Slashdot Mirror

Others here mentioned the quality of games as being in decline the past one or two years. I found this odd as each year, that I can remember, had several pretty good games. I was never one to buy more than a game every few months, so while the barrel of gaming per se was always filled to me, I never drank enough from it to see how quickly I reached the bottom.

So, I took it upon myself to look at some information on MetaCritic. While critical aggregation is not foolproof, it does have some useful data. I counted all the games that were rated at least a 90, that came out no earlier than 2001, and that were for the PS2, Xbox, Xbox 360, Gamecube, or PC. (Sorry, no handhelds or older consoles).

Here is how that turned out:

2001: 25
2002: 34
2003: 38
2004: 30
2005: 21
2006: 7

So if it seems that there's not as many good games as there were three years ago, you're correct. Extrapolating 2006, we come up with an awfully low total. Even with another twenty great games this year, which is extremely unlikely, it's still less compared to 2002-2004.

Here's a detailed chart with a per-system breakdown.

Now have critics gotten tougher after the past two years? Or is the conventional wisdom correct, and have titles really just gotten worse?

If you're looking for a broad approach to video game (and movie and music) reviews, check out: www.metacritic.com

They take reviews from many sites, "equalize" them (puts them on a 100point scale), then produces a weighted average (based on biases which the editors feel the reviewers make that need to be compensated for-ie if a reviewer generally gives favorable reviews to most games his/her score will be adjusted).

I tend to find that this produces fairly good results. Your mileage may vary but its worth checking out.

Indigo Prophecy was published by Atari last year, and it's a very unique take on the console adventure game. Think Shadow Of Destiny with tighter pacing, more playable characters, a more interesting interface, and no time travel schtick. And GameStop just dropped it to $20 new. Good stuff.

Half Life 2 was incredibly well received, both in terms of reviews (metacritic, rottentomatoes and sales numbers.

It sold massively, created a new method of distribution, which other vendors have embraced and cuts out the middle men so hated on Slashdot.

It was first to feature real-time radiosity lighting, scaled from DirectX 6 to 9 and pushed the character animation and expression envelope considerably.

Do you ever look in the mirror and ask: "Maybe I am wrong this time?"

I expected a review of Smart Bomb for PSP because the game was generally thought to suck. It got a 45% rating on Metacritic and 0% positive reviews on Rotten Tomatoes.

Judging by the fact that out of the 15 or so launch titles, maybe 1 is decent

Err....which one would that be? PGR3, one of the best racing games ever (in my opinion, the best), or COD2, one of the best shooters ever? Or maybe it's Kameo, which while not genre defining is a lot of fun, or Q4 which is, well, Quake? Amped 3 was a lot of fun too. And while it wasn't really my cup of tea, I know a lot of people really like RR6. Condemned has also won a lot of praise from the survival horror crowd.

In fact, overall, Metacritic would suggest that quite a few of the launch titles are "decent" - with 9 titles getting 80% or higher average scores and 20 75% or higher.

I guess just like how we all own so many UMD movies and games

UMD movies are actually selling very well. No, I don't know why, but it's a fact.

with close to open development, low cost, quick development time, standard media

Even as an obvious Nintendo fanboy I'd hope you'd recognise that Xbox Live Arcade gives us all that already.

At what point did you think you were playing a "game" instead of sitting through a cutscene?

Did we play the same game? How about when you were pulling some of the most entertainingly gruesome combos ever seen on any game? There were hordes of varied enemies to battle with the greatest combat system I've ever seen in an action game. The whole game wasn't very long (most action games are pretty short, aside from RE4), but I don't remember many cutscenes.

So who's left? People who don't use an aggregator in the first place. And what's he imploring them to do? Not use an aggregator. Seems kind of pointless, doesn't it...?

Besides, I think aggregators are great. Especially well-stewarded ones like Metacritic (which was strangely dropped from the submission text while the other two aggregators weren't). With intelligently weighted averages you get a useful snapshot of opinion, plus the option to check out as many individual reviews as you like to get a fuller picture. I've bought a number of games that had mediocre averages because the text of the linked reviews made it clear that they were something I'd appreciate, just as I've avoided a number of games with high averages where the text of the reviews made it clear that they wouldn't be suited to my taste.

