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

1) Look I don't know what else I can say. I gave you a review of a racing game out on both the 360 and the Wii, and the game scored less on the Wii due to lack of online play. I showed you a review of another racing game out on the 360 and X-box/PS2/GC where the game scored the same on all the platforms. What other proof do you want that games are scored under the same standards? All you keep saying is Froza 2 can't be played on the Wii so all Wii games are scored to a lower standard, where is the logic in that?

The reason the PC racer scored the same is because it was the same game only with superior graphics, by your logic it should have scored lowerthan it scored on the lesser systems but that was not the case, further proving my point that they are rated the same.

2) Again it would only be superior in terms of graphics, and that is something that is universally accepted when it comes to PC to 360/PS3 comparison. In just the same way it is universally accepted that the Wii is inferior to the 360/PS3 when it comes to graphics, no one has denied that. But if they do get the samescore it proves that it is not the hardware capability of the system that determines on how a game is scored, which is my whole argument.

3/4) Look they made a comparison between the 360 and Wii version of the game in the closing statment of the Wii review and nowhere in that comparison does it state that the 360 was a hugely superior game. They only stated that "For core football fans" the 360version would be a better choice. If you look at the score the 360 only got .2 over the Wii so it was obviously close, and the framerate problem might just have been the thing to put the Wii over the PS3 version in terms of scoring for IGN reviewers. If you are basing all your argument on the fact that the PS3 version did not get that .2 over the Wii version then that is a weak argument. At the end of the day the Wii version offers things that the PS3/360 does not offer and vice-versa, and all things considered the IGN reviewers thought that the two versions were overall close to eachother in terms of scores.

You have yet to provide one game review which supports your basis that games on the Wii are scored/reviewed using a lower standard, all you give me are your assumptions and theories.

Philmon

1) So, the Wii version of that racer (what racer are you talking about again?) scored lower because it had no online play? Other than that that version must be equal to the the 360 version, right? But besides that, how does online play relate to which console is better able to create a more realistic racer? It's as if you're denying that standards exist. Even Gamespot doesn't deny this, but somehow you do. Now how does that make sense?

Okay let me ask you this: Why don't reviewer rate Nintendo DS games relative to 360 games?

2) Just like you're saying that, I could say that because the PC is capable of more, it proves that games are scored depending on what their respective consoles are capable of. Why else would a game with superior graphics on one console score less than the same, but inferior game, on another console? Then what's the point of buying Bioshock on the PC if the game is "equal" to the one on the 360? In fact, what's the point for consoles to evolve? If reviewers like gamespot (ones that into consideration graphics) used your rating system (a standard-less one), Bioshock should without a doubt score higher on the PC than on the 360.

And, also, in case you didn't know, Bioshock is scoring lower on the PC than it is on the 360, judging from the reviews that are already out.

3) Ok, so it doesn't say that the 360 version superior. How does that defeat my argument that if you think the the 360 is superior, that must mean the PS3 version is also superior?

The Wii's score does not reflect how much better the Wii version is to the PS3 version; the 360 score does. They are not on the same playing field. It's not hard to understand. If a football game scores higher on the Nintendo DS, does it mean it's better than the PS3 version?

You keeping on saying I am not providing proof, and I keep on saying that you're looking at one -- Madden 08.

[QUOTE="Philmon"]

1) Look I don't know what else I can say. I gave you a review of a racing game out on both the 360 and the Wii, and the game scored less on the Wii due to lack of online play. I showed you a review of another racing game out on the 360 and X-box/PS2/GC where the game scored the same on all the platforms. What other proof do you want that games are scored under the same standards? All you keep saying is Froza 2 can't be played on the Wii so all Wii games are scored to a lower standard, where is the logic in that?

The reason the PC racer scored the same is because it was the same game only with superior graphics, by your logic it should have scored lowerthan it scored on the lesser systems but that was not the case, further proving my point that they are rated the same.

2) Again it would only be superior in terms of graphics, and that is something that is universally accepted when it comes to PC to 360/PS3 comparison. In just the same way it is universally accepted that the Wii is inferior to the 360/PS3 when it comes to graphics, no one has denied that. But if they do get the samescore it proves that it is not the hardware capability of the system that determines on how a game is scored, which is my whole argument.

