Real reason why PS3 games flop at GS (MUST READ!!)

So we were told that the PS3 was going to be the system that would rival any other system to date, whose games were supposed to revolutionize gaming, basically we were to told we wouldn't believe our eyes when we got our hands on it. I even started to believe this when the price was announced. I mean with something that expensive it had to have something amazing under the hood. So with that all in mind, it is plausible to think that GS is also expecting these promises to be a reality and therefore judge the PS3 games with the same standard Sony claimed the PS3 to be.

What do you think? Is this plausible?

Actually the games just suck. Occam's razor.bragac200

yup

So we were told that the PS3 was going to be the system that would rival any other system to date, whose games were supposed to revolutionize gaming, basically we were to told we wouldn't believe our eyes when we got our hands on it. I even started to believe this when the price was announced. I mean with something that expensive it had to have something amazing under the hood. So with that all in mind, it is plausible to think that GS is also expecting these promises to be a reality and therefore judge the PS3 games with the same standard Sony claimed the PS3 to be.

What do you think? Is this plausible?

Frostbite24

So we were told that the PS3 was going to be the system that would rival any other system to date, whose games were supposed to revolutionize gaming, basically we were to told we wouldn't believe our eyes when we got our hands on it. I even started to believe this when the price was announced. I mean with something that expensive it had to have something amazing under the hood. So with that all in mind, it is plausible to think that GS is also expecting these promises to be a reality and therefore judge the PS3 games with the same standard Sony claimed the PS3 to be.

What do you think? Is this plausible?

Frostbite24

Actually the games just suck. Occam's razor.bragac200

i agree with Occams Razor...which is why i disagree with the R&C review. Its more likeley that GS is wrong than that 10+ review sites are over-rating R&C to please fanboys.

[QUOTE="Frostbite24"]

So we were told that the PS3 was going to be the system that would rival any other system to date, whose games were supposed to revolutionize gaming, basically we were to told we wouldn't believe our eyes when we got our hands on it. I even started to believe this when the price was announced. I mean with something that expensive it had to have something amazing under the hood. So with that all in mind, it is plausible to think that GS is also expecting these promises to be a reality and therefore judge the PS3 games with the same standard Sony claimed the PS3 to be.

What do you think? Is this plausible?

Awinagainov

Ah well didn't see that. It is a very good point IMO. I'm glad at least we understand this.

Actually the games just suck. Occam's razor.bragac200

Hooray for Philosophy!

I couldn't hack into the Matrix with the PS2, no matter how hard I tried.

Yet it had plenty of quality games...

[QUOTE="bragac200"]Actually the games just suck. Occam's razor.-Serpahim-

i agree with Occams Razor...which is why i disagree with the R&C review. Its more likeley that GS is wrong than that 10+ review sites are over-rating R&C to please fanboys.

Oh come on. Gamespot is the best reviewer, andthe other "top 10" reviewers are basically retarded. If it got a 7.5 then it's seriously mediocre. Gamespot doesn't accidentally review AAA games as "seriously mediocre." Just to put things in perspective, IGN gave Dead or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball for the Xbox 1 like a 9.2. 1UP is just stupid. The other sites are BS.

Plus- Rachet and Clank is a platformer. What were you expecting? It's a platformer for chrissakes, not the sequel to Oblivion.

Yea man i think your right,these games so far have not been close to what sony was talking about back in 05.With the 360 on the other hand,it wasnt hyped no where near as much as ps3 was.But idk man,i guess things will change when mgs4 comes out.MrPostman4Chi

I hope so. Otherwise Sony just looks like a bunch of asses.

Actually the games just suck. Occam's razor.bragac200

Exactly.

If I were to say my console is better then any other console,had the best hardware to date, and will run at 120 fps at 4D, I would want people to uphold me to that standard.

Obviously the standard hasnt been meet and the games that are being released should be judged accordingly.

Occam's razor.bragac200

[QUOTE="MrPostman4Chi"]Yea man i think your right,these games so far have not been close to what sony was talking about back in 05.With the 360 on the other hand,it wasnt hyped no where near as much as ps3 was.But idk man,i guess things will change when mgs4 comes out.Frostbite24

I hope so. Otherwise Sony just looks like a bunch of asses.

