Did GameSpot's Mark Walton get MK review wrong with 8.5?

I see a lot of gamespot reviews where they are appear off by quite a bit compared to user reviews. Black Ops got a 9.0 gamespot score and the overrall reviews of that game isn't near that. Right now, I am seeing 9.4 MK user score and I am seeing lot of praises for this game but this game scored 8.5 gamespot score which is exactly what marvel vs capcom 3, tekken 6, soul calibur IV got. The "PSM3 Magazine UK" gave it a 79 out of 100 which is a tad better than MK vs DC game (75 out of 100). Wow! There appears to be a pretty big gap between some online reviewers and the initial user reviews who appear to love the game.

Whats wrong with an 8.5?

Holy crap! Oh noes, someone has a differing opinion!TheFallenDemon

Yea. Right now, he has a .9 lower "opinion" of the game compared to the user score. The reviewer should try his best to give it a score that is similar to what the majority of the users think and what it deserves. Sometimes I see games given a 1 point lower or higher score than what the majority of users think. Imagine if some reviewer says "I can give this game any score that I want because it is my opinion as he gives a game a 5 when everyone else gives it a 9?"... Maybe this reviewer is a role playing fan and doesn't care for fighting games but it was his "job" to simply review it. And you don't think there is anything wrong with some video game reviewer who gave MK game a 79 out of 100? "just his opinion right?"... A reviewer should be capable to review the game correctly and not use the "It's my opinion" excuse. The GameSpot reviewer for Tekken 6 gave it a 8.5 and after a few thousand user reviews, the user reviews came out to 8.5. I consider that hitting the nail on the head review. SSFIV review was also pretty accurate as well. Uncharted 2?! Bullseye score!

I think reviewers should be graded on how well they review and how close their score comes to the majority score. If this game gets thousands of user reviews and average user score goes over 9.0, I think that is a pretty big difference in score to his 8.5 score.

This is why I always prefer to look at the thousands of regular users than 1 gamespot reviewer.

So all reviewers must give the same score? :|spazzx625

Not the same score but the reviewer's goal should give a score that is pretty close to what the users think. I scratch my head when I see COD:Black Ops get 3 out of 5 stars on amazon with nearly 1,000 reviews, do a little better here with a 8.3 user score (nearly 5,000 user reviews) and then GameSpot review give the game 9.0 with "Editor's Choice Award"........ "just one person's opinion"... ehhh

round off 8.5 you get a 9! :D

round off 8.5 you get a 9! :D

risako9

8.5 score just doesn't have that ring to it compared when you say "That is a 9 game". It is like a .295 hitter and a .300 hitter... We all know the 9 games to be real great and the 8.5 score fighting games are pretty much just a regular fighting game.

The user score should have absolutely nothing to do with critics scores... Look at portal 2s user reviews.. Full of zeros and tens. Not mention the reviewers have games weeks in advance and the people giving user reviews have only had the game for a day or two now.MethodManFTW

The critic scores should have something to do with the user score because it is the critics that are giving us some idea how good or bad a game is. Critics and users should be around the same ballpark when it comes to reviewing the game. And I don't look at some individual user score who gave Portal 2 a 0. I'm looking at Portal 2 user score and it averages out to be 9.1 which is pretty close to 9.0 gamespot score. It is fair to say that Portal 2 is highly ranked... And the critic score so far is 9.4 which is impressive. The gamespot reviewer did a better job at reviewing this Portal 2 game than the gamespot reviewer who gave COD:Black Ops a 9 out of 10."It is his opinion".... but a highly overrated opinion it is.

The gamespot reviewer may have the game weeks in advance but that doesn't mean he was playing the game all the time. He could have played the game for 2 hours just to get a feel for the game or could have even played it for 15 mins for his article review. All the while some other user got the game, loved it and has been playing it for over 8 hours straight. I would take the opinion of thousand users to 1 single critic review but I also believe that all critics should know how to critique a game and give it a correct review that reflects what users are thinking about the game.

8.5 is an excellent score. I'm loving MK so far but it has some problems that need to be ironed out.

Plus, you can't say he got the score wrong because you're comparing a critic review with user reviews on the first day, or as I call them "Day 1ers". Usually the most insanely biased reviews out there, not enough to give a proper comparison to.

