(Un)official (maybe sorta) Revote of Using GS Scores in SW (Sticky?)

[QUOTE="-RPGamer-"]

To be honest I'll use gamerankings here from this point forward. I once "held true" to the time honored "OMG we're on GS, we use GS reviews" concept, but today has made me not care anymore about that old tradition.

So whether this thread agrees with me or not, does not matter. I will from now on call my "flops" or "AAA" (or what ever other related drivel) off of gamerankings.

I guess my hope is that the journalistic integrity lost might balance out with multiple review sites/pubs.

Today an old tradition dies...

Hoffgod

That old tradition died with a lot of us the second TP was reviewed.

[QUOTE="GT-JPWhoopass"]u wanna use something else... leavegoblaa

No.

We're on Gamespot forums, why shouldn't we use Gamespot scores? If you don't like their reviews, post elsewhere.Stevo_the_gamer

Why shouldn't we? Better question, why must we? I like the forum, but I can use what sites I so choose to do. If you don't like it don't read my (our)posts.

[QUOTE="Hoffgod"][QUOTE="-RPGamer-"]

To be honest I'll use gamerankings here from this point forward. I once "held true" to the time honored "OMG we're on GS, we use GS reviews" concept, but today has made me not care anymore about that old tradition.

So whether this thread agrees with me or not, does not matter. I will from now on call my "flops" or "AAA" (or what ever other related drivel) off of gamerankings.

I guess my hope is that the journalistic integrity lost might balance out with multiple review sites/pubs.

Today an old tradition dies...

bretthorror

That old tradition died with a lot of us the second TP was reviewed.

Well now we can be like the MLB and use Asterisks (*) next to reviews.Blackbond

I actually stopped using their reviews after I bought PDZ.-Renegade

Somehow I doubt you bought that game... Mass Effect is still GOTY !!

Most of fanboys complaining for gamespot reviews are cows and sheep how sad, we are on gamespot like i said u don't like their reviews then leave.-wii60-

[QUOTE="Blackbond"]Well now we can be like the MLB and use Asterisks (*) next to reviews.Tiefster

GS takes bribes. Plain and simple. WE can't use it anymore.

Probably 95% of big Xbox 360 games that were reviewed was bought. Obviously, from Micro$oft... $$$$$$$

[QUOTE="Tiefster"][QUOTE="Blackbond"]Well now we can be like the MLB and use Asterisks (*) next to reviews.Hoffgod

GS takes bribes. Plain and simple. WE can't use it anymore.

Probably 95% of big Xbox 360 games that were reviewed was bought. Obviously, from Micro$oft... $$$$$$$

XenogearsMaster

To be honest I'll use gamerankings here from this point forward. I once "held true" to the time honored "OMG we're on GS, we use GS reviews" concept, but today has made me not care anymore about that old tradition.

So whether this thread agrees with me or not, does not matter. I will from now on call my "flops" or "AAA" (or what ever other related drivel) off of gamerankings.

I guess my hope is that the journalistic integrity lost might balance out with multiple review sites/pubs.

Today an old tradition dies...

-RPGamer-

All that needs to be said. I'm not even going to use GR though, seeing as how it is owned by CNET.

[QUOTE="XenogearsMaster"]

GS takes bribes. Plain and simple. WE can't use it anymore.

Probably 95% of big Xbox 360 games that were reviewed was bought. Obviously, from Micro$oft... $$$$$$$

Tiefster

GS has their standards. They are over-critical.

Most of fanboys complaining for gamespot reviews are cows and sheep-wii60-

[QUOTE="-RPGamer-"]

To be honest I'll use gamerankings here from this point forward. I once "held true" to the time honored "OMG we're on GS, we use GS reviews" concept, but today has made me not care anymore about that old tradition.

So whether this thread agrees with me or not, does not matter. I will from now on call my "flops" or "AAA" (or what ever other related drivel) off of gamerankings.

I guess my hope is that the journalistic integrity lost might balance out with multiple review sites/pubs.

Today an old tradition dies...

ZeldaMaster32

All that needs to be said. I'm not even going to use GR though, seeing as how it is owned by CNET.