Exactly.

If I were to say my console is better then any other console,had the most hardware to date, and will run at 120 fps at 4D, I would want people to uphold me to that standard.

Obviously that standard hasnt been meet and should be judged accordingly.

Synthetic_NinJI

Games are rated as games, not as game on X system. The system should never be accounted for.DaAznSaN

With that Logic handhelds would never get AAAs.

[QUOTE="MrPostman4Chi"]Yea man i think your right,these games so far have not been close to what sony was talking about back in 05.With the 360 on the other hand,it wasnt hyped no where near as much as ps3 was.But idk man,i guess things will change when mgs4 comes out.Frostbite24

I hope so. Otherwise Sony just looks like a bunch of asses.

There already do.

"People will buy PS3 even if it doesnt have any games"

and my favorite

"Xbox 360 is still last gen"

Thats enough reason for any smart, reasonable adult to jump off the Sony bandwagon

Exactly.

If I were to say my console is better then any other console,had the most hardware to date, and will run at 120 fps at 4D, I would want people to uphold me to that standard.

Obviously that standard hasnt been meet and should be judged accordingly.

Synthetic_NinJI

Exactly, and for anyone who thinks we shouldn't bring their claims up in an argument is just stupid.

[QUOTE="-Serpahim-"]

[QUOTE="bragac200"]Actually the games just suck. Occam's razor.bragac200

i agree with Occams Razor...which is why i disagree with the R&C review. Its more likeley that GS is wrong than that 10+ review sites are over-rating R&C to please fanboys.

Oh come on. Gamespot is the best reviewer, andthe other "top 10" reviewers are basically retarded. If it got a 7.5 then it's seriously mediocre. Gamespot doesn't accidentally review AAA games as "seriously mediocre." Just to put things in perspective, IGN gave Dead or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball for the Xbox 1 like a 9.2. 1UP is just stupid. The other sites are BS.

Plus- Rachet and Clank is a platformer. What were you expecting? It's a platformer for chrissakes, not the sequel to Oblivion.

dude...you either use Occam's Razor for everything, or for nothing. So either The games dont suck, and the TC is right. or the games do suck, and I'm right....

[QUOTE="DaAznSaN"]

Games are rated as games, not as game on X system. The system should never be accounted for.NECR0CHILD313

With that Logic handhelds would never get AAAs.

that is a very good point. Systems should, to some extent, be taken into account when reviewing their games. I know that the Wii isn't graded as harshly for not having GeoW graphics because I know that the system's strong point is innovation and that has more weight in the eyes of reviewers for the Wii games.

[QUOTE="-Serpahim-"]

[QUOTE="bragac200"]Actually the games just suck. Occam's razor.bragac200

i agree with Occams Razor...which is why i disagree with the R&C review. Its more likeley that GS is wrong than that 10+ review sites are over-rating R&C to please fanboys.

Oh come on. Gamespot is the best reviewer, andthe other "top 10" reviewers are basically retarded. If it got a 7.5 then it's seriously mediocre. Gamespot doesn't accidentally review AAA games as "seriously mediocre." Just to put things in perspective, IGN gave Dead or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball for the Xbox 1 like a 9.2. 1UP is just stupid. The other sites are BS.

Plus- Rachet and Clank is a platformer. What were you expecting? It's a platformer for chrissakes, not the sequel to Oblivion.

[QUOTE="bragac200"][QUOTE="-Serpahim-"]

[QUOTE="bragac200"]Actually the games just suck. Occam's razor.mmirza23

i agree with Occams Razor...which is why i disagree with the R&C review. Its more likeley that GS is wrong than that 10+ review sites are over-rating R&C to please fanboys.

Oh come on. Gamespot is the best reviewer, andthe other "top 10" reviewers are basically retarded. If it got a 7.5 then it's seriously mediocre. Gamespot doesn't accidentally review AAA games as "seriously mediocre." Just to put things in perspective, IGN gave Dead or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball for the Xbox 1 like a 9.2. 1UP is just stupid. The other sites are BS.

