Should SW use a different review sites t ...

Seems like GS's reviews have been schizophrenic this year. Giving 10's out undeservingly, and flopping other games that are definately AAA status on the majority of other sites. I would nominate Giant Bomb to be the new standard for judging SW scores. Heck, the reviewers there have been with GS longer than the current group of GS reviewers.Should SW use a different review sites t ...
Who cares? No one takes scores seriouslyShould SW use a different review sites t ...
No, you should get over it.It scored a 9, it's not a flop. You don't like it, don't come here.
no GS is law on GS. go to another site where you like the reviews.
[QUOTE=''Chutebox''] No, you should get over it.It scored a 9, it's not a flop. You don't like it, don't come here.[/QUOTE]But at the same time Fable 2 is easily AAA. Banjo will probably be underrated as well.
giant bomb was made by a person who gave out two 10'sone to oot and one to thps3...that doesn't sound strange...? :?
In essence using any review site is pointless since it comes to each persons personal preference whether or not they like the game. But this is Gamespot, so we use Gamespot scores to determin a flop or not here in SW.
[QUOTE=''FanofGames2''][QUOTE=''Chutebox''] No, you should get over it.It scored a 9, it's not a flop. You don't like it, don't come here.[/QUOTE]But at the same time Fable 2 is easily AAA. Banjo will probably be underrated as well. [/QUOTE]Why is it easily AAA? It's (just) below AAA status at gamerankings.Move on...
[QUOTE=''Jackboot343'']giant bomb was made by a person who gave out two 10'sone to oot and one to thps3...that doesn't sound strange...? :? [/QUOTE]Or maybe LOZOOT at the time deserved it:
|[QUOTE=''FirstDiscovery''][QUOTE=''Jackboot343'']giant bomb was made by a person who gave out two 10'sone to oot and one to thps3...that doesn't sound strange...? :? [/QUOTE]Or maybe LOZOOT at the time deserved it:|[/QUOTE]but thps3 is on the same level as lozott :|
Nah, GS reviews have always been inconsistent, nothing new. For convenience we should use a single source, and since we're in GS that source should be GS. They also review games relatively evenly on all platforms, something like Giant Bomb hardly ever reviews PC games.
Why are people damage controlling a 9.0 scoring game?
[QUOTE=''Jackboot343''] giant bomb was made by a person who gave out two 10'sone to oot and one to thps3...that doesn't sound strange...? :? [/QUOTE] He also got fired for no longer putting up BS scores.
[QUOTE=''WillieBeamish''][QUOTE=''Jackboot343''] giant bomb was made by a person who gave out two 10'sone to oot and one to thps3...that doesn't sound strange...? :? [/QUOTE] He also got fired for no longer putting up BS scores.[/QUOTE]Except he didn't. It probably had to do with him putting up a half assed video review.
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
[QUOTE=''JLF1'']Why are people damage controlling a 9.0 scoring game?[/QUOTE]

I ask myself that question as well.
[QUOTE=''Jackboot343''][QUOTE=''FirstDiscovery''][QUOTE=''Jackboot343'']giant bomb was made by a person who gave out two 10'sone to oot and one to thps3...that doesn't sound strange...? :? [/QUOTE]Or maybe LOZOOT at the time deserved it:|[/QUOTE]but thps3 is on the same level as lozott :| [/QUOTE]THPS3 was a mistake maybe?But at the time, it was a high AAA game, just not that darn good
[QUOTE=''Chutebox''][QUOTE=''FanofGames2''][QUOTE=''Chutebox''] No, you should get over it.It scored a 9, it's not a flop. You don't like it, don't come here.[/QUOTE]But at the same time Fable 2 is easily AAA. Banjo will probably be underrated as well. [/QUOTE]Why is it easily AAA? It's (just) below AAA status at gamerankings.Move on...[/QUOTE]Because it's awesome and pretty much everyone who has played it says this?How can gamerankings be taken seriously when you have amateur review sites review games stupidly? For example, you know why halo 3 is a 94 at gamerankings despite the lowest score by any major site is a 9.5?Because of these:Seriously? A 7 for halo 3 with an article that states things that aren't even in the game (meaning happenings and facts, not glitches/ graphics, etc)? :|just read it, if you played the game you'll be screaming in your mind to the reviewer, ''You have not played this game!''http://www.gamerankings.com/itemrankings/launchreview.asp?reviewid=811429Does this not sound like a forum post?
''As for the solo campaign, let me be upfront and honest here and tell you what every other reviewing site seems to be afraid to tell you: the solo campaign is a huge letdown. From the very beginning, it was blatantly obvious to me that I was, once again playing half a game advertised and sold as a complete game. My theory is that Bungie had Halo 2 wrapped up and finished as the last game in the Halo series and was ready to ship on the Xbox, but Microsoft realized that if they ended it the way they wanted, there would be no Halo for the 360. Obviously, this would have been a financial catastrophe for Microsoft and the Xbox 360, so they ordered Bungie to make it so that there would still be some story left for a Halo game on the 360. As a result, we are left with two games that really should have been packaged as one. Halo 3 is about as long as Halo 2 was, which is not that long at all. Lame. ''
I swear, this happens with every major review, whether it under delivers or over delivers. Seriously, Gears 2 is still AAA, scoring a whole .5 lower than most expected doesn't change anything.
I would be for a collection of sites and averaging it out but it won't fly. The people in system wars are too stubborn. Even though it would put more weight on flops and AAA's again.