Meh, what did you expect? It scored a 9.6 a year ago, and it apparently aged by about -.1... honestly though, I don't find this game to be a very big victory for the PS3. Its a year old and is already on the 360 and PC
An itty-bitty 9.5 is SO much less than a 9.6! It's like the differnece between the Grand Canyon and the sidewalk!
Now PS3 fans will never be able to play the game anywhere near the glory of the 360! I mean, the sound is just horrible, and that's what matters most about a game even though 360 fans have been saying it's all about gameplay, in which the PS3 version is the exact same and has more content in the package!
Relax everyone. The only problem here is the Sony boys got robbed of bragging rights. If the game had scored 9.7, omg, there would have been no shortage of posts about how superior the ps3 is to the 360. Too bad cows. Just be thankful the game turned out as well as it did, considering the development hurdles that Bethesda had to go through to get the game running at this level is a minor miracle.
[QUOTE="Not-A-Stalker"]Actually, I think the one year extra is the exact reason why it scored less... It's an old game, yet still a great one. 9.5 is a great score, don't even try and claim ownage on this one...turgore
We will. We claim ownage the first AAA on the PS3 was on the 360 a year ago . We claim ownage because the 360 version is superior by .1 . I always knew this would be AAA but I thought more a 9.3 like the PC version.
In terms of the number score, yeah, the 360 wins by a whopping .1 in the sound department.Congratu-freeking-lations! But in terms of the actual review, the reviewer says the PS3 version is better. I'll trust a professional, someone being payed to do this, when he says the PS3 version is better.
[QUOTE="Nteks"][QUOTE="kingyoto"]what I don't get is why it got a 1 off from sound otherwise it would be the same...Nteks
Maybe the volume was turned down during the review process? Wouldn't HDMI cable provide even better sound then optical ?
Yeah, that is if GS has a receive that supports HDMI (they're quite expensive) but they probably do nonetheless.
I dont think they actually took it off because the sound was worse, just that they couldn't give a year old game the same score (even though it was better) so they took off on a random thing like sound. Yup subjective the PS3 version is better then the xbox 360 version. but they just couldn't jusifty giving the same score to a 1year old game.
No, sir. The PS3 version is not better than the 360 version. The last paragraph of the review reads as follows:
"The PlayStation 3 version of The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion is every bit as impressive as the Xbox 360 and PC versions. However, this isn't necessarily the best version of the game. This version does come with the Knights of the Nine add-on, which will add about 10 hours of gameplay to the already lengthy game, but it doesn't come with any of the other downloadable additions made available on the Xbox 360."
How can anyone even attempt to claim ownage on the 360 version.......When ever has a game scored higher at GS (or anyone for that matter) after being released later in the games life cycle. Claiming ownage for the 360 is practically idoitic
Wow! It got .1 lower! Such ownage! /sarcasm Seriously though, if anything we shouldn't be focusing on the lack of improvements but the fact that a year later this game is still AAA. I'd say that's a feat in it's own. (And I'm a sheep, in case you're wondering)
Ho hohoho, what's up now, cows. The game had one year to improve, and still didn't. It looks like every multiplat will be better on the 360. Heith
Are you serious? The PS3 is hands down the superior version. It just got a slightly lower score due to coming out a year later. For todays standards, it's a 9.5, which is much better than a 9.6 this time last year.
[QUOTE="Heith"]Ho hohoho, what's up now, cows. The game had one year to improve, and still didn't. It looks like every multiplat will be better on the 360. KeyWii
Are you serious? The PS3 is hands down the superior version. It just got a slightly lower score due to coming out a year later. For todays standards, it's a 9.5, which is much better than a 9.6 this time last year.
So by that logic that means Gears of War would be under 9.5 if reviewed now and same with other older games?
I'm sure the reviewer gave it a 9.8 and said oh wait it's a year later, I should give it a 9.5 instead, yeah that's how it works.
seriously..show me a time when a late release has scored better than the original unless they do sumthing major like fix major bugs or change up the gameplay.Viviath
[QUOTE="KeyWii"][QUOTE="Heith"]Ho hohoho, what's up now, cows. The game had one year to improve, and still didn't. It looks like every multiplat will be better on the 360. kcpp2b
Are you serious? The PS3 is hands down the superior version. It just got a slightly lower score due to coming out a year later. For todays standards, it's a 9.5, which is much better than a 9.6 this time last year.
So by that logic that means Gears of War would be under 9.5 if reviewed now and same with other older games?
I'm sure the reviewer gave it a 9.8 and said oh wait it's a year later, I should give it a 9.5 instead, yeah that's how it works.
Oh, come on! It should've gotten the same score. I don't see how the sound could be worse! That's reviews for 'ya. Can't stand them. I'm far away from being a cow, but come on!
Log in to comment