And yes, having your site included in an aggregator's round-up can only be a good thing -- it'll grant immediate exposure to your work and let readers decide for themselves how much clout to give your reviews vs. the weighted average in the future. This stands out even more when you review more obscure titles that don't get covered by all the big outlets, so you become one of a much smaller group of reviews.

I say aggregators are win-win for both readers and review sites.

the best thing the police officer's group can do about this game is to ignore it and not give it free advertising. With the atrocious reviews it's been getting http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/25to life it would stand to reason that this game won't have a very long shelf life without heavy promotion.

Why not boycott the game just because it's completely terrible? http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/25to life Seems like that would be more effective.

I use metacritic to read reviews of every game I buy or acquire. It is basically a bunch of quotes and a rating number from various reviews. The SAME game can get scores from 50, all the way up to 100... you can tell who got paid off for what, and who just had an axe to grind.

I find that reading a couple of their quotes, in each ranking (low=red, medium=yellow, high=green> will give me a quick rundown of the game.

There are users comments at the end to which can be helpful as well... unfortunately a lot of them tend to be fanboy-type.

http://www.metacritic.com/games/

For game reviews I tend to go to Metacritic. Metacritic aggregates critical scores and generates an average score number, which is a valuable indicator of critical consensus.

Or perhaps a lot of people think it rocks. I never played it, but you can't argue that it hasn't been well received. And unless you plan to present a rigorous, objective proof to definitively refute the majority opinion, I think it's safe to say that Zonk was (for a change) not pulling things out of his ass when he said the game rocks. Really, this doesn't matter in the slightest, but it's just incorrect to imply that Zonk is alone here.

I guess I have to just keep pointing the people I know to what should be the top albums of the year

That's too bad. It's actually supposed to be pretty good.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/king_kong/

http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/kingkong

Was there ever any doubt that this kind of thing happens occasionally in the game review business? Thankfully there are alternatives to basing your purchases on these big-name low-integrity publishers. Websites like http://www.metacritic.com/ or http://www.gamerankings.com/ provide averages of many collected reviews, and cannot be corrupted as easily as if you trusted a single source review. You could also take your reviews more personally and visit one of the smaller Blog type sites like the one I write for, http://www.thegamechair.com/ A volunteer run sight like ours has a double advantage, no bribery, and all of the writers are passionate about the games they play.

Here's what I'd suggest. Note that this is purely from a customer's perspective, so it may not jibe with best business practices.

1. Have a clean, uncramped, well-ventilated store. Walk into a chain store in a mall these days and it's so overpacked that you can barely move when you're in there. This really shouldn't be happening when you can use mostly wall space and some sanely placed racks for your product. And ventilation is more important than you might think -- many mom & pop shops have sent me packing because they've consistently smelled like rotting B.O.

2. Have an engaged, knowledgeable, and non-disgusting work force. Hire people with an active interest in games across multiple systems who actually pay attention to what's out and what's coming up, and who can make meaningful recommendations to people. No hypemongers or rabid single-system fanboys, please. And no planetoids with poor hygiene, either. As I mentioned above, if visiting the store becomes an assault on the senses, people won't come back.

3. Don't give me the hard sell. No, I don't want the fucking strategy guide. And don't argue with me when I say I want a new copy instead of a used one. If I come up to the counter and ask for something, just sell it to me without the extra push.

4. Let me try before I buy. Have multiple kiosks for each system and let people try out any game in the store. Have the latest demo discs available too, so people can try out upcoming games.

5. Sell new releases as soon as possible. I don't know the mechanics of this, but occasionally the chain stores will let pre-orderers pick up their game a day early, or they'll sell a huge new release at midnight the night before it would usually be on sale. Most hardcore gamers like to get their new stuff as soon as they can, and whoever can get it in their hands first at a fair price will get their business.

