IGN's Madden 08 Score Should teach us All a Good Lesson on Standards......

With Ign recently reviewing the game for the 360, PS3 and Wii, it's been a little chaotic here on System Wars.

Given that the 360 version scored 8.7, the Wii version 8.5 and the PS3 version a 7.9 (?), many people, particularly the Wii fanboys, have been going around saying the PS3 version is the worst one. Just by looking at the scores, you might agree with them, but these scores shouldn't be taken at face value.

Unlike last-gen where all the consoles were pretty much similar in power, this gen is very different. Whereas the 360 and PS3 do pretty much have the same specs, the Wii is in a different league of its own. This is the reason why, when scoring games, the 360/PS3 use a different standard system than the one used for the Wii. There is no debating this - the reviewers themselves have stated this. Now with that out of the way, it's time for the serious poop.

The Wii version scored higher than the PS3 version but does that mean it's better than the PS3 version? Not necessarily. In fact, the answer is a big NO. No one can deny that the Xbox360 version is the superior version, the one recommended by IGN for serious Madden fans. Now, for those that say the PS3 version is the suckiest of the three, how could that be trueif it is pretty much identical to the 360 version (the superior version), which the Wii version is less identical to? IGN didn't say the PS3 version was inferior to the Wii version, so how is it inferior? Using thatlogic, if the PS3 version is inferior to the Wii version, then so is the Xbox 360 version. The truth is that the Wii version is most likely the worst of the three (IGN had a lot of complaints), but because it is scored using lower standards, its score was inflated. As a matter fact, because of its lower standards, all Wii scores are inflated when compared to the 360/PS3. To use the scores at face value is pretty unfair to the 360/PS3 games, which are graded harder. An 8.5 score on the Wii is not an 8.5 score on the 360/PS3 - it's will be lower. Here is something to think about:

An 8 year-old gets an A on his grade three exam, but a 25 year old scores a B on his college exam and another one scores an A -- just by looking at the test scores and the difficulty of the tests, rank the smartness of the three individuals.

To say the Wii version is superior to the PS3 version is to say it's also superior to the Xbox 360 version, if not equal.

Stop taking scores at face value. This is not last-gen when it made more sense. For this gen, it only makes more sense if you do so for the 360, PS3, and even PC. But the Wii is very far from being on par when it comes to standards.

The last time I checked, 8.5 was greater than 7.9

Numbers don't lie on SW

Yes, standards need apply. And also you're going to hear that "only GS matters".

We can never compare the scores of any PS3/360 games to the scores of Wii games because they are graded on a different standard scale like you said. It doesn't make sense.

The last time I checked, 8.5 was greater than 7.9

Numbers don't lie on SW

i_like_pizza

If you read my post, you wouldn't be saying that.

Ok here is what I think how it goes

PS3 has a higher graphical Standard than the Xbox360, so a 10 for graphics on the 360 is like a 8 for graphics on the PS3.

For the Wii, they don't consider graphics, so they only base it on gameplay and how well it works with the Wii mote.

why dont you go to ign then if you love it so much?bulletmath

What does that have to do with anything?

Ok here is what I think how it goes

PS3 has a higher graphical Standard than the Xbox360, so a 10 for graphics on the 360 is like a 8 for graphics on the PS3.

For the Wii, they don't consider graphics, so they only base it on gameplay and how well it works with the Wii mote.

SoFreeSoNew12

Way to simplfy things, lol. When scoring Wii games, they don't put it up against 360/PS3 games, period, in both graphics and CPU-related aspects. If they did, most Wii games would score less than 5 (considering how low they score already). Zelda TP would have scored lower than an 8.8.

Ok here is what I think how it goes

PS3 has a higher graphical Standard than the Xbox360, so a 10 for graphics on the 360 is like a 8 for graphics on the PS3.

SoFreeSoNew12

What the hell? how'd you figure that? Madden 360 runs 2x the framerate as the PS3 version. DOUBLE. and as an owner of both, these games are not being held to different standards on different systems.

The wii, however, is not held to the expectations of the other 2, so it's judged in a vaccum, I think. that's fine, though.

ppl should forget just the scores and read the reviews.

also don't make it sound like only wii fans do this. i remember sony and ms fans saying that the GC version of Zelda TP scored higher so its better when the actual review clearly stated otherwise.