**** GAMERANKINGS.COM!

**** THEM!

Stop doing stupid **** like "revoting" an issue because you're emotional about it. Gamerankings is broken for a number of rather obvious reasons to anyone who bothers to think about how they do things. GR should be looked at as nothing more than a convenience; one place where you can access a number of reviews quickly. To suggest we should use the Gamerankings.com average as the new standard is...STUPID.

I'm too tired to see this stupid **** going on right now.

I know a few of you are upset in light of certain events that will not be discussed here so I feel the need to take all the poll-less threads off the streets of SW and make one with a poll.

Should we, the forumites of SW, continue to use GS scores as god when determining if a game is a flop or not?

Debate all you like about business practices but do not discuss the recent events in detail.

Also, after you vote, post about why your supported source is credible or any other things you need to say about it.

(Sticky maybe eventually please?)Tiefster

The problem with Meta and GR is they still tabulate GS and other CNET scores. I don't want any more bias involved with these games.

We should trust GameInfomer or IGN, I say.

EDIT : CNET owns Gamerrankings, and Metacritic, which proves how pointless it is to switch to them.

**** GAMERANKINGS.COM!

**** THEM!

Stop doing stupid **** like "revoting" an issue because you're emotional about it. Gamerankings is broken for a number of rather obvious reasons to anyone who bothers to think about how they do things. GR should be looked at as nothing more than a convenience; one place where you can access a number of reviews quickly. To suggest we should use the Gamerankings.com average as the new standard is...STUPID.

I'm too tired to see this stupid **** going on right now.

Dreams-Visions

GS takes bribes. Plain and simple. WE can't use it anymore.

Probably 95% of big Xbox 360 games that were reviewed was bought. Obviously, from Micro$oft... $$$$$$$

XenogearsMaster

Show me the proof. Nothing we've seen today proves anything of the sort. We don't know how many incidents have led up to this move. We don't know the full rationale yet, as far as I know.

**** GAMERANKINGS.COM!

**** THEM!

Stop doing stupid **** like "revoting" an issue because you're emotional about it. Gamerankings is broken for a number of rather obvious reasons to anyone who bothers to think about how they do things. GR should be looked at as nothing more than a convenience; one place where you can access a number of reviews quickly. To suggest we should use the Gamerankings.com average as the new standard is...STUPID.

I'm too tired to see this stupid **** going on right now.

Dreams-Visions

Yeah, hit the sack. You're proven yourself a joke in enough discussion tonight.

[QUOTE="Tiefster"]I know a few of you are upset in light of certain events that will not be discussed here so I feel the need to take all the poll-less threads off the streets of SW and make one with a poll.

Should we, the forumites of SW, continue to use GS scores as god when determining if a game is a flop or not?

Debate all you like about business practices but do not discuss the recent events in detail.

Also, after you vote, post about why your supported source is credible or any other things you need to say about it.

(Sticky maybe eventually please?)SolidTy

The problem with Meta and GR is they still tabulate GS and other CNET scores. I don't want any more bias involved with these games.

We should trust GameInfomer or IGN, I say.

Because GameInformer and IGN aren't heavily dependent upon revenue that comes from ads bought and paid for by publishers and game developers? :|

Just because their skeletons haven't been brought to light doesn't mean they don't exist.

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

**** GAMERANKINGS.COM!

**** THEM!

Stop doing stupid **** like "revoting" an issue because you're emotional about it. Gamerankings is broken for a number of rather obvious reasons to anyone who bothers to think about how they do things. GR should be looked at as nothing more than a convenience; one place where you can access a number of reviews quickly. To suggest we should use the Gamerankings.com average as the new standard is...STUPID.

I'm too tired to see this stupid **** going on right now.

bretthorror

Yeah, hit the sack. You're proven yourself a joke in enough discussion tonight.

*looks at sig*

Nah...you just gave me more motivation to stay up. Please...don't say anything stupid. It would break my heart.