6. Have review information available in-store. This could be as simple as having a public web kiosk that points to Metacritic.com or something similar. You might even be able to convince them to contribute some money toward the kiosk since you'd be driving traffic to their site. Anyway, I mention this because I'll often spot an obscure title in a store and have no way of knowing if it's any good or not. The store employees usually aren't much help (and even good employees can't be familiar with every game out there), so having on-site access to a range of reviews for every game could help close a sale that might not otherwise happen.

7. Have a frequent buyer program with real benefits. Reward loyalty with periodic unrestricted discounts and game-related goodies (e.g. that promotional Prince Of Persia soundtrack CD that came with preorders of POP:T2T at some stores). And give people a one-time discount when they refer a friend to your store.

8. Keep your prices reasonable. Most people understand that mom & pop shops need to bump up their margin a little compared to chain stores, but if you're more than about 5% above the competition you probably won't keep any customers. And even the people who are willing to pay a little extra are only going to do it if they're getting added value from shopping at your store instead of a chain.

You might also consider hosting and/or sponsoring gaming events to get your name out there and build up good will. Even hosting a little weekly Madden tournament in your store with a $20 store credit purse would draw in a decent number of younger customers.

Good luck...

I think the article was pointing a finger reasonably squarely at the very big review sites that post high scores for the very big game properties.

Enter The Matrix - the game that went along inbetween the second and third movies for instance. If anybody played it could tell you it was a very average game, came out in the 9-10 spots from some big name reviewers, check it out at metacritic. It had initially a very high rating that dropped sharply as more "indy" game review sites reviewed it more realistically and bagged it for what it was.

Aggregators are generally a better guide because of course the more reviews you have, the higher the proportion of non-bribed reviews, so the lower the scores.

We live in an era where publishing houses pay developers (in some cases) on the basis of how well the game scores in reviews - and therefore, since the review sites are more and more often demonstrating they're up for sale, review scores are being purchased and journalistic integrity went away a long time ago.

Here, I'll make it easy for you - lots of low scores on games of all systems from various sites contained within these metacritic compilation-reviews. Keep in mind that the majority of these are recent games. There are far, FAR lower score reviews to find in the history of each system (excepting the more recent PSP, DS, and XBOX 360)

PSP: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/psp/worl dseriesofpoker

DS: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ds/space invadersrevolution

PS2: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/beat downfistsofvengeance http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/true crimenewyorkcity

NGC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/one piecegrandbattle http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/gei st

XBOX: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/adve ntrising http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/shad owthehedgehog

PC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/bigmu thatruckers2 http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/beton soldier

XBOX 360: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/ nbalive06

Whoever wrote that article would have better served his/her readers by actually looking into which review sources refuse to give lower end scores and pointing out who the culprits are so that his/her readers can avoid them. Instead, he/she asked a vague rhetorical question that serves only as a broad and baseless generalization. Of course, that would take effort, and ejaculating uneducated opinions into the eyes of the public is so much easier!

Here, I'll make it easy for you - lots of low scores on games of all systems from various sites contained within these metacritic compilation-reviews. Keep in mind that the majority of these are recent games. There are far, FAR lower score reviews to find in the history of each system (excepting the more recent PSP, DS, and XBOX 360)

PSP: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/psp/worl dseriesofpoker

DS: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ds/space invadersrevolution

PS2: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/beat downfistsofvengeance http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/true crimenewyorkcity

NGC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/one piecegrandbattle http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/gei st

XBOX: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/adve ntrising http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/shad owthehedgehog

PC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/bigmu thatruckers2 http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/beton soldier

XBOX 360: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/ nbalive06

Whoever wrote that article would have better served his/her readers by actually looking into which review sources refuse to give lower end scores and pointing out who the culprits are so that his/her readers can avoid them. Instead, he/she asked a vague rhetorical question that serves only as a broad and baseless generalization. Of course, that would take effort, and ejaculating uneducated opinions into the eyes of the public is so much easier!

