This is why I bought a Wii.....

actually, Wii has 1 more AAA than ps3

ogvampire

[QUOTE="ogvampire"]

actually, Wii has 1 more AAA than ps3

angelkimne

Yep. PS3 has 9 AAA and 2 AAAA's.

So, Wii has 3 less AAA's, 2 less AAAA's.

His math is great.

And you can't include VC, they're just ROMS, old games being played on the Wii. Otherwise you'd have to include the PS2 library, or any of the ROMS you can DL through PSN (SotN, etc.) they can be played on the PS3 after all.

Yeah and the PS3 has 2 AAAAs while the Wii has 0. But who's counting right?

DireToad

i dont use GS scores. what games are AAAA? last time i checked, the highest rated game this gen is SMG.

[QUOTE="ogvampire"]

actually, Wii has 1 more AAA than ps3

angelkimne

i dont use GS scores, i use metacritic or GR.

[QUOTE="angelkimne"][QUOTE="ogvampire"]

actually, Wii has 1 more AAA than ps3

RuprechtMonkey

Yep. PS3 has 9 AAA and 2 AAAA's.

So, Wii has 3 less AAA's, 2 less AAAA's.

His math is great.

And you can't include VC, they're just ROMS, old games being played on the Wii. Otherwise you'd have to include the PS2 library, or any of the ROMS you can DL through PSN (SotN, etc.) they can be played on the PS3 after all.

the problem is sources. i use Metacritic or GR, while you just use GS.

according to metacritic, my math is right on. thanks for the attempt though

[QUOTE="RuprechtMonkey"][QUOTE="angelkimne"][QUOTE="ogvampire"]

actually, Wii has 1 more AAA than ps3

ogvampire

Yep. PS3 has 9 AAA and 2 AAAA's.

So, Wii has 3 less AAA's, 2 less AAAA's.

His math is great.

And you can't include VC, they're just ROMS, old games being played on the Wii. Otherwise you'd have to include the PS2 library, or any of the ROMS you can DL through PSN (SotN, etc.) they can be played on the PS3 after all.

according to metacritic, my math is right on. thanks for the attempt though

so we go by metacritic now? since when?

[QUOTE="ogvampire"][QUOTE="RuprechtMonkey"][QUOTE="angelkimne"][QUOTE="ogvampire"]

actually, Wii has 1 more AAA than ps3

qewrewq

Yep. PS3 has 9 AAA and 2 AAAA's.

So, Wii has 3 less AAA's, 2 less AAAA's.

His math is great.

And you can't include VC, they're just ROMS, old games being played on the Wii. Otherwise you'd have to include the PS2 library, or any of the ROMS you can DL through PSN (SotN, etc.) they can be played on the PS3 after all.

according to metacritic, my math is right on. thanks for the attempt though

so we go by metacritic now? since when?

i do. i edited my post to clarify

[QUOTE="ogvampire"][QUOTE="RuprechtMonkey"][QUOTE="angelkimne"][QUOTE="ogvampire"]

actually, Wii has 1 more AAA than ps3

qewrewq

Yep. PS3 has 9 AAA and 2 AAAA's.

So, Wii has 3 less AAA's, 2 less AAAA's.

His math is great.

And you can't include VC, they're just ROMS, old games being played on the Wii. Otherwise you'd have to include the PS2 library, or any of the ROMS you can DL through PSN (SotN, etc.) they can be played on the PS3 after all.

according to metacritic, my math is right on. thanks for the attempt though

so we go by metacritic now? since when?

Theres no rule about whos reviews we go by, you can go by whatever you want.....ofcorse it makes more sense to go by GR or MC no matter what forum you're on....

[QUOTE="ogvampire"][QUOTE="RuprechtMonkey"][QUOTE="angelkimne"][QUOTE="ogvampire"]

actually, Wii has 1 more AAA than ps3

qewrewq

Yep. PS3 has 9 AAA and 2 AAAA's.

So, Wii has 3 less AAA's, 2 less AAAA's.

His math is great.

And you can't include VC, they're just ROMS, old games being played on the Wii. Otherwise you'd have to include the PS2 library, or any of the ROMS you can DL through PSN (SotN, etc.) they can be played on the PS3 after all.

according to metacritic, my math is right on. thanks for the attempt though

so we go by metacritic now? since when?

Lol, I guess so. After all, all those hundreds of no-name sites they factor into their scores (in fact those sites make up the majority of them) are obviously a better gauge. Deeko > GS.

Lol, I guess so. After all, all those hundreds of no-name sites they factor into their scores (in fact those sites make up the majority of them) are obviously a better gauge. Deeko > GS.

RuprechtMonkey

maybe its just me, but when comparing other people's opinions, isnt it more logical to listen to many opinions instead of just 1?

Theres no rule about whos reviews we go by, you can go by whatever you want.....ofcorse it makes more sense to go by GR or MC no matter what forum you're on....

meetroid8

But there should be one, that's like saying the PS3 is the best because it has the most AAA's on www.randomreviewsite.com , if we're going to argue who's got the best games, we should all go by the same review site, and if I remember right..SW voted GR as that website. He chose MC because that's the only place where the Wii has more AAA's than the PS3.

