Unfair reviews - In your opinion of course

[Ish]

I never got on with Killer 7 either. Maybe I'm not cool enough

[bwi]

Games tm giving Burnout 3 10/10 and then, even now still trying to justifying it.

It was good but no 10 imo

bri

[Mr Fujisawa]

i never got on with killer 7 either. just didnt enjoy it

also, i think a 5 star review system is best (if u have to have a score at all, im all for consolevania and the like in having no score as it just causes porblems, bnut socre is useful for archiving and such). 3 for an average game, 4 for a pretty damn good game, 5 for an absolutely brilliant game. 2 for a game that probabably isnt worth playing unless ur an absolute fan or weirdo and 1 for something to avoid that tottally misses the mark. as theres less points the scores can cover mroe range and avoid minor quibbles like 6 vs 7 and such.

again, just my opinion, but i ****ing hate the fact people even have to say this cause OF COURSE ITS MY ****ING OPINION WHO ELSES WOULD IT BE?

[Team Andromeda]

Here's some of mine

Exhumed - EDGE

Lunar (Mega CD) - EDGE

Pazner Dragoon Orta - EDGE The person doing the reviews needs a good kicking

VF Evo - EDGE

HALO II - Official X-Box Mag (giving this 10 out 10 was a joke)

SOA - EDGE

ICO- EDGE

Shenmue - Official Dreamcast Mag . Sorry while I love the game, its far from 10 out of 10

Mario SS - EDGE, how can this shambles of a Mario game get a 9 out of 10 ????

[marcus]

I like the 5 mark system better also, for most of those reasons. There no real distinction between say something that gets a 2, 3 or even 4 much the same as 7 or 8, and marks of 1 and 10 are hardly ever used anyways so it all seems a bit pointless. With less marks available, a writer would have a easier decision to make and I expect that the score would then reflect the review more accurately.

[w?stling]

Halo 2 - GEE (German Edge-style-Mag)
Rating: "One in a million"

They abolished their rating system after that issue.

[oldskool]

Edge giving MARIO KART: DD 5/10.

[sj33]

I've long believed we need a complete overhaul to the way games are reviewed.

Really, what is the purpose of a review? To give the reader information to know whether the title is worth their hard earned cash. I couldn't give a rats ass if the reviewer likes the game or not. Sure, there's nothing wrong with the reviewer stating whether they reckon X feature is good/bad... but we don't read a review of [random game here] because we care what the reviewer thinks of the title - we read it to see what *we* will think of it, right? So Eurogamer thinks RR6 is too much like the PSP game? What if that's what I want, and the idea of PSP Ridge in 720p 5.1 sounds dreamy to me? That 8/10 suddently doesn't mean too much to me. Totally dependant on the reader. More facts, less opinions from a guy who probably has different gaming tastes to me anyway.

Review scores need to be abolished - they don't really serve much purpose if we have the former sorted out. Besides, how does GameSpot decide if a game is worth 8.5 or 8.6? 8.6 SPECIFICALLY? As in, 8.5 would be too low, 8.7 would be too high?
WoW got a higher review score on GameSpot than SotC. That means WoW is better, right? Stupid! They're totally different types of game.

Heck, Ridge Racer 6 might be worth 9/10 to a person that loves that kind of game. Might be worth 4/10 to someone who prefers the feel of GT.
More often than not, people just glace at the review score, yet this doesn't always reflect what the review itself says about the title, and again, a person reckoning the game is worth 8/10 doesn't mean to much to a reader trying to make their own mind up on the title.

Eh, bit of a rant there, but it's something that really bothers me. The current system we have where X person thinks X game is worth X/10 is just not a system that best serves the purpose of helping the reviewer decide whether the title is for THEM, imo.

[dc-arena]

Do you remember Maximum magazine? IIRC they didn't give a score, they just wrote about the game for 5 or 6 pages and providing a very detailed review of the game. They were ace.

Sadly publishers want to be given numbers (especially out of 10) that they can put into their excel sheets, powerpoint presentations and in some cases plastered on the front or back of the game case - a review that takes a good half hour to read is of no use to them.


Stupid review scores imo?

Half Life 2 (PC) - 10/10. EDGE breaking their own rules of only giving out 10s to revolutionary games. HL2 was a fantastic game, but there were too many crappy driving and hoverboat sections (with AWFUL controls) for me. And the games constantly poor caching and awful loading times (played on a highend PC no less) diluted the experience for me. Doom 3 was better. Moving on..


Err.. Anyone giving Perfect Dark Zero anything more than 6 out of 10 needs to remove their dick from the Microsoft provided hookers and actually play the piece of ****.

[Strider]

Gamestms coverage of anything DS related.

Haven't read it for ages now but prior to the DS's release and after it (when I stopped reading) they spouted utter bollocks.

It usually involved the word gimmick somewhere along the line...

I fought tooth and nail for every DS score I gave when I was on the mag. Band Bros got an 8 and so did Catch touch Yoshi. Nanostray got a 6. Not bad scores really. so you can't say all their scores have been wrong I'm saying nothing about the Burnout 3 score

As has been said though scores are subjective and always based on the opinion on the person playing it. So there's little point getting to upset about them. (as I've done here on a number of occasions...)

[MonkeyWrench]

I've long believed we need a complete overhaul to the way games are reviewed.

Really, what is the purpose of a review? To give the reader information to know whether the title is worth their hard earned cash. I couldn't give a rats ass if the reviewer likes the game or not. Sure, there's nothing wrong with the reviewer stating whether they reckon X feature is good/bad... but we don't read a review of [random game here] because we care what the reviewer thinks of the title - we read it to see what *we* will think of it, right? So Eurogamer thinks RR6 is too much like the PSP game? What if that's what I want, and the idea of PSP Ridge in 720p 5.1 sounds dreamy to me? That 8/10 suddently doesn't mean too much to me. Totally dependant on the reader. More facts, less opinions from a guy who probably has different gaming tastes to me anyway.

That's exactly how I feel too. Sometimes the reviewers opinion completely over shadows the details of the game. Just gimme the ****ing details and let me make up my own mind. Another thing that really irks me is there's an over reliance on comparisons with other games in reviews nowadays, it's just lazy journalism.

[gingerj]

Edge giving MARIO KART: DD 5/10.

what was wrong with that?

Oh and this review I think wins by a country mile its so wrong its untrue:

http://www.gamepro.com/nintendo/gamecube/games/reviews/51854.shtml

[Kieran76]

what was wrong with that?

Oh and this review I think wins by a country mile its so wrong its untrue:
http://www.gamepro.com/nintendo/game...ws/51854.shtml

That review was comedy gold, made me want to go out and buy the game.

I remember EDGE giving Goldeneye a 9 when we all know it's a 10. But if you moan about one mark then you're a cock.

[Nakano]

Everyone has different tastes, whats wrong with that? If someone reviews a game that they don't like, of course they're going to give a low mark if they're being honest.

I never liked the Mario games, GTA games or MGS games, I'll probably get killed if I reviewed those games!

[Team Andromeda]

Do you remember Maximum magazine? IIRC they didn't give a score, they just wrote about the game for 5 or 6 pages and providing a very detailed review of the game. They were ace.

.

Maximum did give score , they were marked in out of 5 star's . Anway you're spot on about PDZ. Its a 3 out of 10 at best