatte

PC GAMING UK scored it 95%, 1% lower than thier highest scored game ever.

omg lyk dats cuz da pc writers are HERMITS!!!111111oneshift

first off, learn to type, second, WTF, r u saying only gaming mags like EGM and gameinformer are allowed to give high scores and mean it? Just because a mag only does xbox or only pc doesn't mean thier biased, infact its a better review because they are comparing pc to pc or xbox to xbox , not ps3 to xbox.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

I fail to see how you do not see a connection to it.. Isn't it beneficial for Microsoft to give a good review to a highly acclaimed game that is being released for the Xbox360 the only console system that will have the game.. And being released on the PC which is for windows, a OS platform that is devolped by Microsoft.. Don't you think it would be beneficial for them to hype the game a bit to get sales in the system>?

Ninja-Vox

, Crackdown would not have received a mediocre score, or shadowrun a pretty bad score for that matter. That was a microsoft games studios game for crying out loud.

yeah, but sometimes you cant hide the mediocrity with a sugar coating.

first off, learn to type, second, WTF, r u saying only gaming mags like EGM and gameinformer are allowed to give high scores and mean it? Just because a mag only does xbox or only pc doesn't mean thier biased, infact its a better review because they are comparing pc to pc or xbox to xbox , not ps3 to xbox.

*sigh* first off, he was being sarcastic. secondly, no it doesnt make for better reviews.

Out of everyone who reviwed the xbox 360 version of FNr3, they are the only people to give it a 10 or the equivalent there of. Bunked. sorry but no.

jigglebilly1983

Wrong again; if you actually READ the review, it gets a 10 because it's the perfect boxing game. They say quite clearly several times that if you are not a fan of boxing, the game is definately not for you. You cannot act just on scores.

[QUOTE="Ninja-Vox"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

I fail to see how you do not see a connection to it.. Isn't it beneficial for Microsoft to give a good review to a highly acclaimed game that is being released for the Xbox360 the only console system that will have the game.. And being released on the PC which is for windows, a OS platform that is devolped by Microsoft.. Don't you think it would be beneficial for them to hype the game a bit to get sales in the system>?

jigglebilly1983

, Crackdown would not have received a mediocre score, or shadowrun a pretty bad score for that matter. That was a microsoft games studios game for crying out loud.

yeah, but sometimes you cant hide the mediocrity with a sugar coating.

i hate people like you, big corporations are not out to lie to you about videos games. It does them no good, because at the end of the day, gamestop makes themost profit with trad-ins.:P

Wow...so many opinions (mostly unfounded and more bias then the opinion they were talking about) about a matter that doesn't directly effect them. System Wars rules *sniff*.

Alternative Press - 5/5 Stars

OXM - 10/10

PC Gamer UK - 95%

[QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

Out of everyone who reviwed the xbox 360 version of FNr3, they are the only people to give it a 10 or the equivalent there of. Bunked. sorry but no.

Ninja-Vox

Wrong again; if you actually READ the review, it gets a 10 because it's the perfect boxing game. They say quite clearly several times that if you are not a fan of boxing, the game is definately not for you. You cannot act just on scores.

if it was so perfect how come more people dint give it a perfect score as well?

[QUOTE="whocares4peace"][QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]

OXM = no credibility cuz they are on M$ payroll. Not that i dont doubt it wont get eh same score elsewheres. im really excited for this game.

Blanco98

Btw, its gotten more than 1 review, 95% at PC gamer

If they would overrate games, it would be a disservice to their readers and the readers would abandon the mag after a couple of misleading reviews.

[QUOTE="Ninja-Vox"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

I fail to see how you do not see a connection to it.. Isn't it beneficial for Microsoft to give a good review to a highly acclaimed game that is being released for the Xbox360 the only console system that will have the game.. And being released on the PC which is for windows, a OS platform that is devolped by Microsoft.. Don't you think it would be beneficial for them to hype the game a bit to get sales in the system>?

jigglebilly1983

, Crackdown would not have received a mediocre score, or shadowrun a pretty bad score for that matter. That was a microsoft games studios game for crying out loud.

yeah, but sometimes you cant hide the mediocrity with a sugar coating.

Sorry, you're just wrong. You're accusing microsoft of paying off reviewers to give a higher score; and this isn't even a microsoft game. Two microsoft PUBLISHED games both scored 7.0 and 6.0 respectively; mediocre scores and lower than what any multi-format reviewers awarded. So you have no point. They are not paid by microsoft at all.

[QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"][QUOTE="Ninja-Vox"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

I fail to see how you do not see a connection to it.. Isn't it beneficial for Microsoft to give a good review to a highly acclaimed game that is being released for the Xbox360 the only console system that will have the game.. And being released on the PC which is for windows, a OS platform that is devolped by Microsoft.. Don't you think it would be beneficial for them to hype the game a bit to get sales in the system>?

Ninja-Vox

, Crackdown would not have received a mediocre score, or shadowrun a pretty bad score for that matter. That was a microsoft games studios game for crying out loud.

yeah, but sometimes you cant hide the mediocrity with a sugar coating.

Sorry, you're just wrong. You're accusing microsoft of paying off reviewers to give a higher score; and this isn't even a microsoft game. Two microsoft PUBLISHED games both scored 7.0 and 6.0 respectively; mediocre scores and lower than what any multi-format reviewers awarded. So you have no point. They are not paid by microsoft at all.

I never said Payed off. I said they were on the M$ payroll. one is underhanded, the other is not. any which way it works, does it really change the fact that OXM scores and OPM scores are universally pretty much not acknowledged here on SW for the core reason of them being the OFFICIAL magazines?

I never said Payed off. I said they were on the M$ payroll. one is underhanded, the other is not. any which way it works, does it really change the fact that OXM scores and OPM scores are universally pretty much not acknowledged here on SW for the core reason of them being the OFFICIAL magazines?

jigglebilly1983

No, just you. So stop with the nonsense. You've been proven wrong now let it go. They aren't even paid by microsoft. You're completely wrong. They have no reason to give the game a higher review at all; they haven't done so in the past, and aren't starting now. Especially when it isn't even a microsoft game.

Also, PC Gamer gave it 95%; are they being paid to sell more PCs too? :roll: