Since PS3/Wii launch: List of Standalone AAAE PC Games at Gamerankings

Crysis :|

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

:lol:

what's so funny.

Having a good day laughing at Crysis?

what's so funny.

Having a good day laughing at Crysis?

Ncsoftlover

You're right.....More sad than Funny

This troll needs to learn that in this type of debate, .aliblabla2007

I disagree. You can't honestly say PDZ and NMH are AAA games. GR is much more accurate.

[QUOTE="aliblabla2007"]This troll needs to learn that in this type of debate, .GioVela2010

I disagree. You can't honestly say PDZ and NMH are AAA games. GR is much more accurate.

If we're going by that argument for arguing game quality, then stop using any score method whatsoever. Whether or not GR is a collection of opinions as compared to GS being one opinion, it doesn't matter - they are both subjective, and you should use another person's score, or a score from a group of people to judge how you yourself will like a game.

It's an SW rule to use GS scores over any other website. Like any other law, it's idiotic, as the score argument should be abolished completely. But as long as you're debating in this board, you follow its rules.

[QUOTE="GioVela2010"]

[QUOTE="aliblabla2007"]This troll needs to learn that in this type of debate, .aliblabla2007

I disagree. You can't honestly say PDZ and NMH are AAA games. GR is much more accurate.

If we're going by that argument for arguing game quality, then stop using any score method whatsoever. Whether or not GR is a collection of opinions as compared to GS being one opinion, it doesn't matter - they are both subjective, and you should use another person's score, or a score from a group of people to judge how you yourself will like a game.

It's an SW rule to use GS scores over any other website. Like any other law, it's idiotic, as the score argument should be abolished completely. But as long as you're debating in this board, you follow its rules.

Nah, as far as I'm concerned the average opinion of 50+ profesional reviewers far out weighs the opinion of one person. You can go by whatever you like. I'll continue to go by Gamerankings.

And for the record, I think PC has had 1 standalone AAAE at Gamerankings (Crysis) in like a 800 day span. Truely pathetic.

[QUOTE="aliblabla2007"][QUOTE="GioVela2010"]

[QUOTE="aliblabla2007"]This troll needs to learn that in this type of debate, .GioVela2010

I disagree. You can't honestly say PDZ and NMH are AAA games. GR is much more accurate.

If we're going by that argument for arguing game quality, then stop using any score method whatsoever. Whether or not GR is a collection of opinions as compared to GS being one opinion, it doesn't matter - they are both subjective, and you should use another person's score, or a score from a group of people to judge how you yourself will like a game.

It's an SW rule to use GS scores over any other website. Like any other law, it's idiotic, as the score argument should be abolished completely. But as long as you're debating in this board, you follow its rules.

Nah, as far as I'm concerned the average opinion of 50+ profesional reviewers far out weighs the opinion of one person. You can go by whatever you like. I'll continue to go by Gamerankings.

And for the record, I think PC has had 1 standalone AAAE at Gamerankings (Crysis) in like a 800 day span. Truely pathetic.

What's pathetic is that people insist on using scores to represent game quality - it's all what you make of the game you're playing. If you get someone else's opinion and try to validate it as a fact because he's doing it for a job and you're not, then you need to learn to think for yourself.

[QUOTE="aliblabla2007"]This troll needs to learn that in this type of debate, .GioVela2010

I disagree. You can't honestly say PDZ and NMH are AAA games. GR is much more accurate.

The reason I don't consider GR accurate is that when Pc games get less reviews they'll be ignored, because you know they won't show pc games with less than a few reviews on lists or rankings.

You have these PlayStation official magazine or OXM or G4 or others site that give out 10s to every massively hyped consoles game, and you also have some strict reviewer that are just strict on reviewing pc games, all of these count into average, that's why the pc version of a multiplat always get a lower score on GR.

[QUOTE="GioVela2010"]

[QUOTE="aliblabla2007"]This troll needs to learn that in this type of debate, .Ncsoftlover

I disagree. You can't honestly say PDZ and NMH are AAA games. GR is much more accurate.

The reason I don't consider GR accurate is that when Pc games get less reviews they'll be ignored, because you know they won't show pc games with less than a few reviews on lists or rankings.

You have these PlayStation official magazine or OXM or G4 or others site that give out 10s to every massively hyped consoles game, and you also have some strict reviewer that are just strict on reviewing pc games, all of these count into average, that's why the pc version of a multiplat always get a lower score on GR.

Which AAA Console game at GR is not AAA on PC because of stricter PC reviewers? It's not like I'm saying the 360 version of Bioshock is best because it's averaging .3% higher....

The stricter PC reviewers excuse is such a cop out..

[QUOTE="Ncsoftlover"][QUOTE="GioVela2010"]

[QUOTE="aliblabla2007"]This troll needs to learn that in this type of debate, .GioVela2010

I disagree. You can't honestly say PDZ and NMH are AAA games. GR is much more accurate.

The reason I don't consider GR accurate is that when Pc games get less reviews they'll be ignored, because you know they won't show pc games with less than a few reviews on lists or rankings.

You have these PlayStation official magazine or OXM or G4 or others site that give out 10s to every massively hyped consoles game, and you also have some strict reviewer that are just strict on reviewing pc games, all of these count into average, that's why the pc version of a multiplat always get a lower score on GR.

Which AAA Console game at GR is not AAA on PC because of stricter PC reviewers? It's not like I'm saying the 360 version of Bioshock is best because it's averaging .3% higher....

The stricter PC reviewers excuse is such a cop out..

Each site has different review criteria, GS' criteria is they DO NOT rate games by comparing them to other platforms, they rate games based on the technical capabilities of the SAME platform. In other words, its VERY hard for a PC game to get a 10, since PC evolves so fast, its hard to determine what the technical "limits" of a PC are.

What's with the flood of low level/post-count users this week?Verge_6

Console games usually have 3-4 publications each which churn out unrealistically high scores (the Official magazines are particularly bad). Lair was given AAA by two magazines, as was Too Human.

This is obviously going to raise averages.

PC journalism alternatively has no centralised company interested in promoting the platform, so there are no official PC magazines. In fact, specialist PC magazines are often much, much more critical than most mainstream journalism, simply because they know their catering to an audience they can be a little more frank with.

The most logical solution is the one we use here. A single source where review standards are exactly the same for each platform. Otherwise we have a situation were the Official Playstation Magazine is taken with as much weight as GameSpot or IGN.

omg TC is right.....

:lol:

:lol:

The PC haters are really crawling out of the woodwork today. Whats with the hate?

Perhaps as both gears and R2 scored the same they need somewhere else to vent the anger.

[QUOTE="Danm_999"]

Console games usually have 3-4 publications each which churn out unrealistically high scores (the Official magazines are particularly bad). Lair was given AAA by two magazines, as was Too Human.

This is obviously going to raise averages.

PC journalism alternatively has no centralised company interested in promoting the platform, so there are no official PC magazines. In fact, specialist PC magazines are often much, much more critical than most mainstream journalism, simply because they know their catering to an audience they can be a little more frank with.

The most logical solution is the one we use here. A single source where review standards are exactly the same for each platform. Otherwise we have a situation were the Official Playstation Magazine is taken with as much weight as GameSpot or IGN.

rgame1

o shut up. Go and read how gameranking is done and u will see how weighting is done.

They make average all the sites they list in bold. It's not rocket science.

omg TC is right.....

:lol:

:lol:

rgame1

Actually, he's not.

The TC's list for some reason excludes Company of Heroes, Civ 4, The Burning Crusade and Dark Avatar.

All this generation, AAAEs according to GameRankings. Doesn't make the method any more valid.

I also have to ask why this is being taken from the launch of the PS3/Wii, rather than the 360? To manipulate the results?

[QUOTE="rgame1"]

omg TC is right.....

:lol:

:lol:

Danm_999

Actually, he's not.

The TC's list for some reason excludes Company of Heroes, Civ 4, The Burning Crusade and Dark Avatar.

All this generation, AAAEs according to GameRankings. Doesn't make the method any more valid.

I also have to ask why this is being taken from the launch of the PS3/Wii, rather than the 360? To manipulate the results?

Stop trying to make it look like he's giving us false information... Last I checked, Company of Heroes came out before Wii/PS3, which gives me no incentive to even check if your other 'exclusives' are correct... Face it he's giving you a fact, he didn't make AAAE's since 360 launch because that wouldn't he as hilarious.

[QUOTE="Danm_999"][QUOTE="rgame1"]

omg TC is right.....

:lol:

:lol:

WAIW

Actually, he's not.

The TC's list for some reason excludes Company of Heroes, Civ 4, The Burning Crusade and Dark Avatar.

All this generation, AAAEs according to GameRankings. Doesn't make the method any more valid.

I also have to ask why this is being taken from the launch of the PS3/Wii, rather than the 360? To manipulate the results?

Stop trying to make it look like he's giving us false information... Last I checked, Company of Heroes came out before Wii/PS3, which gives me no incentive to even check if your other 'exclusives' are correct... Face it he's giving you a fact, he didn't make AAAE's since 360 launch because that wouldn't he as hilarious.

I honestly dont see what the point of this is.

Gamerankings is a terrible source for meta reviews, that sticks in scores from any source, and the scores fluctuate constantly as more are added at any date.

If people are going to go Meta they should at least use MetaCritic.

Anyways the thread is a troll thread so whats the point of even discussing this.

[

Gamerankings is a terrible source for meta reviews, that sticks in scores from any source, and the scores fluctuate constantly as more are added at any date.

If people are going to go Meta they should at least use MetaCritic.

skrat_01

i agree, i still don't know why we use gamespot or gamerankings i think it's just moronic

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][

Gamerankings is a terrible source for meta reviews, that sticks in scores from any source, and the scores fluctuate constantly as more are added at any date.

If people are going to go Meta they should at least use MetaCritic.

st1ka

i agree, i still don't know why we use gamespot or gamerankings i think it's just moronic

[QUOTE="st1ka"]

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][

Gamerankings is a terrible source for meta reviews, that sticks in scores from any source, and the scores fluctuate constantly as more are added at any date.

If people are going to go Meta they should at least use MetaCritic.

skrat_01

i agree, i still don't know why we use gamespot or gamerankings i think it's just moronic

the thing with gamespot is that they are so inconsistent, and what's more shouldn't that problem with Jeff and half of the review team leaving prove that there is something wrong with gamespot's review system?

it's not like this rule was imposed by gamespot or anything, a mod just told me yesterday that this rule was imposed by the comunity.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="st1ka"]

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][

Gamerankings is a terrible source for meta reviews, that sticks in scores from any source, and the scores fluctuate constantly as more are added at any date.

If people are going to go Meta they should at least use MetaCritic.

st1ka

i agree, i still don't know why we use gamespot or gamerankings i think it's just moronic

the thing with gamespot is that they are so inconsistent, and what's more shouldn't that problem with Jeff and half of the review team leaving prove that there is something wrong with gamespot's review system?

it's not like this rule was imposed by gamespot or anything, a mod just told me yesterday that this rule was imposed by the comunity.

I thought the community voted for 'anarchy' - in that there is no 'winner' of SW - in ratings from GS or meta sites, or sales.

Still I honestly cant say, other than the general gist seems to be its GS scores, as this is gamespot. I'm guessing its the same for other forums out there.

this is already complete **** since there are multiple games missiing...like Company of heroes, WOW burning crusade...etc.cobrax75

Burning Crusade is an expansion....

[QUOTE="cobrax75"]this is already complete **** since there are multiple games missiing...like Company of heroes, WOW burning crusade...etc.WAIW

Burning Crusade is an expansion....

But expansion packs don't count! /sarcasm

this is already complete **** since there are multiple games missiing...like Company of heroes, WOW burning crusade...etc.cobrax75

Is the topic title incorrect in anyway?

[QUOTE="WAIW"][QUOTE="Danm_999"][QUOTE="rgame1"]

omg TC is right.....

:lol:

:lol:

skrat_01

Actually, he's not.

The TC's list for some reason excludes Company of Heroes, Civ 4, The Burning Crusade and Dark Avatar.