Here, I'll make it easy for you - lots of low scores on games of all systems from various sites contained within these metacritic compilation-reviews. Keep in mind that the majority of these are recent games. There are far, FAR lower score reviews to find in the history of each system (excepting the more recent PSP, DS, and XBOX 360)

PSP: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/psp/worl dseriesofpoker

DS: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ds/space invadersrevolution

PS2: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/beat downfistsofvengeance http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/true crimenewyorkcity

NGC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/one piecegrandbattle http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/gei st

XBOX: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/adve ntrising http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/shad owthehedgehog

PC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/bigmu thatruckers2 http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/beton soldier

XBOX 360: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/ nbalive06

Whoever wrote that article would have better served his/her readers by actually looking into which review sources refuse to give lower end scores and pointing out who the culprits are so that his/her readers can avoid them. Instead, he/she asked a vague rhetorical question that serves only as a broad and baseless generalization. Of course, that would take effort, and ejaculating uneducated opinions into the eyes of the public is so much easier!

Here, I'll make it easy for you - lots of low scores on games of all systems from various sites contained within these metacritic compilation-reviews. Keep in mind that the majority of these are recent games. There are far, FAR lower score reviews to find in the history of each system (excepting the more recent PSP, DS, and XBOX 360)

PSP: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/psp/worl dseriesofpoker

DS: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ds/space invadersrevolution

PS2: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/beat downfistsofvengeance http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/true crimenewyorkcity

NGC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/one piecegrandbattle http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/gei st

XBOX: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/adve ntrising http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/shad owthehedgehog

PC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/bigmu thatruckers2 http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/beton soldier

XBOX 360: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/ nbalive06

Whoever wrote that article would have better served his/her readers by actually looking into which review sources refuse to give lower end scores and pointing out who the culprits are so that his/her readers can avoid them. Instead, he/she asked a vague rhetorical question that serves only as a broad and baseless generalization. Of course, that would take effort, and ejaculating uneducated opinions into the eyes of the public is so much easier!

Here, I'll make it easy for you - lots of low scores on games of all systems from various sites contained within these metacritic compilation-reviews. Keep in mind that the majority of these are recent games. There are far, FAR lower score reviews to find in the history of each system (excepting the more recent PSP, DS, and XBOX 360)

PSP: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/psp/worl dseriesofpoker

DS: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ds/space invadersrevolution

PS2: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/beat downfistsofvengeance http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/true crimenewyorkcity

NGC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/one piecegrandbattle http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/gei st

XBOX: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/adve ntrising http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/shad owthehedgehog

PC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/bigmu thatruckers2 http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/beton soldier

XBOX 360: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/ nbalive06

Whoever wrote that article would have better served his/her readers by actually looking into which review sources refuse to give lower end scores and pointing out who the culprits are so that his/her readers can avoid them. Instead, he/she asked a vague rhetorical question that serves only as a broad and baseless generalization. Of course, that would take effort, and ejaculating uneducated opinions into the eyes of the public is so much easier!

Here, I'll make it easy for you - lots of low scores on games of all systems from various sites contained within these metacritic compilation-reviews. Keep in mind that the majority of these are recent games. There are far, FAR lower score reviews to find in the history of each system (excepting the more recent PSP, DS, and XBOX 360)

PSP: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/psp/worl dseriesofpoker

DS: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ds/space invadersrevolution

PS2: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/beat downfistsofvengeance http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/true crimenewyorkcity

NGC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/one piecegrandbattle http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/gei st

XBOX: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/adve ntrising http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/shad owthehedgehog

PC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/bigmu thatruckers2 http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/beton soldier

XBOX 360: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/ nbalive06

Whoever wrote that article would have better served his/her readers by actually looking into which review sources refuse to give lower end scores and pointing out who the culprits are so that his/her readers can avoid them. Instead, he/she asked a vague rhetorical question that serves only as a broad and baseless generalization. Of course, that would take effort, and ejaculating uneducated opinions into the eyes of the public is so much easier!