I think its clear that Gamespot's new review system's scores (in real world terms and for system wars use) are incapable of being used for comparison ofmultiplat games. It's pretty bad. I thought that the "medals" or whatever would help the issue out....but the PS3 and 360 version receive the same medlals.

The whole thing is a damn joke.

The PS3 version isn't as good as the 360 version and then the Wii is something different. Ergo: Don't get the PS3 version if you have either 360 or Wii.braydee1234

No. Don't get the PS3 version if you have a 360; get the PS3 version if you have a Wii. The PS3 version and Wii version are held at different standards, and because the PS3 version is pretty much identical to the 360 version, to think the Wii version is better than the 360 version is to think that it is also better than the 360 version, which it isn't.

An 8 year-old gets an A on his pre-school exam, but a 25 year old scores a B on his college exam and another one scores an A+ -- just by looking at the test scores and the difficulty of the tests, rank the smartness of the three individuals.emawk

[QUOTE="braydee1234"]The PS3 version isn't as good as the 360 version and then the Wii is something different. Ergo: Don't get the PS3 version if you have either 360 or Wii.emawk

No. Don't get the PS3 version if you have a 360; get the PS3 version if you have a Wii. The PS3 version and Wii version are held at different standards, and because the PS3 version is pretty much identical to the 360 version, to think the Wii version is better than the 360 version is to think that it is also better than the 360 version, which it isn't.

nope, the PS3 version isnt "pretty much the same" as the 360 version, the score shows that and if you want to go into more detail then read the negative parts. therefore thinking the wii version is better then the PS3 version doesnt mean that its also better then the 360 version.

Standars my butt. Its a known fact that Madden for PS2 and Xbox were superior then PS3 and 360 thus why The Madden Challenge was also on the original Xbox and not 360. Its not a coincidence that the xbox and PS2 versions outscored the PS3 and 360 versions. Standards are one thing but a whole .5 difference is another thing.Blackbond

What if the madden challenge was on those systems because that was the most convenient route. It takes time for the tournament to adjust to next-gen standards. You have to give the players time to prepare. I read the rewiew for the 07 version; if I remember correctly, they said the 360 version was the biggest improvement over the previous iteration (but I could be wrong). Read the rewiews; stop take scores at their face value. The 360/PS3 have different standards than the Xbox/PS2 and Wii.

The only lesson this teaches me is that IGN took the 30 vs 60 FPS system warz BS too far in the review. There is no way that it is game breaking that it is running at 30 FPS on PS3. Last years 360 Madden ran at 30 FPS yet it recieved an 8.5. This years core game is much improved framerate aside for PS3.

The only people who would notice or care are people who own both systems and are deciding between the 2. I cant see this being a majority of PS3 owners.

BTW you cant use IGN scores for ownage here....remember.

[QUOTE="emawk"]

[QUOTE="braydee1234"]The PS3 version isn't as good as the 360 version and then the Wii is something different. Ergo: Don't get the PS3 version if you have either 360 or Wii.reyad-u

No. Don't get the PS3 version if you have a 360; get the PS3 version if you have a Wii. The PS3 version and Wii version are held at different standards, and because the PS3 version is pretty much identical to the 360 version, to think the Wii version is better than the 360 version is to think that it is also better than the 360 version, which it isn't.

nope, the PS3 version isnt "pretty much the same" as the 360 version, the score shows that and if you want to go into more detail then read the negative parts. therefore thinking the wii version is better then the PS3 version doesnt mean that its also better then the 360 version.

Yes it does. The only major complait between the two is the frame rate difference. Aside from that, everythng is pretty much identical to the PS3 version.

Everything that 360 version does better than the Wii version, the PS3 pretty much also does better. You can't argue that. The PS3 score what it did because it was compared to the 360 version, not the Wii version. It's not a hard concept to understand.

ign was right, there is no reason the ps3 version shouldnt have been 60 fps. if ms would stop paying devs, stupid stuff like this would never, happen.

as far as the wii vs ps3 score....hahahahah u have got to be kidding me, i hope wii owners dont think that that mean its better than the ps3 version, because if the wii version of madden was on ps3 or 350, the game would have got a 2.1. there are standers on each system, so the grade them accordently