Any way we go we're pretty much in the gutter. GS - Review scores called into question with ad dollars. GR - Not every game reviewed by all the same sites/magazines and some sites counted are clearly biased. Meta - Yeah, same thing as GR. Other - How can we agree on a single site? Polls? How do we know they are any different? :roll: ;) SW meta game, you've just been pwnt. Oh well.Ibacai

Any way we go we're pretty much in the gutter. GS - Review scores called into question with ad dollars. GR - Not every game reviewed by all the same sites/magazines and some sites counted are clearly biased. Meta - Yeah, same thing as GR. Other - How can we agree on a single site? Polls? :roll: ;) SW meta game, you've just been pwnt. Oh well.Ibacai

Glad somebody has a goddamn clue at this time of night.

Gamerankigns.com doesn't use the same set of reviewers for all reviews.

Gamerankings.com includes fansites in their average scores.

Gamerankings.com uses reviews that are not standardized (some are out of 10, some out of 5, some out of 100).

Not all reviews look for the same qualities and quantities, but Gamerankings.com treats them all the same by design.

4 clear, fundamental flaws.

[QUOTE="XenogearsMaster"]

GS takes bribes. Plain and simple. WE can't use it anymore.

Probably 95% of big Xbox 360 games that were reviewed was bought. Obviously, from Micro$oft... $$$$$$$

Dreams-Visions

Show me the proof. Nothing we've seen today proves anything of the sort. We don't know how many incidents have led up to this move. We don't know the full rationale yet, as far as I know.

We won't know the full story unless Gamespot speaks up but if theydo they'll go in full damage control.

We just have to assume that most of their AAA games were bought.

[QUOTE="Ibacai"]Any way we go we're pretty much in the gutter. GS - Review scores called into question with ad dollars. GR - Not every game reviewed by all the same sites/magazines and some sites counted are clearly biased. Meta - Yeah, same thing as GR. Other - How can we agree on a single site? Polls? :roll: ;) SW meta game, you've just been pwnt. Oh well.Dreams-Visions

Glad somebody has a goddamn clue at this time of night.

Gamerankigns.com doesn't use the same set of reviewers for all reviews.

Gamerankings.com includes fansites in their average scores.

Gamerankings.com uses reviews that are not standardized (some are out of 10, some out of 5, some out of 100).

Not all reviews look for the same qualities and quantities, but Gamerankings.com treats them all the same by design.

4 clear, fundamental flaws.

**** GAMERANKINGS.COM!

**** THEM!

Stop doing stupid **** like "revoting" an issue because you're emotional about it. Gamerankings is broken for a number of rather obvious reasons to anyone who bothers to think about how they do things. GR should be looked at as nothing more than a convenience; one place where you can access a number of reviews quickly. To suggest we should use the Gamerankings.com average as the new standard is...STUPID.

I'm too tired to see this stupid **** going on right now.

Dreams-Visions

Using GR is stupid? Is it as stupid as trusting a site that takes bribes from advertisers? Or are you just going to brush it off as capitalism again?

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"][QUOTE="XenogearsMaster"]

GS takes bribes. Plain and simple. WE can't use it anymore.

Probably 95% of big Xbox 360 games that were reviewed was bought. Obviously, from Micro$oft... $$$$$$$

XenogearsMaster

Show me the proof. Nothing we've seen today proves anything of the sort. We don't know how many incidents have led up to this move. We don't know the full rationale yet, as far as I know.

We won't know the full story unless Gamespot speaks up but if theydo they'll go in full damage control.

We just have to assume that most of their AAA games were bought.

well...what of the other websites? the other magazines. as has been talked about countless times in the past, Gamespot's scoring is on PAR with the game scores for just about every game you can name with the rest of the industry's opinion.

[QUOTE="SolidTy"]

[QUOTE="Tiefster"]I know a few of you are upset in light of certain events that will not be discussed here so I feel the need to take all the poll-less threads off the streets of SW and make one with a poll.

Should we, the forumites of SW, continue to use GS scores as god when determining if a game is a flop or not?

Debate all you like about business practices but do not discuss the recent events in detail.

Also, after you vote, post about why your supported source is credible or any other things you need to say about it.

(Sticky maybe eventually please?)Dreams-Visions

The problem with Meta and GR is they still tabulate GS and other CNET scores. I don't want any more bias involved with these games.

We should trust GameInfomer or IGN, I say.

Because GameInformer and IGN aren't heavily dependent upon revenue that comes from ads bought and paid for by publishers and game developers? :|

Just because their skeletons haven't been brought to light doesn't mean they don't exist.