Here, I'll make it easy for you - lots of low scores on games of all systems from various sites contained within these metacritic compilation-reviews. Keep in mind that the majority of these are recent games. There are far, FAR lower score reviews to find in the history of each system (excepting the more recent PSP, DS, and XBOX 360)

PSP: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/psp/worl dseriesofpoker

DS: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ds/space invadersrevolution

PS2: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/beat downfistsofvengeance http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/true crimenewyorkcity

NGC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/one piecegrandbattle http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/gei st

XBOX: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/adve ntrising http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/shad owthehedgehog

PC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/bigmu thatruckers2 http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/beton soldier

XBOX 360: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/ nbalive06

Whoever wrote that article would have better served his/her readers by actually looking into which review sources refuse to give lower end scores and pointing out who the culprits are so that his/her readers can avoid them. Instead, he/she asked a vague rhetorical question that serves only as a broad and baseless generalization. Of course, that would take effort, and ejaculating uneducated opinions into the eyes of the public is so much easier!

Here, I'll make it easy for you - lots of low scores on games of all systems from various sites contained within these metacritic compilation-reviews. Keep in mind that the majority of these are recent games. There are far, FAR lower score reviews to find in the history of each system (excepting the more recent PSP, DS, and XBOX 360)

PSP: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/psp/worl dseriesofpoker

DS: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ds/space invadersrevolution

PS2: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/beat downfistsofvengeance http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/true crimenewyorkcity

NGC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/one piecegrandbattle http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/gei st

XBOX: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/adve ntrising http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/shad owthehedgehog

PC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/bigmu thatruckers2 http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/beton soldier

XBOX 360: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/ nbalive06

Whoever wrote that article would have better served his/her readers by actually looking into which review sources refuse to give lower end scores and pointing out who the culprits are so that his/her readers can avoid them. Instead, he/she asked a vague rhetorical question that serves only as a broad and baseless generalization. Of course, that would take effort, and ejaculating uneducated opinions into the eyes of the public is so much easier!

Here, I'll make it easy for you - lots of low scores on games of all systems from various sites contained within these metacritic compilation-reviews. Keep in mind that the majority of these are recent games. There are far, FAR lower score reviews to find in the history of each system (excepting the more recent PSP, DS, and XBOX 360)

PSP: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/psp/worl dseriesofpoker

DS: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ds/space invadersrevolution

PS2: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/beat downfistsofvengeance http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/true crimenewyorkcity

NGC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/one piecegrandbattle http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/gei st

XBOX: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/adve ntrising http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/shad owthehedgehog

PC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/bigmu thatruckers2 http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/beton soldier

XBOX 360: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/ nbalive06

Whoever wrote that article would have better served his/her readers by actually looking into which review sources refuse to give lower end scores and pointing out who the culprits are so that his/her readers can avoid them. Instead, he/she asked a vague rhetorical question that serves only as a broad and baseless generalization. Of course, that would take effort, and ejaculating uneducated opinions into the eyes of the public is so much easier!

Here, I'll make it easy for you - lots of low scores on games of all systems from various sites contained within these metacritic compilation-reviews. Keep in mind that the majority of these are recent games. There are far, FAR lower score reviews to find in the history of each system (excepting the more recent PSP, DS, and XBOX 360)

PSP: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/psp/worl dseriesofpoker

DS: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ds/space invadersrevolution

PS2: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/beat downfistsofvengeance http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/true crimenewyorkcity

NGC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/one piecegrandbattle http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/gei st

XBOX: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/adve ntrising http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/shad owthehedgehog

PC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/bigmu thatruckers2 http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/beton soldier

XBOX 360: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/ nbalive06

Whoever wrote that article would have better served his/her readers by actually looking into which review sources refuse to give lower end scores and pointing out who the culprits are so that his/her readers can avoid them. Instead, he/she asked a vague rhetorical question that serves only as a broad and baseless generalization. Of course, that would take effort, and ejaculating uneducated opinions into the eyes of the public is so much easier!