3/4) Look they made a comparison between the 360 and Wii version of the game in the closing statment of the Wii review and nowhere in that comparison does it state that the 360 was a hugely superior game. They only stated that "For core football fans" the 360version would be a better choice. If you look at the score the 360 only got .2 over the Wii so it was obviously close, and the framerate problem might just have been the thing to put the Wii over the PS3 version in terms of scoring for IGN reviewers. If you are basing all your argument on the fact that the PS3 version did not get that .2 over the Wii version then that is a weak argument. At the end of the day the Wii version offers things that the PS3/360 does not offer and vice-versa, and all things considered the IGN reviewers thought that the two versions were overall close to eachother in terms of scores.

You have yet to provide one game review which supports your basis that games on the Wii are scored/reviewed using a lower standard, all you give me are your assumptions and theories.

emawk

1) So, the Wii version of that racer (what racer are you talking about again?) scored lower because it had no online play? Other than that that version must be equal to the the 360 version, right? But besides that, how does online play relate to which console is better able to create a more realistic racer? It's as if you're denying that standards exist. Even Gamespot doesn't deny this, but somehow you do. Now how does that make sense?

Okay let me ask you this: Why don't reviewer rate Nintendo DS games relative to 360 games?

2) Just like you're saying that, I could say that because the PC is capable of more, it proves that games are scored depending on what their respective consoles are capable of. Why else would a game with superior graphics on one console score less than the same, but inferior game, on another console? Then what's the point of buying Bioshock on the PC if the game is "equal" to the one on the 360? In fact, what's the point for consoles to evolve? If reviewers like gamespot (ones that into consideration graphics) used your rating system (a standard-less one), Bioshock should without a doubt score higher on the PC than on the 360.

And, also, in case you didn't know, Bioshock is scoring lower on the PC than it is on the 360, judging from the reviews that are already out.

3) Ok, so it doesn't say that the 360 version superior. How does that defeat my argument that if you think the the 360 is superior, that must mean the PS3 version is also superior?

The Wii's score does not reflect how much better the Wii version is to the PS3 version; the 360 score does. They are not on the same playing field. It's not hard to understand. If a football game scores higher on the Nintendo DS, does it mean it's better than the PS3 version?

You keeping on saying I am not providing proof, and I keep on saying that you're looking at one -- Madden 08.

1) Ok lets say there is a game A. Game A scores 8.9 on 360, and 8.9 on Wii. The only difference between the two is that 360 has HD graphics and Wii version doesn't. Now tell me does this prove that the Wii is graded using the same standards as the 360 (barring graphics, which I have always stated), or does it prove that the Wii is graded using a lower standard than the 360?

As for the DS, it cant be compared to the 360 games because it is portable. If you compare the two then 360 games will have to be penalised for not being portable. However the DS games are comparable to PSP games (which have superior graphics to the DS).

2) Again I told you the multi-plat games I listed were basically the same, only difference being the graphics on the PC being better. How many times do you want me to say that Graphics/Audio are scored differently on each systems according to the systems capabilities. I never denied this, all I said was that everything else like game-play are scored using the same standards across all platforms. And again the games I gave shows that when the only difference in the game between platforms is graphics they tend to score the same.

As for Bioshock, there are lots of reason you could get one version over the other, but that does not change the fact that both games "out of the box"should be just as good and the review scores will point this out. As for the scores Bioshock has already gotten, show me a single source that has reviewed both versions and given different scores. According to Gamerankings both versions of the game have yet to be rated by a single source.

3) Look if the one and only time they compare the 360 version to the Wii version they do not say it is superior and they grade the 360 version only .2 above the Wii, does that not tell you that they thought the two games were about equally as good? Again as for football games on the DS scoring higher, it might not be comparable to the PS3 since it is a handheld game but it is comparable to the PSP game, which I might point out is to the DS what PS3 is to the Wii in terms of graphics.