Well, I make it a habit to not just complain, but to throw at least a solution out there. GameInformer would definately be more free for their own opinions, as they are tied to Gamestop, and that means they may have more freedom to say what needs to be said.

Still, I do remember you saying there was NO BIAS at GS...that didn't prove to be so true, from what we know right now.

Either way, as humans there is no perfect solution, just mags/sites we trust. GS isn't one of those now.

Many Presidents have had to do some shady things, but we always remember the Nixon's/Bush's. They all have skeleton's, but that's where you go with your gut.

GS and CNET sites no longer get that luxury.

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"][QUOTE="XenogearsMaster"]

GS takes bribes. Plain and simple. WE can't use it anymore.

Probably 95% of big Xbox 360 games that were reviewed was bought. Obviously, from Micro$oft... $$$$$$$

XenogearsMaster

Show me the proof. Nothing we've seen today proves anything of the sort. We don't know how many incidents have led up to this move. We don't know the full rationale yet, as far as I know.

We won't know the full story unless Gamespot speaks up but if theydo they'll go in full damage control.

We just have to assume that most of their AAA games were bought.

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

**** GAMERANKINGS.COM!

**** THEM!

Stop doing stupid **** like "revoting" an issue because you're emotional about it. Gamerankings is broken for a number of rather obvious reasons to anyone who bothers to think about how they do things. GR should be looked at as nothing more than a convenience; one place where you can access a number of reviews quickly. To suggest we should use the Gamerankings.com average as the new standard is...STUPID.

I'm too tired to see this stupid **** going on right now.

Zhengi

Using GR is stupid? Is it as stupid as trusting a site that takes bribes from advertisers? Or are you just going to brush it off as capitalism again?

So now they've gone from firing a guy for whatever the full reasons are (which will never be disclosed) to taking bribes for games from advertisers? What bribes? When? Links? or is this all in your imagination right now?

How about the average of Gamespot, IGN, and Eurogamer scores?

I voted for Gamespot in the poll but this tremendous idea just struck like a bolt from the blue.

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"]

**** GAMERANKINGS.COM!

**** THEM!

Stop doing stupid **** like "revoting" an issue because you're emotional about it. Gamerankings is broken for a number of rather obvious reasons to anyone who bothers to think about how they do things. GR should be looked at as nothing more than a convenience; one place where you can access a number of reviews quickly. To suggest we should use the Gamerankings.com average as the new standard is...STUPID.

I'm too tired to see this stupid **** going on right now.

Zhengi

Using GR is stupid? Is it as stupid as trusting a site that takes bribes from advertisers? Or are you just going to brush it off as capitalism again?

I vote GameRankings. It's already what I go by personally, and although I respect GameSpot's scores, I will always respect an average of critics a lot more than one guy's opinion.

There should also be an option to to go by the GameSpot average user score. Because I could see how someone might value that more than other options (although I'd personally still prefer GR).

[QUOTE="Ibacai"]Any way we go we're pretty much in the gutter. GS - Review scores called into question with ad dollars. GR - Not every game reviewed by all the same sites/magazines and some sites counted are clearly biased. Meta - Yeah, same thing as GR. Other - How can we agree on a single site? Polls? :roll: ;) SW meta game, you've just been pwnt. Oh well.Dreams-Visions

Glad somebody has a goddamn clue at this time of night.

Gamerankigns.com doesn't use the same set of reviewers for all reviews.

Gamerankings.com includes fansites in their average scores.

Gamerankings.com uses reviews that are not standardized (some are out of 10, some out of 5, some out of 100).

Not all reviews look for the same qualities and quantities, but Gamerankings.com treats them all the same by design.

4 clear, fundamental flaws.

The third complaint doesn't matter because they're all converted into percentages.

The first and second complaint are minor because they are not skewed in a significant way, i.e. including only fansites for one console and not the others. With so many reviews being averaged, it's a wash.

Gamerankings/Metacritic aren't perfect, but it's the best option we have.

[QUOTE="XenogearsMaster"][QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"][QUOTE="XenogearsMaster"]

GS takes bribes. Plain and simple. WE can't use it anymore.