Here, I'll make it easy for you - lots of low scores on games of all systems from various sites contained within these metacritic compilation-reviews. Keep in mind that the majority of these are recent games. There are far, FAR lower score reviews to find in the history of each system (excepting the more recent PSP, DS, and XBOX 360)

PSP: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/psp/worl dseriesofpoker

DS: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ds/space invadersrevolution

PS2: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/beat downfistsofvengeance http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/true crimenewyorkcity

NGC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/one piecegrandbattle http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/gei st

XBOX: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/adve ntrising http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/shad owthehedgehog

PC: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/bigmu thatruckers2 http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/beton soldier

XBOX 360: http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbox360/ nbalive06

Whoever wrote that article would have better served his/her readers by actually looking into which review sources refuse to give lower end scores and pointing out who the culprits are so that his/her readers can avoid them. Instead, he/she asked a vague rhetorical question that serves only as a broad and baseless generalization. Of course, that would take effort, and ejaculating uneducated opinions into the eyes of the public is so much easier!

The rule should be: Avoid movie/tv games made by EA.

I dunno, their Lord of the Rings games are really good (except for that Third Age RPG), and some of their Bond games aren't bad either (Everything or Nothing was excellent, although not strictly a movie tie-in).

I think you mean: Avoid movie/tv games made by THQ or Activision. ;)

The rule should be: Avoid movie/tv games made by EA.

I dunno, their Lord of the Rings games are really good (except for that Third Age RPG), and some of their Bond games aren't bad either (Everything or Nothing was excellent, although not strictly a movie tie-in).

I think you mean: Avoid movie/tv games made by THQ or Activision. ;)

Metacritic games is where I visit first.

Prettymuch if a game has an 85+ rating on here it's not going to be a total lemon.

Just last week I was talking with our facilities manager who was lamenting he hadn't played any games on the Xbox lately, but was wanting to get some more FPS and didn't know which games were any good.

We went to metacritic, used the advanced search, and printed off a list of the top 25 FPS for Xbox, stopped by Gamestop at lunch and he picked up 3 highly rated games.

I bought Darwinia as a download.....I *WOULD NOT* have bought it if it had been a distibuted via Steam. Before I play Half Life 2 I end up disconnecting from the internet to play the game (which takes ages to boot up on my PC anyway) to stop it doing what it does. On the plus side Introversion may get more people buying the game (and kudos to them for writing something great and different), but the gaming community it seems only put up with Steam because Half-Life 2 was such a great game, but for an unknown indie game there's gonna have to be some *great* word of mouth stuff going on.

...you're not a Nintendo fan...

On the contrary, I have a GameCube and a Game Boy Advance SP.

...there wasn't a Donky Kong game on the Gamecube...

Apart from Donkey Kong: Jungle Beat, Donkey Konga, and Donkey Konga 2: Hit Song Parade.

...there has only been one console Animal Crossing game relesed to a home console ever...

I was thinking of Harvest Moon, in fact, which is the same kind of idea. So make that Harvest Moon Revolution if you like. As for Pokemon, I was thinking of the endless GBA Pokemon games.

It's not so much that I feel they milk the franchises, it's more that the predictability gets tiresome. And I found Wind Waker far too similar to Ocarina of Time; it's basically the same game for the first half, and then there's way too much ocean wandering.

...you're not a Nintendo fan...

On the contrary, I have a GameCube and a Game Boy Advance SP.

...there wasn't a Donky Kong game on the Gamecube...

Apart from Donkey Kong: Jungle Beat, Donkey Konga, and Donkey Konga 2: Hit Song Parade.

...there has only been one console Animal Crossing game relesed to a home console ever...

I was thinking of Harvest Moon, in fact, which is the same kind of idea. So make that Harvest Moon Revolution if you like. As for Pokemon, I was thinking of the endless GBA Pokemon games.

It's not so much that I feel they milk the franchises, it's more that the predictability gets tiresome. And I found Wind Waker far too similar to Ocarina of Time; it's basically the same game for the first half, and then there's way too much ocean wandering.

...you're not a Nintendo fan...

On the contrary, I have a GameCube and a Game Boy Advance SP.

...there wasn't a Donky Kong game on the Gamecube...

Apart from Donkey Kong: Jungle Beat, Donkey Konga, and Donkey Konga 2: Hit Song Parade.

...there has only been one console Animal Crossing game relesed to a home console ever...

I was thinking of Harvest Moon, in fact, which is the same kind of idea. So make that Harvest Moon Revolution if you like. As for Pokemon, I was thinking of the endless GBA Pokemon games.