Technical aspects are rated on a different scale: graphics and sounds. The other aspects, that deal with more than gameplay, should be comparable to all consoles -- no matter what. IGN's overall scores aren't based on the average of the categories, meaning you don't add up all the categories and divide by five for the final score. The final score is weighted by the game's overall fun and enjoyability. This should also be comparable to all systems since fun is universal, though I don't know if that's how IGN really reviews.DaAznSaN

Let me ask you a question: If, say, Forza 2 was released on the Wii unchanged fromt he 360 version, wouldn't it score higher on the Wii? Because of the higher score, would it mean it's more fun that 360 version?

ign was right, there is no reason the ps3 version shouldnt have been 60 fps. if ms would stop paying devs, stupid stuff like this would never, happen.

as far as the wii vs ps3 score....hahahahah u have got to be kidding me, i hope wii owners dont think that that mean its better than the ps3 version, because if the wii version of madden was on ps3 or 350, the game would have got a 2.1. there are standers on each system, so the grade them accordently

G10mgs4

Yea that's what I'm arguing. But these Wii fanboys fail to understand. It's not even a difficult concept to understand.

The only lesson this teaches me is that IGN took the 30 vs 60 FPS system warz BS too far in the review. There is no way that it is game breaking that it is running at 30 FPS on PS3. Last years 360 Madden ran at 30 FPS yet it recieved an 8.5. This years core game is much improved framerate aside for PS3.

The only people who would notice or care are people who own both systems and are deciding between the 2. I cant see this being a majority of PS3 owners.

BTW you cant use IGN scores for ownage here....remember.

iwo4life

I'm not trying to use the IGN scores for ownage. I'm just using them to make a point.

[QUOTE="G10mgs4"]

ign was right, there is no reason the ps3 version shouldnt have been 60 fps. if ms would stop paying devs, stupid stuff like this would never, happen.

as far as the wii vs ps3 score....hahahahah u have got to be kidding me, i hope wii owners dont think that that mean its better than the ps3 version, because if the wii version of madden was on ps3 or 350, the game would have got a 2.1. there are standers on each system, so the grade them accordently

emawk

Yea that's what I'm arguing. But these Wii fanboys fail to understand. It's not even a difficult concept to understand.

It's basically common sense and I agree......you can't judge scores a game across multiplte platforms because of standards. Plain and simple. End of story.

[QUOTE="DaAznSaN"]Technical aspects are rated on a different scale: graphics and sounds. The other aspects, that deal with more than gameplay, should be comparable to all consoles -- no matter what. IGN's overall scores aren't based on the average of the categories, meaning you don't add up all the categories and divide by five for the final score. The final score is weighted by the game's overall fun and enjoyability. This should also be comparable to all systems since fun is universal, though I don't know if that's how IGN really reviews.emawk

Let me ask you a question: If, say, Forza 2 was released on the Wii unchanged fromt he 360 version, wouldn't it score higher on the Wii? Because of the higher score, would it mean it's more fun that 360 version?

If it was released for the Wii, and it retained the exact same gameplay qualities, barring the possible downgrades in graphics and sound, then it should score the same, if not slightly less. The graphics and sound may score higher on the Wii, cause it has different standards, but this is why the final score isn't the average of it's parts; the reviewer can weigh the game's fun in comparison with other versions.

[QUOTE="emawk"] An 8 year-old gets an A on his pre-school exam, but a 25 year old scores a B on his college exam and another one scores an A+ -- just by looking at the test scores and the difficulty of the tests, rank the smartness of the three individuals.coreygames

Clearly you didn't understand the analogy. If you took their grades (game scores) at face value, the preschooler is smarter than the college student. If you took into consideration the difficulty of the tests (the standards at which games are scored), you can't really say that.

The college students and preschooler aren't taking the same test; for that reason, you shouldn't weight their scores evenly. Just like because the Wii is substantially weaker than the 360/PS3, you shouldn't weight their games equally.

ok at first your post started out pretty logical, but it should have stopped at "the 360/PS3 using a different standard system than the one used for the Wii."

there was no need to go on to say that the Wii version is most likely the worst. You don't know that. You just made yourself sound like the sheep who were saying the PS3 has the inferior version

ok at first your post started out pretty logical, but it should have stopped at "the 360/PS3 using a different standard system than the one used for the Wii."

there was no need to go on to say that the Wii version is most likely the worst. You don't know that. You just made yourself sound like the sheep who were saying the PS3 has the inferior version

renger6002

But I gave you a reason why I think it is the worst. You could try arguing it like some people are doing.