The gamespot reviewer may have the game weeks in advance but that doesn't mean he was playing the game all the time. He could have played the game for 2 hours just to get a feel for the game or could have even played it for 15 mins for his article review. All the while some other user got the game, loved it and has been playing it for over 8 hours straight. I would take the opinion of thousand users to 1 single critic review but I also believe that all critics should know how to critique a game and give it a correct review that reflects what users are thinking about the game.BH14

No it doesn't mean they have been playing it 24/7 obviously, but they have time to reflect over the game. Not just play it for one session and post your gut reaction. And you shouldn't just read one review, the best course of action is to learn what specific critics like and dislikes about games in general by listening to podcasts, reading articles, watching videos etc.. Then read their reviews.

Plus, you can't say he got the score wrong because you're comparing a critic review with user reviews on the first day, or as I call them "Day 1ers". Usually the most insanely biased reviews out there, not enough to give a proper comparison to.IndianaPwns39

Yes.

[QUOTE="TheFallenDemon"]Holy crap! Oh noes, someone has a differing opinion!BH14

Yea. Right now, he has a .9 lower "opinion" of the game compared to the user score. The reviewer should try his best to give it a score that is similar to what the majority of the users think and what it deserves. Sometimes I see games given a 1 point lower or higher score than what the majority of users think. Imagine if some reviewer says "I can give this game any score that I want because it is my opinion as he gives a game a 5 when everyone else gives it a 9?"... Maybe this reviewer is a role playing fan and doesn't care for fighting games but it was his "job" to simply review it. And you don't think there is anything wrong with some video game reviewer who gave MK game a 79 out of 100? "just his opinion right?"... A reviewer should be capable to review the game correctly and not use the "It's my opinion" excuse. The GameSpot reviewer for Tekken 6 gave it a 8.5 and after a few thousand user reviews, the user reviews came out to 8.5. I consider that hitting the nail on the head review. SSFIV review was also pretty accurate as well. Uncharted 2?! Bullseye score!

I think reviewers should be graded on how well they review and how close their score comes to the majority score. If this game gets thousands of user reviews and average user score goes over 9.0, I think that is a pretty big difference in score to his 8.5 score.

This is why I always prefer to look at the thousands of regular users than 1 gamespot reviewer.

Most of the users scores are always biased even if you look at the total amount. I don't think a reviewers should be graded based on how close they should be to a user scores. Its still an opinon but most of the time reviewers arent' as baised since they actually look at details where as alot ofusers vote based on whenever or not if its an exclusive. IF you look at a few people on these fourms they give games like Halo Reach and xbox exclusives 0

[QUOTE="MethodManFTW"]The user score should have absolutely nothing to do with critics scores... Look at portal 2s user reviews.. Full of zeros and tens. Not mention the reviewers have games weeks in advance and the people giving user reviews have only had the game for a day or two now.BH14

The critic scores should have something to do with the user score because it is the critics that are giving us some idea how good or bad a game is. Critics and users should be around the same ballpark when it comes to reviewing the game. And I don't look at some individual user score who gave Portal 2 a 0. I'm looking at Portal 2 user score and it averages out to be 9.1 which is pretty close to 9.0 gamespot score. It is fair to say that Portal 2 is highly ranked... And the critic score so far is 9.4 which is impressive. The gamespot reviewer did a better job at reviewing this Portal 2 game than the gamespot reviewer who gave COD:Black Ops a 9 out of 10."It is his opinion".... but a highly overrated opinion it is.

The gamespot reviewer may have the game weeks in advance but that doesn't mean he was playing the game all the time. He could have played the game for 2 hours just to get a feel for the game or could have even played it for 15 mins for his article review. All the while some other user got the game, loved it and has been playing it for over 8 hours straight. I would take the opinion of thousand users to 1 single critic review but I also believe that all critics should know how to critique a game and give it a correct review that reflects what users are thinking about the game.

I watched the review, how is any of that, and the subsequent score of 8.5, anything to be taken negatively? It all looks pretty good to me, and the review seemed without flaw... I'd say the whole thing is right-on.