Plus- Rachet and Clank is a platformer. What were you expecting? It's a platformer for chrissakes, not the sequel to Oblivion.

So you're saying that we have to play every game to know if a reviewer is right? I don't know about you, but I would rather kill myself than play Hour of Victory just to see if GS's score was accurate.

[QUOTE="mmirza23"][QUOTE="bragac200"][QUOTE="-Serpahim-"]

[QUOTE="bragac200"]Actually the games just suck. Occam's razor.Frostbite24

i agree with Occams Razor...which is why i disagree with the R&C review. Its more likeley that GS is wrong than that 10+ review sites are over-rating R&C to please fanboys.

Oh come on. Gamespot is the best reviewer, andthe other "top 10" reviewers are basically retarded. If it got a 7.5 then it's seriously mediocre. Gamespot doesn't accidentally review AAA games as "seriously mediocre." Just to put things in perspective, IGN gave Dead or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball for the Xbox 1 like a 9.2. 1UP is just stupid. The other sites are BS.

Plus- Rachet and Clank is a platformer. What were you expecting? It's a platformer for chrissakes, not the sequel to Oblivion.

So you're saying that we have to play every game to know if a reviewer is right? I don't know about you, but I would rather kill myself than play Hour of Victory just to see if GS's score was accurate.

[QUOTE="mmirza23"][QUOTE="bragac200"][QUOTE="-Serpahim-"]

[QUOTE="bragac200"]Actually the games just suck. Occam's razor.Frostbite24

i agree with Occams Razor...which is why i disagree with the R&C review. Its more likeley that GS is wrong than that 10+ review sites are over-rating R&C to please fanboys.

Oh come on. Gamespot is the best reviewer, andthe other "top 10" reviewers are basically retarded. If it got a 7.5 then it's seriously mediocre. Gamespot doesn't accidentally review AAA games as "seriously mediocre." Just to put things in perspective, IGN gave Dead or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball for the Xbox 1 like a 9.2. 1UP is just stupid. The other sites are BS.

Plus- Rachet and Clank is a platformer. What were you expecting? It's a platformer for chrissakes, not the sequel to Oblivion.

So you're saying that we have to play every game to know if a reviewer is right? I don't know about you, but I would rather kill myself than play Hour of Victory just to see if GS's score was accurate.

maybe not play every game, but u have to agree that when the majority of the review public gives the game AA-AAA scores and GS happens to be theonly one dishing out 7.5 (the score on metacritic is a translation of a letter score..apperantly when they went to school, getiing 75% was above average and warranted a B....) you should atleast contemplate the possibility that the gamespot review maybe errenous, instead of discounting all the other reviews that seem to be in cohesion.

have the game and R&C is way better then the 7.5 score period GS negative was identity crisis wtf!?!?!? and story r&C always been that way.

any way i can see why cows think GS is biasbecause halo 3 sure is not a 9.5game more of a8.9 game with its linear game play and its LAME STORY(i weather watch a steven seagal movie then see halo trash story on the big screen). oooooooooooooo the flood I'm so frighten so how many times can you kill an alien and run around on small maps playing slayer. ooooo we got forge...forge=red headed step child to half life mods and unreal tourney

heck the end was garbage all you see is master chief 117 some passport looking thing

plus why they have to kill sgt major?

i guess halo for the simple minded no wonder a lot kids8 and up play it regardless of the M rating

all GS does is judge xbox360 gamesof the good and judge ps3 gamesof the bad

optimistic for xbox360 andpessimistic for ps3

because we all know if halo got a 7.5 you be sending death threats and threaten to hang yourselves if they don't change it.

llidianStormage

I stopped reading there.

Seriously, this guy is comparing Halo 3 to a platformer.

have the game and R&C is way better then the 7.5 score period GS negative was identity crisis wtf!?!?!? and story r&C always been that way.

any way i can see why cows think GS is bias because halo 3 sure is not a 9.5 game more of a8.9 game with its linear game play and its LAME STORY(i weather watch a steven seagal movie then see halo trash story on the big screen). oooooooooooooo the flood I'm so frighten so how many times can you kill an alien and run around on small maps playing slayer. ooooo we got forge...forge=red headed step child to half life mods and unreal tourney

heck the end was garbage all you see is master chief 117 some passport looking thing

plus why they have to kill sgt major?

i guess halo for the simple minded no wonder a lot kids8 and up play it regardless of the M rating

all GS does is judge xbox360 gamesof the good and judge ps3 gamesof the bad

optimistic for xbox360 andpessimistic for ps3

because we all know if halo got a 7.5 you be sending death threats and threaten to hang yourselves if they don't change it.

llidianStormage

You who? don't come in here and start pointing fingers at anyone. This is the kind of comment I was trying to avoid but **** always seems to seep into even the most civil of places doesn't it? We don't need your unitelligent banter here at all, so if you'd kindly leave

have the game and R&C is way better then the 7.5 score period GS negative was identity crisis wtf!?!?!? and story r&C always been that way.

any way i can see why cows think GS is bias because halo 3 sure is not a 9.5 game more of a8.9 game with its linear game play and its LAME STORY(i weather watch a steven seagal movie then see halo trash story on the big screen). oooooooooooooo the flood I'm so frighten so how many times can you kill an alien and run around on small maps playing slayer. ooooo we got forge...forge=red headed step child to half life mods and unreal tourney

heck the end was garbage all you see is master chief 117 some passport looking thing

plus why they have to kill sgt major?

i guess halo for the simple minded no wonder a lot kids8 and up play it regardless of the M rating

all GS does is judge xbox360 gamesof the good and judge ps3 gamesof the bad

optimistic for xbox360 andpessimistic for ps3

because we all know if halo got a 7.5 you be sending death threats and threaten to hang yourselves if they don't change it.

llidianStormage

you may wanna put a spoiler tag or u may get modded.

have the game and R&C is way better then the 7.5 score period GS negative was identity crisis wtf!?!?!? and story r&C always been that way.

any way i can see why cows think GS is bias because halo 3 sure is not a 9.5 game more of a8.9 game with its linear game play and its LAME STORY(i weather watch a steven seagal movie then see halo trash story on the big screen). oooooooooooooo the flood I'm so frighten so how many times can you kill an alien and run around on small maps playing slayer. ooooo we got forge...forge=red headed step child to half life mods and unreal tourney

heck the end was garbage all you see is master chief 117 some passport looking thing

plus why they have to kill sgt major?

i guess halo for the simple minded no wonder a lot kids8 and up play it regardless of the M rating

all GS does is judge xbox360 gamesof the good and judge ps3 gamesof the bad

optimistic for xbox360 andpessimistic for ps3

because we all know if halo got a 7.5 you be sending death threats and threaten to hang yourselves if they don't change it.

llidianStormage

You arn't aloud to make fun of people for being simple minded and type like that.

They gave Oblivion an 9.5 and Ninja Gaiden a 9.0 same with Rainbow Six (I believe). I don't think it has anything to do with high expectations (from all the hype) and more to do with the games just not being that great.pins_basic

Regardless of the expectations theory, I believe these games just really aren't up to par with what the other systems are offering, but my point would also takes into account that having expectations based on company promises should be acceptable, and whether or not GS does this, doesn't seem unfair at all.

have the game and R&C is way better then the 7.5 score period GS negative was identity crisis wtf!?!?!? and story r&C always been that way.

any way i can see why cows think GS is bias because halo 3 sure is not a 9.5 game more of a8.9 game with its linear game play and its LAME STORY(i weather watch a steven seagal movie then see halo trash story on the big screen). oooooooooooooo the flood I'm so frighten so how many times can you kill an alien and run around on small maps playing slayer. ooooo we got forge...forge=red headed step child to half life mods and unreal tourney

heck the end was garbage all you see is master chief 117 some passport looking thing

plus why they have to kill sgt major?

i guess halo for the simple minded no wonder a lot kids8 and up play it regardless of the M rating

all GS does is judge xbox360 gamesof the good and judge ps3 gamesof the bad

optimistic for xbox360 andpessimistic for ps3

because we all know if halo got a 7.5 you be sending death threats and threaten to hang yourselves if they don't change it.

llidianStormage

dude the game was amazing ok? it did what it was supposed to do. finish the fight... with style.