Probably 95% of big Xbox 360 games that were reviewed was bought. Obviously, from Micro$oft... $$$$$$$

Dreams-Visions

Show me the proof. Nothing we've seen today proves anything of the sort. We don't know how many incidents have led up to this move. We don't know the full rationale yet, as far as I know.

We won't know the full story unless Gamespot speaks up but if theydo they'll go in full damage control.

We just have to assume that most of their AAA games were bought.

well...what of the other websites? the other magazines. as has been talked about countless times in the past, Gamespot's scoring is on PAR with the game scores for just about every game you can name with the rest of the industry's opinion.

I say we choose 5 most trusted websites or magazinesexcluding GS(because theyare liars)and average their scores.

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"][QUOTE="SolidTy"]

[QUOTE="Tiefster"]I know a few of you are upset in light of certain events that will not be discussed here so I feel the need to take all the poll-less threads off the streets of SW and make one with a poll.

Should we, the forumites of SW, continue to use GS scores as god when determining if a game is a flop or not?

Debate all you like about business practices but do not discuss the recent events in detail.

Also, after you vote, post about why your supported source is credible or any other things you need to say about it.

(Sticky maybe eventually please?)SolidTy

The problem with Meta and GR is they still tabulate GS and other CNET scores. I don't want any more bias involved with these games.

We should trust GameInfomer or IGN, I say.

Because GameInformer and IGN aren't heavily dependent upon revenue that comes from ads bought and paid for by publishers and game developers? :|

Just because their skeletons haven't been brought to light doesn't mean they don't exist.

Well, I make it a habit to not just complain, but to throw at least a solution out there. GameInformer would definately be more free for their own opinions, as they are tied to Gamestop, and that means they may have more freedom to say what needs to be said.

Still, I do remember you saying there was NO BIAS at GS...that didn't prove to be so true, from what we know right now.

Either way, as humans there is no perfect solution, just mags/sites we trust. GS isn't one of those now.

Many Presidents have had to do some shady things, but we always remember the Nixon's/Bush's. They all have skeleton's, but that's where you go with your gut.

GS and CNET sites no longer get that luxury.

But in truth, we've still not seen any evidence of them showing bias to anyone. We know a guy was fired. We know it had something to do a review that impacted Gamespots banner ad revenue. I don't know if we have any more real information than that. This may have been a final straw for Gamespot. And given how hard Gamespot has been on all games, I wouldn't think it's fair to presume any inflated scores to date. would you?

Again, with the "No bias" thing, people have assembled those threads before. Gamespot's scoring is on par with other websites and that's a fact. We've all seen the numbers.

How about the average of Gamespot, IGN, and Eurogamer scores?

I voted for Gamespot in the poll but this tremendous idea just struck like a bolt from the blue.

JiveT

[QUOTE="ZeldaMaster32"][QUOTE="-RPGamer-"]

To be honest I'll use gamerankings here from this point forward. I once "held true" to the time honored "OMG we're on GS, we use GS reviews" concept, but today has made me not care anymore about that old tradition.

So whether this thread agrees with me or not, does not matter. I will from now on call my "flops" or "AAA" (or what ever other related drivel) off of gamerankings.

I guess my hope is that the journalistic integrity lost might balance out with multiple review sites/pubs.

Today an old tradition dies...

Tiefster

All that needs to be said. I'm not even going to use GR though, seeing as how it is owned by CNET.

No idea. *shrugs* I find GT to be spot on all the time however.

[QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"][QUOTE="XenogearsMaster"][QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"][QUOTE="XenogearsMaster"]

GS takes bribes. Plain and simple. WE can't use it anymore.

Probably 95% of big Xbox 360 games that were reviewed was bought. Obviously, from Micro$oft... $$$$$$$

XenogearsMaster

Show me the proof. Nothing we've seen today proves anything of the sort. We don't know how many incidents have led up to this move. We don't know the full rationale yet, as far as I know.

We won't know the full story unless Gamespot speaks up but if theydo they'll go in full damage control.

We just have to assume that most of their AAA games were bought.

well...what of the other websites? the other magazines. as has been talked about countless times in the past, Gamespot's scoring is on PAR with the game scores for just about every game you can name with the rest of the industry's opinion.