It's not so much that I feel they milk the franchises, it's more that the predictability gets tiresome. And I found Wind Waker far too similar to Ocarina of Time; it's basically the same game for the first half, and then there's way too much ocean wandering.

"If I'm really bored, there's always the PSP dev kit, where I can write my own software to take advantage of the wifi which uses a standard protocol instead of something crippled. Thanks, actually, I will go back to my PSP :)"

And your opinion of RE4 is in the minority. This is an entertainment medium so ultimately, your opinion is what matters to you, but the majority of people who have spoken up about RE4 have had very positive things to say about it. http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/cube/res identevil4 A 96 rating on metacritic is nothing to scoff at.

I realize that GTA has fans, and that this game is unlike ANYTHING that has ever been on a portable platform (self-made portable PS2 hacks notwithstanding). But how can a game with such terrible flaws (read the reviews) as no difficulty difference between early and ending missions (except for the fact your weapons are terrible at the start), a bad camera and terrible targeting system, and mind-numbingly boring/anoying missions get 90+% grades?

Simple: no one wants to risk pissing off GTA lovers and losing them as readers/viewers/subscribers.

Don't get me wrong. I loved GTA 1 and 2. I played GTA 3 and found it fun to drive around but I didn't get far due to the terrible targeting. I loved Vice City even more (great soundtrack) and got farther, but I eventually dumped the game for the same reasons. The game was better, but it still wasn't there. I haven't played San An, and I don't intend to play LCS now.

Bugs and problems were OK for GTA 3, it was a first of it's kind (being a 3D world). Vice City was buggy and they should have done better. I don't know if the targeting was fixed for San An (I heard it was better) but I didn't care by that point. Then they release this game shortly after with all these problems. I realize it's the first on the platform for the series, and that the second analog stick is missing, but come one. You've made THREE OF THESE GAMES BY NOW, can't you fix some of this stuff?

They were rushing it, or they didn't care. Those are the only two reasons I can think of for having the same problems that put me off of GTA 3 four years ago this week.

The sandbox they created is fantastic. The stories and great, and the games have tons of replay value. But playing occaisionally makes me feel like I'm running towards $1,000,000 in a foot and a half of water. There is something great there, I can see it, but getting there is just so hard .

These days I'm getting less and less time to play games. My backlog is piling up. I just finished Pyschonauts (Great game, but the framerate on the PS2 version was a JOKE), and I'm in the middle of Sly 3 now (better than Sly 2!). If I was a freshman in highschool and had the time to commit, I may be able to play it. But at this point I don't need to fight a game to play it. There are a couple of games I've got RIGHT NOW that I know will be good that I won't have to do that for.

Sorry Rockstar. Try harder, huh?

-- A guy who wants to love GTA

For aggregated reviews, see the serenity page on.
74/100 is very good on the traditionally stingy Metacritic.

From San Francisco Chronicle's: "As challenging as it must have been to pilot Joss Whedon's space opera from the TV junk pile to the big screen, the finished product is a triumph."

To LA Weekly's: "It's the zippy chatter among the Serenity's wised-up space pirates that gives the film most of its punch, but with only serviceable action sequences and largely cookie-cutter effects, you can still sense the void just outside."

You be the judge... or really, let them be the judge, and then you be the meta judge, judging all the judges that already made their judgments. Then take Famous Reinholds for $1000.

To save time searching for reviews (if that's what you're looking for), here you go. http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/serenity

Please note that IMDB no longer associates Uwe Boll with Halo. This is excellent news. If you don't believe me check the appalling aggregate scoring of his last film Alone In The Dark, provided by metacritic.

Far Cry fans will be disappointed however, he's scheduled to ruin that franchise next...

Please note that IMDB no longer associates Uwe Boll with Halo. This is excellent news. If you don't believe me check the appalling aggregate scoring of his last film Alone In The Dark, provided by metacritic.

Far Cry fans will be disappointed however, he's scheduled to ruin that franchise next...