So by your point of view there is no way that the WII'sMadden could be better than the PS3...Sorry but that is wrong. Yes the graphics are not the same but you still can not say that the Wii did not extras that the PS3 does not have.

The rating is still 1-10 and if a game no matter what game or system gets a higher score then that game is better on that system. The only way I may or may not disagree if the score was just on graphics. But it not the Wii got better Gameplay, Presentation and Lasting Appeal. Come on would you only agree that the Wii could be better than the PS3 if the Wii got aperfect 10?

[QUOTE="Blackbond"]Standars my butt. Its a known fact that Madden for PS2 and Xbox were superior then PS3 and 360 thus why The Madden Challenge was also on the original Xbox and not 360. Its not a coincidence that the xbox and PS2 versions outscored the PS3 and 360 versions. Standards are one thing but a whole .5 difference is another thing.emawk

What if the madden challenge was on those systems because that was the most convenient route. It takes time for the tournament to adjust to next-gen standards. You have to give the players time to prepare. I read the rewiew for the 07 version; if I remember correctly, they said the 360 version was the biggest improvement over the previous iteration (but I could be wrong). Read the rewiews; stop take scores at their face value. The 360/PS3 have different standards than the Xbox/PS2 and Wii.

No last years 360 and PS3 versions were inferior. Ask any serious Madden Player. It wasn't a matter of convience it was a matter of it just sucked. Only the ROOKIE CHALLENGE used the 360 versions lol. Last years versions the PS2 and Xbox > PS3 and 360. The scores backed this. Standards do play a role thats no doubt but a .5 score differential is a rather large margin for standards.

[QUOTE="emawk"]

[QUOTE="DaAznSaN"]Technical aspects are rated on a different scale: graphics and sounds. The other aspects, that deal with more than gameplay, should be comparable to all consoles -- no matter what. IGN's overall scores aren't based on the average of the categories, meaning you don't add up all the categories and divide by five for the final score. The final score is weighted by the game's overall fun and enjoyability. This should also be comparable to all systems since fun is universal, though I don't know if that's how IGN really reviews.DaAznSaN

Let me ask you a question: If, say, Forza 2 was released on the Wii unchanged fromt he 360 version, wouldn't it score higher on the Wii? Because of the higher score, would it mean it's more fun that 360 version?

If it was released for the Wii, and it retained the exact same gameplay qualities, barring the possible downgrades in graphics and sound, then it should score the same, if not slightly less. The graphics and sound may score higher on the Wii, cause it has different standards, but this is why the final score isn't the average of it's parts; the reviewer can weigh the game's fun in comparison with other versions.

I chose Forza 2 for a reason, mainly because it's a CPU-intesive game; it's not just about its graphics and sound. If the game was unchanged on the Wii, it would score considerably higher than the Xbox 360 version because a game of that (technical) Caliber on Wii hardware is unimaginable. Its score would show this.

Even with its higher score, the game is still just as good and just as fun as the one on the 360. When comparing "fun" across platforms (between the Wii and 360/PS3), you shouldn't take the scores at their facevalue.

[QUOTE="emawk"]

[QUOTE="Blackbond"]Standars my butt. Its a known fact that Madden for PS2 and Xbox were superior then PS3 and 360 thus why The Madden Challenge was also on the original Xbox and not 360. Its not a coincidence that the xbox and PS2 versions outscored the PS3 and 360 versions. Standards are one thing but a whole .5 difference is another thing.Blackbond

What if the madden challenge was on those systems because that was the most convenient route. It takes time for the tournament to adjust to next-gen standards. You have to give the players time to prepare. I read the rewiew for the 07 version; if I remember correctly, they said the 360 version was the biggest improvement over the previous iteration (but I could be wrong). Read the rewiews; stop take scores at their face value. The 360/PS3 have different standards than the Xbox/PS2 and Wii.

No last years 360 and PS3 versions were inferior. Ask any serious Madden Player. It wasn't a matter of convience it was a matter of it just sucked. Only the ROOKIE CHALLENGE used the 360 versions lol. Last years versions the PS2 and Xbox > PS3 and 360. The scores backed this. Standards do play a role thats no doubt but a .5 score differential is a rather large margin for standards.

