Xmas EDGE Scores

[djjimbob]

Had a read of the SMG review yesterday. Talk about gushing! They absolutely loved it. Very enthusiastically written and a really interesting read.

I think Adam Stone should write the NTSC-UK review in poem form just to be different.

[fuzzybee]

some interesting points but i don't agree about one

you must judge a game by it's own merits and score it accordingly, you cannot compare or let the final score be influenced by a game coming out later than the game your reviewing. Bioshock and Orange Box may be fps but one review shouldn't and i doubt has influenced the other, if there was ever a game deserved of a 10 it has to be Orange Box.
I also agreed with the 8 for Bioshock, as i said in my other post Edge are usually more or less spot on and i agree totally about the games narrative as they usually alway cover the pros and cons perfectly.

[crocky-chocky]

I think I've finally discovered my main source of beef with EDGE:

They're slapdash handing out of 7's.

Silent Hill Origins for example, doesn't feel a mere notch underneath Bioshock in terms of quality. Even though a 7 is a fair score for Origins, it's a dated game rife with cliches. Whereas Bioshock attempts something new, is stunning to play and yet it's ruthlessly marked down for reasons that have very little effect on the sheer entertainment the game delivers.

I guess what I'm trying to say in a cack-handed manner, is that the gap in quality between a 7 game and an 8 game is slightly too great. And that CVG should return and bring back the High Five system.

And I am SORRY for bringing up the Bioshock 8 again. Really.

[eastyy]

its odd really and i could not write reviews

i mean if a game does something new but perhaps not the best is that better then a game thats nothing new but does it really well ?

steve

[B1gBeard]

I think I've finally discovered my main source of beef with EDGE:

They're slapdash handing out of 7's.

Silent Hill Origins for example, doesn't feel a mere notch underneath Bioshock in terms of quality. Even though a 7 is a fair score for Origins, it's a dated game rife with cliches. Whereas Bioshock attempts something new, is stunning to play and yet it's ruthlessly marked down for reasons that have very little effect on the sheer entertainment the game delivers.

I guess what I'm trying to say in a cack-handed manner, is that the gap in quality between a 7 game and an 8 game is slightly too great. And that CVG should return and bring back the High Five system.

And I am SORRY for bringing up the Bioshock 8 again. Really.

To be fair games like Dues Ex, System Shock, Ultima Underworld etc were doing this stuff way before Bioshock. The narrative and atmosphere was Bioshocks biggest draws. It did little that was innovative.

[crocky-chocky]

To be fair games like Dues Ex, System Shock, Ultima Underworld etc were doing this stuff way before Bioshock. The narrative and atmosphere was Bioshocks biggest draws. It did little that was innovative.

Aye.

I agree it's not the most innovative game. Although it's setting alone made it feel fresher than most games this year to me.

But my point is that it is significantly more daring and exciting than a majority of EDGE's 7's. Because their template for a 7 is a solid game that attempts nothing new.

[Brats]

I mean if a game does something new but perhaps not the best is that better then a game thats nothing new but does it really well ?

I think it just boils down to the entertainment value. Sometimes you need innovation for a game to be entertaining, other times you don't. COD4 is a great example of a game that is polished until it beams like a minature sun, but it doesn't do anything new.

Expectation lays a big part in reviews as well. There's no doubt that the text for the Bioshock and Mass Effect reviews were very critical, but that was because they expected the second coming and it didn't arrive in their opinions. Other games have reviewed very well when little was expected of them and they turned out to be pretty good.

Compare the reviews of Biosock with King Kong. Both are similar games in some ways and both scored the same, but the reviews themselves could not be more different.

[Kotatsu Neko]

To be fair games like Dues Ex, System Shock, Ultima Underworld etc were doing this stuff way before Bioshock. The narrative and atmosphere was Bioshocks biggest draws. It did little that was innovative.

The amazing atmosphere was in itself innovative.

[B1gBeard]

The amazing atmosphere was in itself innovative.

If you hadn't played certain other games maybe but it was nothing that hadn't been done before albeit at lower resolutions and sound quality.

[MonkeySteve]

The amazing atmosphere was in itself innovative.

And Edge praised that in their review, but said it wasn't enough to carry the rest of the game, which had its flaws.

[Kotatsu Neko]

If you hadn't played certain other games maybe but it was nothing that hadn't been done before albeit at lower resolutions and sound quality.

I would disagree with that personally. For me the amazing setting an atmosphere was the bulk of the enjoyment in Bioshock. Could be that it just particularly appealed to me, but I just loved it. I spent a good deal of time just wandering around the environments drinking in the scenery and history of it all.

[Dogg Thang]

i mean if a game does something new but perhaps not the best is that better then a game thats nothing new but does it really well?

No. Doing something new only counts if that something is actually good. Personally I think 'innovation' has led to more bad games than good. But when they're really good and push things forward, great.

But no, that doesn't mean they should get a higher score than a game that does things done before but does them really well. There is going to be a certain amount of progress expected though - to justify a game's existence.

[B1gBeard]

I would disagree with that personally. For me the amazing setting an atmosphere was the bulk of the enjoyment in Bioshock. Could be that it just particularly appealed to me, but I just loved it. I spent a good deal of time just wandering around the environments drinking in the scenery and history of it all.

I agree it was amazing and as yourself spent a great deal of time soaking up the atmosphere. I had just experienced very similar feelings before in other games. All very personal as you say.

[JU!]

Have I missed the issue with a review of PES2008 or something? I want to see what they have got to say about the slow down etc. That Galaxy score as well lookin fwd to reading what they say especially about it being a bit easy.

As for reviews I do pay attention to them if a majority say it's a poor game then it's usually correct. But I do agree that a small score in Edge can sometimes sway you to buy or not buy a game if you choose to pay attention to it. I usually know what games I like and will buy what I want, but if the game is reviewed and gets a poor score then this may stop me wasting my money because non of us want to do that right?!?

[Dogg Thang]

What I find with reviews is that if 3 magazines give a game a 9 and one gives it a 7, to me it usually turns out that the 7 review is right no matter what the source is. It seems easy for reviewers to get blinded by gloss or hype or whatever and give a score higher than a game really deserves and there's usually more straight up honesty in the lower reviews.