[QUOTE="RuprechtMonkey"]

Lol, I guess so. After all, all those hundreds of no-name sites they factor into their scores (in fact those sites make up the majority of them) are obviously a better gauge. Deeko > GS.

ogvampire

maybe its just me, but when comparing other people's opinions, isnt it more logical to listen to many other opinions instead of just 1?

Yes, it's just you. I could make 20 sites right now, list all the Wii games there, and give them all 10, would that matter? we argue by comparing professional reviews, and MC includes almost every single review site out there.

[QUOTE="RuprechtMonkey"]

Lol, I guess so. After all, all those hundreds of no-name sites they factor into their scores (in fact those sites make up the majority of them) are obviously a better gauge. Deeko > GS.

ogvampire

maybe its just me, but when comparing other people's opinions, isnt it more logical to listen to many opinions instead of just 1?

It depends whose opinions you're talking about. IGN, 1up, GS, EuroGamer - sure. Many of those no-name sites are just as worthless as opinions of random people from this forum, so, for those, no. Go down the list of the Metacritic review sites and you should see how many useless sites there truly are (and they have a tremendous impact on the averages.) ANYONE can set up a review site, Hell, I could. It takes more than that to become an established, respected name in the field.

[QUOTE="meetroid8"]

Theres no rule about whos reviews we go by, you can go by whatever you want.....ofcorse it makes more sense to go by GR or MC no matter what forum you're on....

qewrewq

But there should be one, that's like saying the PS3 is the best because it has the most AAA's on www.randomreviewsite.com , if we're going to argue who's got the best games, we should all go by the same review site, and if I remember right..SW voted GR as that website. He chose MC because that's the only place where the Wii has more AAA's than the PS3.

Wii and ps3 have the same amount of AAA games at GR...

i choose MC as a personal preference.

[QUOTE="qewrewq"][QUOTE="meetroid8"]

Theres no rule about whos reviews we go by, you can go by whatever you want.....ofcorse it makes more sense to go by GR or MC no matter what forum you're on....

ogvampire

But there should be one, that's like saying the PS3 is the best because it has the most AAA's on www.randomreviewsite.com , if we're going to argue who's got the best games, we should all go by the same review site, and if I remember right..SW voted GR as that website. He chose MC because that's the only place where the Wii has more AAA's than the PS3.

Wii and ps3 have the same amount of AAA games at GR...

i choose MC as a personal preference.

yeah, where did I say it didn't?

[QUOTE="ogvampire"][QUOTE="RuprechtMonkey"]

Lol, I guess so. After all, all those hundreds of no-name sites they factor into their scores (in fact those sites make up the majority of them) are obviously a better gauge. Deeko > GS.

qewrewq

maybe its just me, but when comparing other people's opinions, isnt it more logical to listen to many other opinions instead of just 1?

Yes, it's just you. I could make 20 sites right now, list all the Wii games there, and give them all 10, would that matter? we argue by comparing professional reviews, and MC includes almost every single review site out there.

but then youre just picking and choosing the sites where you get your info from. metacritic includes all sites so you get a more realistic overview.

[QUOTE="ogvampire"]

actually, Wii has 1 more AAA than ps3

angelkimne

[QUOTE="ogvampire"][QUOTE="qewrewq"][QUOTE="meetroid8"]

Theres no rule about whos reviews we go by, you can go by whatever you want.....ofcorse it makes more sense to go by GR or MC no matter what forum you're on....

qewrewq

But there should be one, that's like saying the PS3 is the best because it has the most AAA's on www.randomreviewsite.com , if we're going to argue who's got the best games, we should all go by the same review site, and if I remember right..SW voted GR as that website. He chose MC because that's the only place where the Wii has more AAA's than the PS3.

Wii and ps3 have the same amount of AAA games at GR...

i choose MC as a personal preference.

yeah, where did I say it didn't?

[/QUOTE

i didnt say that you did, but if you look all the way back to my original reply that this discussion began with on another post, you would see that i was correcting someone that said that the Wii had the least amount of AAA games...

[QUOTE="qewrewq"][QUOTE="ogvampire"][QUOTE="RuprechtMonkey"]

Lol, I guess so. After all, all those hundreds of no-name sites they factor into their scores (in fact those sites make up the majority of them) are obviously a better gauge. Deeko > GS.

ogvampire

maybe its just me, but when comparing other people's opinions, isnt it more logical to listen to many other opinions instead of just 1?

Yes, it's just you. I could make 20 sites right now, list all the Wii games there, and give them all 10, would that matter? we argue by comparing professional reviews, and MC includes almost every single review site out there.

but then youre just picking and choosing the sites where you get your info from. metacritic includes all sites so you get a more realistic overview.

90% of review sites are worthless. You'd never read them individually, or care about their scores individually, so I don't know why you think they suddenly become "OK" or more important if you combine them and average their scores.

that would be a good pickup line, "hey babe, wanna play pajama sam with me?"KGB32

[QUOTE="angelkimne"][QUOTE="ogvampire"]

actually, Wii has 1 more AAA than ps3

air_wolf_cubed

nope. i meant Metacritic

90% of review sites are worthless. You'd never read them individually, or care about their scores individually, so I don't know why you think they suddenly become "OK" or more important if you combine them and average their scores.

RuprechtMonkey

i dont think they are worthless, they are just different.

as far as im concerned, the only non-credible sites are the playstation, xbox, and nintendo-centered ones