A .5 difference isn't that large. If the PS2 Resident Evil 4 came on the PS3 unchanged, I (most people as well) can imagine it score at least .5 less than the PS2 version. You see, it's easily possible.

The important thing is that you acknowledge the existence on standards.

[QUOTE="DaAznSaN"][QUOTE="emawk"]

[QUOTE="DaAznSaN"]Technical aspects are rated on a different scale: graphics and sounds. The other aspects, that deal with more than gameplay, should be comparable to all consoles -- no matter what. IGN's overall scores aren't based on the average of the categories, meaning you don't add up all the categories and divide by five for the final score. The final score is weighted by the game's overall fun and enjoyability. This should also be comparable to all systems since fun is universal, though I don't know if that's how IGN really reviews.emawk

Let me ask you a question: If, say, Forza 2 was released on the Wii unchanged fromt he 360 version, wouldn't it score higher on the Wii? Because of the higher score, would it mean it's more fun that 360 version?

If it was released for the Wii, and it retained the exact same gameplay qualities, barring the possible downgrades in graphics and sound, then it should score the same, if not slightly less. The graphics and sound may score higher on the Wii, cause it has different standards, but this is why the final score isn't the average of it's parts; the reviewer can weigh the game's fun in comparison with other versions.

I chose Forza 2 for a reaons, mainly because it's CPU-intesive game; it's not just about graphics and sound. If the game was unchanged on the Wii, it would score considerably higher than the Xbox 360 version because a game of that (technical) Caliber in just about every area on Wii hardware is unimaginable.

Even it's higher score, the game is still just as good and as fun as the one on the 360. When comparing "fun" across platforms (between the Wii and 360/PS, you shouldn't take the scores at their facevalue.

But that's what I'm debating. I'm trying to say overall scores are consistent on all consoles; it's the graphics and sounds that are not. But because the final score isn't the average of it's parts, and it's weighted towards the gameplay parts, it can be compared to all versions.

If this is how IGN truly reviews, then the Wii version won't score higher despite different technical standards; they'll be the same because they provide the same amount of fun. If IGN does review in such a way that even the overall score has different standards, and the Wii scores higher just because it's on the Wii (ignoring the possible enhancement of the Wiimote) then I'll eat my words and say IGN has a flawed review system.

this is the first time the .5 incremental system has failed. there will be more failures soon enough. .5 increments simply encompass too much in scope. the framerate is a significant thing. everyone else can see it...and the average reviews will undoubtedly show it as well.Dreams-Visions

Thats a great point. I was screaming about this when they changed the scoring system here. People thought I was over reacting. Appears not. :D

The whole "GS scores only matter" rule needs to change. The new system sucks arse. Everyone that I've talked to that's played both versions of Madden 08' say the 360 versions runs much better.butteater86

How much COULD graphics and sound affect the score? I honestly don't think think it'll affect a score a whole 0.8.Eponique

Umm...read my previous posts.

The standards you speak of is mainly technical and also the Wii has higher standards in areas as well. So it can go both ways even though the 360 version scored higher, the Wii ver. indeed could be the superior version. It's much simpler to just take them at face value, then ramble on about standards.Devil-Itachi

It's simpler (and unjustifiable) but it's not fair for the 360 and PS3. To take the scores at facevalue is pretty much like giving the Wii a handicap. It's simply not fair.

it may havelower standards when it comes to graphics/sounds.

But if anything the gameplay is graded the same. If anything the wii-mote is judged harsher if it's not used correctly or in a piratical way.

The last time I checked, 8.5 was greater than 7.9

Numbers don't lie on SW

i_like_pizza

[QUOTE="Devil-Itachi"]The standards you speak of is mainly technical and also the Wii has higher standards in areas as well. So it can go both ways even though the 360 version scored higher, the Wii ver. indeed could be the superior version. It's much simpler to just take them at face value, then ramble on about standards.emawk

It's simpler (and unjustifiable) but it's not fair for the 360 and PS3. To take the scores at facevalue is pretty much like giving the Wii a handicap. It's simply not fair.

The only problem with that is that the Wii has a lot more extras on it than either the 360 or the PS3 Madden. Do these extras not count?