Oh come on. Gamespot is the best reviewer, andthe other "top 10" reviewers are basically retarded. If it got a 7.5 then it's seriously mediocre. Gamespot doesn't accidentally review AAA games as "seriously mediocre." Just to put things in perspective, IGN gave Dead or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball for the Xbox 1 like a 9.2. 1UP is just stupid. The other sites are BS.

Plus- Rachet and Clank is a platformer. What were you expecting? It's a platformer for chrissakes, not the sequel to Oblivion.

Frostbite24

So you're saying that we have to play every game to know if a reviewer is right? I don't know about you, but I would rather kill myself than play Hour of Victory just to see if GS's score was accurate.

maybe not play every game, but u have to agree that when the majority of the review public gives the game AA-AAA scores and GS happens to be theonly one dishing out 7.5 (the score on metacritic is a translation of a letter score..apperantly when they went to school, getiing 75% was above average and warranted a B....) you should atleast contemplate the possibility that the gamespot review maybe errenous, instead of discounting all the other reviews that seem to be in cohesion.

You'd also have to agree that GS has been around for a very long time and have always reviewed, previewed, and showcased games in a professional and fair manner. These aren't just random people picked up off the road, GS peeps have much more experience with games and the game industry than most of the people on here. i've never doubted GS's reviews, even when things didn't turn out well IMO, and I'm not going to start now.

Well look who reviewed the game. Someone who didn't review the past games from the series, someone who has never gave a rating higher then 8.5, etc. I would probably have more respect for the review if someone like Jeff did it.

The guy simply doesn't know how to rate games. I mean seriously he gave Heavenly Sword a 8 and R&C a 7.5? LOL! The review made sense but the score did not match the review which is why it was a bad review.

have the game and R&C is way better then the 7.5 score period GS negative was identity crisis wtf!?!?!? and story r&C always been that way.

any way i can see why cows think GS is bias because halo 3 sure is not a 9.5 game more of a8.9 game with its linear game play and its LAME STORY(i weather watch a steven seagal movie then see halo trash story on the big screen). oooooooooooooo the flood I'm so frighten so how many times can you kill an alien and run around on small maps playing slayer. ooooo we got forge...forge=red headed step child to half life mods and unreal tourney

heck the end was garbage all you see is master chief 117 some passport looking thing

plus why they have to kill sgt major?

i guess halo for the simple minded no wonder a lot kids8 and up play it regardless of the M rating

all GS does is judge xbox360 gamesof the good and judge ps3 gamesof the bad

optimistic for xbox360 andpessimistic for ps3

because we all know if halo got a 7.5 you be sending death threats and threaten to hang yourselves if they don't change it.

llidianStormage

That is in all honesty the most pathetic post i've ever read on system wars. And that really is saying something.

What myth are you cows inventing? R&C flopped - so now every PS3 game flops at GS? You realise GS have given you cows three more AAA games than the average on gamerankings?Ninja-Vox

I'm not inventing anything, and I'm not a cow. I'm a lemming. I'm just trying to offer a logical reason why PS3 scores are lower on GS. If it were me, every PS3 game that didn't absolutely shock me would get low scores because of the the BS about how the PS3 was supposed to be a super computer that would solve world hunger. If a company is going make claims to extraordinary standards then they should be judged on those standards.

Oh come on. Gamespot is the best reviewer, andthe other "top 10" reviewers are basically retarded. If it got a 7.5 then it's seriously mediocre. Gamespot doesn't accidentally review AAA games as "seriously mediocre." Just to put things in perspective, IGN gave Dead or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball for the Xbox 1 like a 9.2. 1UP is just stupid. The other sites are BS.

