I wonder about the GS reviews

Do you think that the GS reviews are acurate?? What site do you think has the most acurate reviews? There have been some cases that the reviews don't quite = what you would think (aka: NFS Underground 2 (mobile) scored .2 higher then Bioshock, or THPS2 is rated 10/10.) Do you think they are acurate??

PS. This has nothing to do with Bioshock in particular, i simply used that as an example. If this was meant to be about Bioshock i would have asked this in the stickied thread. ;)

tony hawk 3 = 10/10

perfect dark zero = 9/10

metal gear solid 3 = 8.7/10

bioshock = 9/10

NUFF SAID ^^^^^^^^^^^

tony hawk 3 = 10/10

perfect dark zero = 9/10

metal gear solid 3 = 8.7/10

bioshock = 9/10

NUFF SAID ^^^^^^^^^^^

tidus222

8.7 for MGS 3 is laugable.

[QUOTE="tidus222"]

tony hawk 3 = 10/10

perfect dark zero = 9/10

metal gear solid 3 = 8.7/10

bioshock = 9/10

NUFF SAID ^^^^^^^^^^^

majadamus

8.7 for MGS 3 is laugable.

9.1 for warioware

8.8 for TP

and an 8.3 for Majora's mask

WTF

Do you think that the GS reviews are acurate?? What site do you think has the most acurate reviews? There have been some cases that the reviews don't quite = what you would think (aka: NFS Underground 2 (mobile) scored .2 higher then Bioshock, or THPS2 is rated 10/10.) Do you think they are acurate??

PS. This has nothing to do with Bioshock in particular, i simply used that as an example. If this was meant to be about Bioshock i would have asked this in the stickied thread. ;)

snorlaxmaster

Most accurate, IMO, is IGN

IF

you are a fan of the console/game that you are reading the review for. For instance, I have a DS, so if I am interested in buying a DS game, but want to read some reviews first, the review I trust the most is the IGN review because they have departments for specific consoles, and the members of those departments are typically fans of the console, and will give fair grading.

GS doesn't offer this luxury. The thing that made most people mad about the Twilight Princess review was that Jeff wasn't even a fan of the Wii. He had reviewed previous Zelda games, and he is a Zelda fan, yes, but from day 1, he never enjoyed the Wii, and he was TERRIBLE at Wii Sports and everything else he tried. I didn't feel his review was fair because, frankly, I don't trust that he was really any good at the game, and he had consistently expressed distaste for the Wii remote.

A similar thing happened with the MP: Hunters review, where a noob reviewer severely underscored the game and actually made a few critical mistakes in his review, while the preview would have suggested that it would hands-down be the best handheld game ever made.

In short, I don't like GS because you never have a clue who is going to review a game, and their specific tastes might skew them against that game. IGN is a better source for reviews if you're actually interested in purchasing the game.

I agree with their reviews about 95% of the time after playing the games myself which is why I trust them. Bioshock seems to be the business and a 9 sounds indicative of that, the rest is just going to come down to personal experience which is what matters at the end of the day.

[QUOTE="snorlaxmaster"]

Do you think that the GS reviews are acurate?? What site do you think has the most acurate reviews? There have been some cases that the reviews don't quite = what you would think (aka: NFS Underground 2 (mobile) scored .2 higher then Bioshock, or THPS2 is rated 10/10.) Do you think they are acurate??

PS. This has nothing to do with Bioshock in particular, i simply used that as an example. If this was meant to be about Bioshock i would have asked this in the stickied thread. ;)

i_like_pizza

Most accurate, IMO, is IGN

IF

you are a fan of the console/game that you are reading the review for. For instance, I have a DS, so if I am interested in buying a DS game, but want to read some reviews first, the review I trust the most is the IGN review because they have departments for specific consoles, and the members of those departments are typically fans of the console, and will give fair grading.

GS doesn't offer this luxury. The thing that made most people mad about the Twilight Princess review was that Jeff wasn't even a fan of the Wii. He had reviewed previous Zelda games, and he is a Zelda fan, yes, but from day 1, he never enjoyed the Wii, and he was TERRIBLE at Wii Sports and everything else he tried. I didn't feel his review was fair because, frankly, I don't trust that he was really any good at the game, and he had consistently expressed distaste for the Wii remote.

A similar thing happened with the MP: Hunters review, where a noob reviewer severely underscored the game and actually made a few critical mistakes in his review, while the preview would have suggested that it would hands-down be the best handheld game ever made.

In short, I don't like GS because you never have a clue who is going to review a game, and their specific tastes might skew them against that game. IGN is a better source for reviews if you're actually interested in purchasing the game.

That's aa good point. With a review system where each system has its own team of reviewers, it would be more fair.

gamespot reviews are probobly the best ive seen, ign at a close second. All other reviewers i dont trust too much-PS360-

You should have a look at gamerankings. ;)