I say we choose 5 most trusted websites or magazinesexcluding GS(because theyare liars)and average their scores.

But are there 5 to trust?

IGN - eh....ok.

1UP - People hate them

GameInformer - ok.

GamePro - people hate them

GameSpy - nobody cares about them

Edge - Nobody likes them.

Gametrailers - ok.

Who's left?

[QUOTE="SolidTy"][QUOTE="Dreams-Visions"][QUOTE="SolidTy"]

[QUOTE="Tiefster"]I know a few of you are upset in light of certain events that will not be discussed here so I feel the need to take all the poll-less threads off the streets of SW and make one with a poll.

Should we, the forumites of SW, continue to use GS scores as god when determining if a game is a flop or not?

Debate all you like about business practices but do not discuss the recent events in detail.

Also, after you vote, post about why your supported source is credible or any other things you need to say about it.

(Sticky maybe eventually please?)Dreams-Visions

The problem with Meta and GR is they still tabulate GS and other CNET scores. I don't want any more bias involved with these games.

We should trust GameInfomer or IGN, I say.

Because GameInformer and IGN aren't heavily dependent upon revenue that comes from ads bought and paid for by publishers and game developers? :|

Just because their skeletons haven't been brought to light doesn't mean they don't exist.

Well, I make it a habit to not just complain, but to throw at least a solution out there. GameInformer would definately be more free for their own opinions, as they are tied to Gamestop, and that means they may have more freedom to say what needs to be said.

Still, I do remember you saying there was NO BIAS at GS...that didn't prove to be so true, from what we know right now.

Either way, as humans there is no perfect solution, just mags/sites we trust. GS isn't one of those now.

Many Presidents have had to do some shady things, but we always remember the Nixon's/Bush's. They all have skeleton's, but that's where you go with your gut.

GS and CNET sites no longer get that luxury.

But in truth, we've still not seen any evidence of them showing bias to anyone. We know a guy was fired. We know it had something to do a review that impacted Gamespots banner ad revenue. I don't know if we have any more real information than that. This may have been a final straw for Gamespot. And given how hard Gamespot has been on all games, I wouldn't think it's fair to presume any inflated scores to date. would you?

Again, with the "No bias" thing, people have assembled those threads before. Gamespot's scoring is on par with other websites and that's a fact. We've all seen the numbers.

How about the average of Gamespot, IGN, and Eurogamer scores?

I voted for Gamespot in the poll but this tremendous idea just struck like a bolt from the blue.

JiveT

Yeah, that's what I was thinking except exclude Gamespot (because their credibility is blown) and we should add 3 more.

I say, IGN, 1UP, Eurogamer, GI,... what else?

[QUOTE="SolidTy"]

Well, I make it a habit to not just complain, but to throw at least a solution out there. GameInformer would definately be more free for their own opinions, as they are tied to Gamestop, and that means they may have more freedom to say what needs to be said.

Still, I do remember you saying there was NO BIAS at GS...that didn't prove to be so true, from what we know right now.

Either way, as humans there is no perfect solution, just mags/sites we trust. GS isn't one of those now.

Many Presidents have had to do some shady things, but we always remember the Nixon's/Bush's. They all have skeleton's, but that's where you go with your gut.

GS and CNET sites no longer get that luxury.

Dreams-Visions

But in truth, we've still not seen any evidence of them showing bias to anyone. We know a guy was fired. We know it had something to do a review that impacted Gamespots banner ad revenue. I don't know if we have any more real information than that. This may have been a final straw for Gamespot. And given how hard Gamespot has been on all games, I wouldn't think it's fair to presume any inflated scores to date. would you?

Again, with the "No bias" thing, people have assembled those threads before. Gamespot's scoring is on par with other websites and that's a fact. We've all seen the numbers.

I don't know if we ever will see evidence. I hope we do. I hope we see something that clears this up, but in the meantime, what are we to do. Right now, we have momentum for change. That cant' be conjured up whenever. I do know that GS is hard on games...This thread is a tad premature, to say the least, but the masses are reacting.

All we can do is control the flow, because we can't stop this...if it's a real Review Revolt. That said, what is the solution?