Plus- Rachet and Clank is a platformer. What were you expecting? It's a platformer for chrissakes, not the sequel to Oblivion.

Frostbite24

So you're saying that we have to play every game to know if a reviewer is right? I don't know about you, but I would rather kill myself than play Hour of Victory just to see if GS's score was accurate.

maybe not play every game, but u have to agree that when the majority of the review public gives the game AA-AAA scores and GS happens to be theonly one dishing out 7.5 (the score on metacritic is a translation of a letter score..apperantly when they went to school, getiing 75% was above average and warranted a B....) you should atleast contemplate the possibility that the gamespot review maybe errenous, instead of discounting all the other reviews that seem to be in cohesion.

You'd also have to agree that GS has been around for a very long time and have always reviewed, previewed, and showcased games in a professional and fair manner. These aren't just random people picked up off the road, GS peeps have much more experience with games and the game industry than most of the people on here. i've never doubted GS's reviews, even when things didn't turn out well IMO, and I'm not going to start now.

dont get me wrong, i think GS is talented and everything, but they are not perfect. I have only ever complained about3 or 4 incidents and coming form a company that has been around for years as you've said thats a god track record. Sure there are some deviation here and there, but overall i think they are good at what they do. But you have to atleast accept the possibilty that in this regard, this review may be wrong. Did u watch the video review? it was all positive that at the end u think to urself "why did he give it 7.5 if all he had to say was good things?" i mean Halo 2 got AAA with a weak story and cliffhanger ending because it has great gameplay. This guy says that the gameplay is where R&C shines, yet he gives it 7.5 You have to admit it deserves atleast a pause.

[QUOTE="Synthetic_NinJI"]

Exactly.

If I were to say my console is better then any other console,had the most hardware to date, and will run at 120 fps at 4D, I would want people to uphold me to that standard.

Obviously that standard hasnt been meet and should be judged accordingly.

DaAznSaN

But I do not believe it is the reason for the flops as multiplats seem to score decently. Tho it does depend on the genre as well, for e.g. RTS has a lot lower expectations on consoles.

So we were told that the PS3 was going to be the system that would rival any other system to date, whose games were supposed to revolutionize gaming, basically we were to told we wouldn't believe our eyes when we got our hands on it. I even started to believe this when the price was announced. I mean with something that expensive it had to have something amazing under the hood. So with that all in mind, it is plausible to think that GS is also expecting these promises to be a reality and therefore judge the PS3 games with the same standard Sony claimed the PS3 to be.

What do you think? Is this plausible?

Frostbite24

You make a very good point. If that is the case, the first time GS gives a PS3 exclusive game a AAA rating, it will be a truely phenomanal game.

So we were told that the PS3 was going to be the system that would rival any other system to date, whose games were supposed to revolutionize gaming, basically we were to told we wouldn't believe our eyes when we got our hands on it. I even started to believe this when the price was announced. I mean with something that expensive it had to have something amazing under the hood. So with that all in mind, it is plausible to think that GS is also expecting these promises to be a reality and therefore judge the PS3 games with the same standard Sony claimed the PS3 to be.

What do you think? Is this plausible?

Frostbite24

no, its because the 360 has raised the bar.

[QUOTE="Frostbite24"]

So we were told that the PS3 was going to be the system that would rival any other system to date, whose games were supposed to revolutionize gaming, basically we were to told we wouldn't believe our eyes when we got our hands on it. I even started to believe this when the price was announced. I mean with something that expensive it had to have something amazing under the hood. So with that all in mind, it is plausible to think that GS is also expecting these promises to be a reality and therefore judge the PS3 games with the same standard Sony claimed the PS3 to be.

What do you think? Is this plausible?

kevy619

no, its because the 360 has raised the bar.

it is quite apparent that the 360, without making extraordinary claims, has succeeded in offering gamers truly next gen games. In the eyes of the reviewers I'm sure that many a 360 game has suprised them with quality and this is due to the fact that Microsoft does not spew forth inconcievables about it's capabilities and claim them to be doctrine.