I honestly do not get anything the OP is saying. It makes no sense. How are gamespot, who get the game a weeks time ahead, supposed to magically guess what thousand of users are going to give the game? How does 1 guys opinon = thousand of people. Not only that, but the most baised reviews are the users. It's either "omg I didn't like this game, 1.0/10" or "this game was amazing 10/10".

its an opinion, personally i would've given it a 8 or so, the game is good but the controls don't feel tight enough. i think the 9.4 user score is based on the game generally being a good mk game and since the last few have been less than stellar the improvement seems that great.

lol? you should see Ryan Clement's review from IGN and read all those comments! BRUTAL!!!

I like the fact that GS is quite choosy with the higher scores. Gives them more value. All too often in Official PlayStation magazine, mediocre games get high review scores and it cheapens it for genuinely good games. When it comes to GS scores anything above a 7.5 I consider good and worth playing. The 9's and above are for truly epic games and certainly 8.5 is a great score. Have to agree, it's interesting how scores can vary across sites and ultimately it's one person's opinion.Molecat

lol? you should see Ryan Clement's review from IGN and read all those comments! BRUTAL!!!

parvie

It's just one guy's opinion. They claim to be objective, but when the main criteria for rating a game is how much fun it is, that's about as anti-objective as it gets.

They gave dcuo a 7.0 right?

I remember the review on this site said there wasn't much to do after you reach level 30. Well that is a total lie. The game starts taking off once u reach level 30. The game doesn't begin until level 30. I have more stuff to do now & the game is much more interesting then when I was leveling up.

I don't know if I will ever be able to finish everything there is do in the game.

So reviewers should wait and look at user review scores before writing their reviews? Reviews are meant to give people an insight on a game and help them decide whether or not to buy it. If reviewers wait for people to buy it BEFORE writing a review then what the hell is the point of writing one at all?PeelMyBanana

Umm. When did I say that they should wait to look at user scores? I never did. I said the reviewer's score should be somewhat similar to the public's opinion of the game. For example, it is odd to see COD:Black Ops get the editors choice label and a 9.0 when the majority of the users give it like an 8 or less. That is "off the mark".

So gamespot review editors should NEVER ever be graded on how well they review a game? They can simply overrate or underrate games compared to the majority of the users simply because he can say "It is my opinion"?

Nah it is just one dudes opinion..MethodManFTW

This - I would have given it a lower score myself.

As people have said, it's one guys opinion. Just like why you are looking at the average user review score that is why metacritic averages the "professional" critic review scores. There will always be outliers and I think most people that would come to gamespot to look at reviews, you know the actual words, and the review score know about metacritic. In fact, the average metacritic review score right now IS 85% and 82% for user score. I would think most professional critics can be more objective than as previously mentioned by others a bunch of fanboys giving the game a 10 or 0 on day one.

As people have said, it's one guys opinion. Just like why you are looking at the average user review score that is why metacritic averages the "professional" critic review scores. There will always be outliers and I think most people that would come to gamespot to look at reviews, you know the actual words, and the review score know about metacritic. In fact, the average metacritic review score right now IS 85% and 82% for user score. I would think most professional critics can be more objective than as previously mentioned by others a bunch of fanboys giving the game a 10 or 0 on day one.

xboxfreak1

The review was good. The score should have been a 9.0 given from the review. mrmusicman247

[QUOTE="xboxfreak1"]

As people have said, it's one guys opinion. Just like why you are looking at the average user review score that is why metacritic averages the "professional" critic review scores. There will always be outliers and I think most people that would come to gamespot to look at reviews, you know the actual words, and the review score know about metacritic. In fact, the average metacritic review score right now IS 85% and 82% for user score. I would think most professional critics can be more objective than as previously mentioned by others a bunch of fanboys giving the game a 10 or 0 on day one.

Foulcry

Yes, that's why I put the "professional" in quotation marks, because some are certainly more professional than others, and some are not professional at all. That is also why I mentioned metacritic, because it averages out the reviewers opinions to get a better idea of the overall opinion of the game. Some games this works better for though, since they have a tighter standard deviation.

I also wouldn't agree the best critic is the consumer buying the product, since as previously mentioned a lot of fanboys either rate a product a 10 because they love a franchise or a 0 because they hate a franchise or like one platform better than another. The key is to find either consumers OR critics that have a similar opinion to you and then listen to them. Quit obsessing over 1 score, especially since it's not completely unreasonable.

GS gives Black Ops 9.0, metacritic rating is 8.8 GS gives MK 8.5, metacritic rating is 8.6 Not sure what your problem is.BenderUnit22

Umm. The metacritic for Mortal Kombat is 8.8 now (not 8.6) and the user score is 9.4 (713 votes).