On metacritic, it scored 77/100 by critics and 8.7/10 by users. For metacritic, that seems pretty respectable. Of 25 critic reviews, only 2 scored 60% or less. I don't know who Zonk is.

Also, I ask, did Zonk play PS2 or Xbox?

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/ps2/dark watchcurseofthewest

Try Metacritic I find it very useful for game revies and scores. And it has also Films, DVDs, Music and Books.

if you go to metacritic and compare DS to PSP you get a considerably higher number (and percentage) of games for the PSP rated highly.

Let's look at each list, sorted by score: DS and PSP. So, what's a good score? 85? Then the DS has 4 good games and the PSP has 3.

After subtracting two extra versions of Nintendogs from the DS's list:
80? DS: 8, PSP: 7
75? DS: 11, PSP: 11
70? DS: 20, PSP: 17
65? DS: 25, PSP: 21

You weren't comparing the averages scores between systems were you? That penalizes a system for games that you won't even be buying, operating under the assumption that you can't control which games you'll get. Even so, I've heard people talk like it's a valid criteria, so let's look at the results (again, after removing two duplicate Nintendogs scores of 84). The DS averages 69.03, and the PSP averages 70.13. Looks like the DS has mostly recovered by now from the early titles Ping Pals, Sprung, and Pokemon Dash.

if you go to metacritic and compare DS to PSP you get a considerably higher number (and percentage) of games for the PSP rated highly.

Let's look at each list, sorted by score: DS and PSP. So, what's a good score? 85? Then the DS has 4 good games and the PSP has 3.

After subtracting two extra versions of Nintendogs from the DS's list:
80? DS: 8, PSP: 7
75? DS: 11, PSP: 11
70? DS: 20, PSP: 17
65? DS: 25, PSP: 21

You weren't comparing the averages scores between systems were you? That penalizes a system for games that you won't even be buying, operating under the assumption that you can't control which games you'll get. Even so, I've heard people talk like it's a valid criteria, so let's look at the results (again, after removing two duplicate Nintendogs scores of 84). The DS averages 69.03, and the PSP averages 70.13. Looks like the DS has mostly recovered by now from the early titles Ping Pals, Sprung, and Pokemon Dash.

OK: you're a troll, and your message is flamebait.

It's also crap. According to metacritic:

DS has 13 "good" games out of 38 total (and 3 of those are the same game - Nintendogs).

PSP has 11 "good" games out of 30 total.

That's not a particularly big difference - there are plenty of good games for the PSP, maybe your local Frys had just sold out of them?

The screen is considerably larger than 2", movies look very good on it, although I obviously don't buy UMD movies. Ripping DVDs to flash memory is a lot more sensible.

If you don't want it, fine, but it is anything but a paperweight. That award would go to my GBA SP which is gathering dust.

OK: you're a troll, and your message is flamebait.

It's also crap. According to metacritic:

DS has 13 "good" games out of 38 total (and 3 of those are the same game - Nintendogs).

PSP has 11 "good" games out of 30 total.

That's not a particularly big difference - there are plenty of good games for the PSP, maybe your local Frys had just sold out of them?

The screen is considerably larger than 2", movies look very good on it, although I obviously don't buy UMD movies. Ripping DVDs to flash memory is a lot more sensible.

If you don't want it, fine, but it is anything but a paperweight. That award would go to my GBA SP which is gathering dust.

Two reviews does not make a consensus. Checking Metacritic suggests that response to the game have been more favorable than the submitter suggests.

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/madd ennfl06

I have 05 and and 06 for xbox and I think 06 is a worthy step forward from 05. But, that's just one opinion.

The bigger question is: Is this the least relevant accepted Slashdot submission ever?

Let me preface this by saying, I don't play Madden and I don't intend to buy Madden 06. However, I had some concerns about the way the post was written.

The poster cites 2 sources for review scores. Have you heard of Metacritic? They look at reviews across the web and create a score based on all possible reviews. If you look at Madden there you'll see:

XBox: 88% - Based on 20 reviews
PS2: 89% - Based on 18 reviews
PC: 81% - Based on 5 reviews

While these still may not be an ideal sampling, it's a much better guage of how reviewers are judging this game.