Madden 08 is not proof that the Wii is being scored using a lower standard, you are just interpreting it that way because you do not like the fact that the Wii version got a better score than the PS3 version. I have given you multiple past reviews from games that were released on multi-plats scoring similarly to the same games scoring less on the Wii than 360 due to missing features on the Wii versions, to games that were ported from older platforms getting similar scores on the newer platforms. And through out all this the only tangible thing you can put forward is the score Madden 08 got on IGN, which you interpret to mean that most Wii games are being scored under a lower standard.

1) Ok lets say there is a game A. Game A scores 8.9 on 360, and 8.9 on Wii. The only difference between the two is that 360 has HD graphics and Wii version doesn't. Now tell me does this prove that the Wii is graded using the same standards as the 360 (barring graphics, which I have always stated), or does it prove that the Wii is graded using a lower standard than the 360?

As for the DS, it cant be compared to the 360 games because it is portable. If you compare the two then 360 games will have to be penalised for not being portable. However the DS games are comparable to PSP games (which have superior graphics to the DS).

2) Again I told you the multi-plat games I listed were basically the same, only difference being the graphics on the PC being better. How many times do you want me to say that Graphics/Audio are scored differently on each systems according to the systems capabilities. I never denied this, all I said was that everything else like game-play are scored using the same standards across all platforms. And again the games I gave shows that when the only difference in the game between platforms is graphics they tend to score the same.

As for Bioshock, there are lots of reason you could get one version over the other, but that does not change the fact that both games "out of the box"should be just as good and the review scores will point this out. As for the scores Bioshock has already gotten, show me a single source that has reviewed both versions and given different scores. According to Gamerankings both versions of the game have yet to be rated by a single source.

3) Look if the one and only time they compare the 360 version to the Wii version they do not say it is superior and they grade the 360 version only .2 above the Wii, does that not tell you that they thought the two games were about equally as good? Again as for football games on the DS scoring higher, it might not be comparable to the PS3 since it is a handheld game but it is comparable to the PSP game, which I might point out is to the DS what PS3 is to the Wii in terms of graphics.

Madden 08 is not proof that the Wii is being scored using a lower standard, you are just interpreting it that way because you do not like the fact that the Wii version got a better score than the PS3 version. I have given you multiple past reviews from games that were released on multi-plats scoring similarly to the same games scoring less on the Wii than 360 due to missing features on the Wii versions, to games that were ported from older platforms getting similar scores on the newer platforms. And through out all this the only tangible thing you can put forward is the score Madden 08 got on IGN, which you interpret to mean that most Wii games are being scored under a lower standard.

Philmon

Ok, I didn't expect things to last that long

1) Why is it that the reviewers can use different standards for graphics, but not for, say, physics, as in the case of a realistic racer?

In the case of ports, they pretty much use the same standards across platforms, but that's mainly because not much changes in the versions, except the graphics a little. If a game is ported from a weaker system to a more power systems (which is not uncommon), you're right, the gameplay wouldn't change much. Have you wondered why games are rarely ported from the 360/PS3 to the Wii? It's because the wouldn't be able to do those game justice, but regardless, if they were, the Wii version would be matched directly to the 360/PS3 version. But that's for just ports. As for games made exclusively for these powerful systems (like a realistic racer, ones utilizing the systems power), they wouldn't be directly compared to a Wii game in the same category. Does tha clear things up? The Wii version of Madden is not the same as the PS3/360 versions. It's a port of the PS2 version; either that or it was developed on the Wii. But we know for sure its not the same game as the 360/PS3 versions.

Do you see why they didn't directly compare it to the 360 version like they did for the PS3 version? Do you understand why even though the 360 and PS3 versions are very similar ("brothers") relative to the Wii, the 360 version scored slightly higher while the PS3 scored much lower than the Wii version? They Wii version wasn't graded in the same way as the 360/PS3 versions.

As for the DS, replace it with the Gamecube. If they were to make a realistic racer for it, would it be directly compared to Forza 2, in every regards and graded accordingly?

2) Refer to 1.

3) Ok, let's get this out of the way. Do you think the the 360 version is better than the Wii version? Why?

As for Bioshock, its a port of the 360 version so they will most likely be directly compared, and they will score roughly the same, assuming their differences are negligible.