[QUOTE="Foulcry"][QUOTE="xboxfreak1"]

As people have said, it's one guys opinion. Just like why you are looking at the average user review score that is why metacritic averages the "professional" critic review scores. There will always be outliers and I think most people that would come to gamespot to look at reviews, you know the actual words, and the review score know about metacritic. In fact, the average metacritic review score right now IS 85% and 82% for user score. I would think most professional critics can be more objective than as previously mentioned by others a bunch of fanboys giving the game a 10 or 0 on day one.

xboxfreak1

Yes, that's why I put the "professional" in quotation marks, because some are certainly more professional than others, and some are not professional at all. That is also why I mentioned metacritic, because it averages out the reviewers opinions to get a better idea of the overall opinion of the game. Some games this works better for though, since they have a tighter standard deviation.

I also wouldn't agree the best critic is the consumer buying the product, since as previously mentioned a lot of fanboys either rate a product a 10 because they love a franchise or a 0 because they hate a franchise or like one platform better than another. The key is to find either consumers OR critics that have a similar opinion to you and then listen to them. Quit obsessing over 1 score, especially since it's not completely unreasonable.

[QUOTE="BenderUnit22"]GS gives Black Ops 9.0, metacritic rating is 8.8 GS gives MK 8.5, metacritic rating is 8.6 Not sure what your problem is.BH14

Umm. The metacritic for Mortal Kombat is 8.8 now (not 8.6) and the user score is 9.4 (713 votes).

[QUOTE="TheFallenDemon"]Holy crap! Oh noes, someone has a differing opinion!BH14

Yea. Right now, he has a .9 lower "opinion" of the game compared to the user score. The reviewer should try his best to give it a score that is similar to what the majority of the users think and what it deserves. Sometimes I see games given a 1 point lower or higher score than what the majority of users think. Imagine if some reviewer says "I can give this game any score that I want because it is my opinion as he gives a game a 5 when everyone else gives it a 9?"... Maybe this reviewer is a role playing fan and doesn't care for fighting games but it was his "job" to simply review it. And you don't think there is anything wrong with some video game reviewer who gave MK game a 79 out of 100? "just his opinion right?"... A reviewer should be capable to review the game correctly and not use the "It's my opinion" excuse. The GameSpot reviewer for Tekken 6 gave it a 8.5 and after a few thousand user reviews, the user reviews came out to 8.5. I consider that hitting the nail on the head review. SSFIV review was also pretty accurate as well. Uncharted 2?! Bullseye score!

I think reviewers should be graded on how well they review and how close their score comes to the majority score. If this game gets thousands of user reviews and average user score goes over 9.0, I think that is a pretty big difference in score to his 8.5 score.

This is why I always prefer to look at the thousands of regular users than 1 gamespot reviewer.

You're essentially saying that he/she should reviewwitha bias. Reviewers should give games score that they feel it deserves, not scores that other people feel it deserves because then it wouldn't be an honest review. Also, games with more devoted followings would mean higher review scores even if the game in question isn't as good as some better but lesser known titles because devoted fans will usually rate something higher than most people would.

And that's beside the part that an 8.5 is still a great score. Reviews aren't an end all be all number. You should expect your opinion to be different. If you really love the series or the game, you may think it's worth a 9 or more. However, if you're either not familiar with the series at all or have something against it, you may think it's only worth an 8 or less.

I really don't get your point, topic creator. I guess I can see why you are annoyed that it didn't score higher, but user reviews are made by users and critics are critics. They have differing opinions and don't necessarily have to mirror each other. We each have an opinion for a reason.

Insisting that the professional reviewer's final score be more like the user's is pretty crazy in my opinion. That totally cancels out the point for opinions in the first place.

I was highly annoyed that the gamespot reviewer gave Pokemon White a measly 7.5 instead of something higher but although he thought it did some things special, he felt it was still more of the same. I don't like the score but I have to realize it was his opinion. I thought the game was near perfect and would give it no lower than a 10 since I consider it the best in the series.

But really. You have to see that these reviews are just opinions of a single man. Not the all-knowing opinion. Just an opinion.

If MK9 got an 8.5, FFXIII should have got a 20/10.