Since it is almost December, I think it would be final to see what should be the game of the year.

I choose Mass Effect because after just purchasesing it and played it for a good 13 hours and already know the replay is high because of the achievements and able to transfer the same character to the next adventure (starting over again but with the same level and stats). I think the game is like Resident Evil 4 because you can start over with the same stats.

[QUOTE="judas-savior"][QUOTE="Hrex_basic"]

Anyone Notice that Kevin Van Ord reviewed both ME & AC? Seems like his reviews are really inconsistent with the rest ofhis journalistic peers at other sites and magazines.

GREG KASAVIN oh where are you? Your once wonderful website is falling apart at the seems. I miss your reasonable reviews, and the old review system. Please come back and save us...oh yeah, and DUMP this Kevin VanOrd guy, his reviews are just TERRIBLE.

Zell_Forever

Kevin VanOrd is biased against RPG's.. He does not appear to be an RPG gamer.. I just hope he doesn't get his hands on Lost Odyssey. Final Fantasy XIII or White Knight or any other upcomming RPG's as he will destroy the hearts and excitment of so many RPG fans lol.

I hate to say it but he doesn't deserve to be in the chair.. atleast not writing reviews for RPG's.. He obviously doesn't like them very much and he also can't obviously uphold his professionalism so I say its time to keep him away or dump him.

Oh damn, maybe i should'nt check gamespot when those games are released and go according to the impressions i get from gameplay vids.
It seems this Kevin guy isn't the RPG type, and that fat bastard who reviewed R&C was the sports fan, I don't understand whats going on when in gamespots terms they clearly state they give a game to a reviewer who enjoys that type of game.

All in all this seems like a big marketing ploy.. I don't see how they could screw up so bad otherwise.

What Gamespot should really do is do what Game Informer does, if they do please tell me, is create a profile with each other. Now I know they do, but what Game Informer does is match their intrests (RPG, FPS, Adventure, Platforming ect.) and do their reviews by what their intrests are, then do a SECOND OPINION the by a less into reviewer.

Like Example)

Real Review SCore: 9. 75 (Game Informer does it by .25's which is a whole lot better)

Second Opinion: 8.5 (Kevin that is, and Gamespot does it by .5's, which is stupid as hell)

Get it?

[QUOTE="youngtongue"]wow I'm going to get hated for this.....bioshock......stika

trust me, your not, bioshock was a major disapointment

Dude, I thought Bioshock was supposed to be a free world exploration, but it seemed so linear that it had a disapointing feel to it.

and um buying it,whats your point?itll take me 30 hours to beat the game cause i dont rush games like reviewersi-lick-monkeys

i-lick-monkeys do have a point maybe. These reviewers will try to gets these reviews done and post them down a fast as they could. They should enjoy the games rather than make it like homework. Even if it does look like a 12 hour main quest, it would sure kill Halo 3's storyline.

Under the current review system, a 9.5 is the best score possible as their are no "perfect" games. Crysis, Halo 3, Mario, The Orange Box, and World in Conflict are all games that have scored a 9.5 in the past two months, and while they are all great games, they should all not be given the best possible score. Hypothetically, what happens if GS finds the upcoming Mass Effect to be better than Mario? They can't give it a 10 because it isn't perfect, but they can't differentiate it score-wise from, what they feel, is an inferior game. I know that reviews should be about the content and not the number, but I find it disheartening that "the best possible score" is being dished out like candy on Halloween. 5 games have been given a 9.5 since September!

Using increments of .5 on reviews has been working for the most part, but fails when it comes to truly exceptional games. GS should continue its scoring method for game reviews, but when the next Ocarina of Time comes up for review, a higher score than the traditional 9.5 should be available to a reviewer. There will never be a perfect game, but there will be ones deserving of a score higher than 9.5, and Game Spot should recognize that.

tothedogsforme

Why don't they do it the best way, by .25 increments. Game Informer does it, and it works perfectly. Not too specific but not too casual.

I personally think this is a really good poll. I voted for Halo 3 beacuse Call of Duty really just looks like another modern FPS, sorry. Call of Duty 4 is a superb game, but I think I got more bang for my buck for Halo 3.

I reserved Mass Effect four months ago, so I am really hyped about the game.

Also, Game Informer gave Mass Effect 9.75 out of 10, so my money must be going somewhere totally revolutionary. They must have got a deal... hhmmmm.