All this generation, AAAEs according to GameRankings. Doesn't make the method any more valid.

I also have to ask why this is being taken from the launch of the PS3/Wii, rather than the 360? To manipulate the results?

Stop trying to make it look like he's giving us false information... Last I checked, Company of Heroes came out before Wii/PS3, which gives me no incentive to even check if your other 'exclusives' are correct... Face it he's giving you a fact, he didn't make AAAE's since 360 launch because that wouldn't he as hilarious.

September 13th

PC has gone like 800 days with 1 standalone AAAE at GR.

Crysis is not a good game in my opinion, all flash no substance, but PC gaming has still been great for me since the launch of the PS3. I've been enjoying many games that would simply be pathetic on a console, regardless of platform, take TF2 for example. Great game that I could not imagine playing anywhere else other than PC.

When it comes down to it, who cares what score a game gets on a website. If you're so easily manipulated that you base all your purchases off a games score on various websites, good luck and I hope you enjoy your 'gaming'

I prefer PC games in general. I don't really care whether "Mario Battles the Magical Child Mushroom Princess VII" scores a million 10 out of 10s, it's not my cup of tea. Is this so difficult to understand for you people? That people have different tastes, and different platforms cater to those?

GioVela, if you want to troll, be a bit less conspicuous about it.

[QUOTE="cobrax75"]this is already complete **** since there are multiple games missiing...like Company of heroes, WOW burning crusade...etc.WAIW

Burning Crusade is an expansion....

....so? whats your point?

[QUOTE="WAIW"]

[QUOTE="cobrax75"]this is already complete **** since there are multiple games missiing...like Company of heroes, WOW burning crusade...etc.JangoWuzHere

Burning Crusade is an expansion....

....so? whats your point?

His point is Burning Crusade doesn't meet the criteria of the thread topic.

Stating facts is trolling? :roll:GioVela2010

Here are some more facts:

Total AAAA (# exclusive)

• PS3: 2 (1)
• 360: 1 (0)

Total AAA (# exclusive)

• PC: 19 (10)
• 360: 16 (5)
• PS3: 12 (2)
• Wii: 6 (4)

Total AA (# exclusive)

• PC: 83 (57)
• 360: 74 (12)
• PS3: 45 (4)
• Wii: 24 (7)

[QUOTE="GioVela2010"]Stating facts is trolling? :roll:Locke562

Here are some more facts:

Total AAAA (# exclusive)

• PS3: 2 (1)
• 360: 1 (0)

Total AAA (# exclusive)

• PC: 19 (10)
• 360: 16 (5)
• PS3: 12 (2)
• Wii: 6 (4)

Total AA (# exclusive)

• PC: 83 (57)
• 360: 74 (12)
• PS3: 45 (4)
• Wii: 24 (7)

Make a thread about it, that debunks nothing I've said in the Topic Title.

the fact that PC gamers get years out of their games and console gamers usually weeks to months, really says alot about this debate.Koalakommander

HAHA with your $15 dollar a month MMO's , and $30 dollar bi yearly expansion packs I would sure hope so :lol:

[QUOTE="Koalakommander"]the fact that PC gamers get years out of their games and console gamers usually weeks to months, really says alot about this debate.GioVela2010

HAHA with your $15 dollar expansion packs, and $30 dollar bi yearly expansion packs I would sure hope so :lol:

lol what? im so confused.

at least i dont buy expansion packs labeled as sequels and drop $60 on them 0_o.

[QUOTE="GioVela2010"]

[QUOTE="Koalakommander"]the fact that PC gamers get years out of their games and console gamers usually weeks to months, really says alot about this debate.Koalakommander

HAHA with your $15 dollar expansion packs, and $30 dollar bi yearly expansion packs I would sure hope so :lol:

lol what? im so confused.

at least i dont buy expansion packs labeled as sequels and drop $60 on them 0_o.

This DC is soo old :lol:

because shooters seem to be the only thing worth hyping this generation, it should come to no surprise that almost 100% of worth-while shooters go to the PC and are BETTER on the PC. :o

http://www.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=25781167

Fail.

yay another consolite troll .

wooooooo