The true reason that Gamespot gives low scores in AAA PS3 Games

Here is the supposd reason that they gave a AAA game that score

GameSpot's Jeff Gerstmann writes

"To use the Review of the Moment as an example, when we give Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction a 7.5, we're not saying it's "average" or something. This isn't school, and a 7.5 doesn't translate to a C+. We're effectively saying that fans of these sorts of action platformers, and to an even greater extent, fans of the Ratchet series, will probably have a blast. But we're also saying that its appeal might not extend so far beyond that group due to issues mentioned in the review text."

So hey what do you think about this statement, write your oppinions about it and lets see what gamespot do

"We're effectively saying that fans of these sorts of action platformers, and to an even greater extent, fans of the Ratchet series, will probably have a blast. But we're also saying that its appeal might not extend so far beyond that group due to issues mentioned in the review text."

wow, i never expected to hear that. That's more or so an insult and sorry arse excuse for them giving the game such a low score. I mean, look at games like god of war, halo, final fantasy, all of these games got high reviews but does it appeal to everyone? No. So, why not give these games a 7.5 also?

Jeff, no one is complaining about what the score means; everyone is complaining that you guys destroyed the game with the score, talk soo much crap about the game, and said "worst of the series". When everyone else differs that opinion. Truly, Gamestop, you've gone down the drain.

Think about it; think on why you guys are calling you "360 fanboys" and "Gamespot is Bias". Big hint, Halo 3!

"We're effectively saying that fans of these sorts of action platformers, and to an even greater extent, fans of the Ratchet series, will probably have a blast. But we're also saying that its appeal might not extend so far beyond that group due to issues mentioned in the review text."

wow, i never expected to hear that. That's more or so an insult and sorry arse excuse for them giving the game such a low score. I mean, look at games like god of war, halo, final fantasy, all of these games got high reviews but does it appeal to everyone? No. So, why not give these games a 7.5 also?

Jeff, no one is complaining about the score; everyone is complaining that you guys destroyed the game, talk soo much crap about the game, and said "worst of the series". When everyone else differs that opinion. Truly, Gamestop, you've gone down the drain.

ShawDowFX

I think FF is a great example, I know that 90% of my friends will never play a FF game but they are still good games

Cant say, but maybe; just maybe that game sucks for real. CastleBomb44

I can't believe this.

Dude www.gamerankings.com

Gamespot is the ONLY site to give R&C an average score.

This is one of the best games out, not just onthe PS3, but out of the 3 systems R&C:FTOD is one of the top next gen games, period.

Cant say, but maybe; just maybe that game sucks for real. CastleBomb44

AAA 99% virtually everywhere says your a fanboy/troll.

I do say; Gamestop, just start reviewing games like EGM and Famitsu. Put four guys reviewing the game and then total up the score. Then, all four reviews on the site and let everyone read them.

Also, don't put reviewers who have a record in reviewing sport games in the past, to review an action adventure game. That's like giving a Racing Games Reviewer so he'll review an RPG game.

I can see it now- the reviewer will review that RPG game with a: "too slow", "too complicated", "story feels like it goes no where".

IF only IGN had free forum and msg boards...Phoenix963

lol! I feel you man...

If IGN has a free forum and msg boards, i will be going there instead of coming here, and i will not visit this web anymore. The only good thing about gamespot is the forums. Look at how they rate the 360 games, and look how they rate the PS3 games, there's a BIG difference in the review scores.

And saying the PS3's version of Ratchet and Clank is the worst series among all? GIVE ME A BREAK. It's the best so far FYI, Microspot.

No, this is why. Watch the nice little "our partners" graphic. Doesn't seem to work in Firefox.

No, this is why. Watch the nice little "our partners" graphic. Doesn't seem to work in Firefox.

Zeke129

everything's clear now! LOL

And of course Halo appeals to everybody...Liquid-Prince

LMFAO! dude u read my mind thnx!

i dont find halo appealing at all...the first one maybe but the second one is like ehhh

Jeff, no one is complaining about what the score means; everyone is complaining that you guys destroyed the game with the score, talk soo much crap about the game, and said "worst of the series". When everyone else differs that opinion. Truly, Gamestop, you've gone down the drain.

Think about it; think on why you guys are calling you "360 fanboys" and "Gamespot is Bias". Big hint, Halo 3!

ShawDowFX

Did you notice your little mistake? You called Gamespot Gamestop. Funny. I think if this site was really Gamestop every game would get a 10. Easy mistake though.

I can't believe how bad Gamespot is now though. and good ol' Aaron chalks it all up to system wars in his latest blog. I don't blame him though. He's just a sports game nut reviewing a game he shouldn't be reviewing. I blame Jeff his boss for this mess. I'm sure he has a lot to do with who reviews the games. Time for Jeff to stand up and admit he made a huge mistake and take it like a man. How about it Jeff if you're reading this? I wonder if they read these boards?

And of course Halo appeals to everybody...Liquid-Prince

OMFG thats halrious i bow to you b/c of this

SO TRUE!

Some of the ppl take the reviews too seriously! It's just one persons view of the game and I bet who ever reviewed it gets alot of crap from not only the members of this site, but the people he/she works with too! Theres really nothing anyone can do to change that person's mind about the game. Just like how their ratings can't change your mind about the game, so chill out and enjoy the game.cezeon

You're right, it is only one person's view of the game. But then, this site isn't aaronthomas.com, it's gamespot.com. Gamespot needs to care more about their reputation. When a game as big as Ratchet & Clank comes out at least act like you care and have the right person review it. I'm sure Gamespot didn't hand over Halo 3 to a reviewer who hates the Halo series.

Jeff..we know the real reason. It's about not giving AAA score to any PS3's game coming in the holiday season.

So, you say it might not appeal to other consumers ...well, tell that to New York Times that says the following:

The first game to truely deliver the long-sought " You are playing a Pixar Movie " experience.


Jeff..what a score you would give to Uncharted, or shall I say it all depends on the cheque ?


Jeff...Sorry, but let me say the following:


Shame on you


castlevaniaX

The New York Times? You might want to try the New York Post based on what these guys write. :o

The first game to truely deliver the long-sought " You are playing a Pixar Movie " experience.



castlevaniaX

Gametrailers said that too more or less... Except they said used a toy story example.

Never again will I pay atention to a gamespot review after this R&C BS.

shame on Gamespot, R&C looks good, gameplay is fun and they give 7.5. the score gives a "WTF" on my face.

Haha by the way, i dont like Halo at all. I never like fantasy shooter, if shooter for me, it should be realistic like Battlefield 2, Counter Strike.

[QUOTE="castlevaniaX"]Jeff..we know the real reason. It's about not giving AAA score to any PS3's game coming in the holiday season.

So, you say it might not appeal to other consumers ...well, tell that to New York Times that says the following:

The first game to truely deliver the long-sought " You are playing a Pixar Movie " experience.


Jeff..what a score you would give to Uncharted, or shall I say it all depends on the cheque ?


Jeff...Sorry, but let me say the following:


Shame on you


BrianC6234

The New York Times? You might want to try the New York Post based on what these guys write. :o

shame on Gamespot, R&C looks good, gameplay is fun and they give 7.5. the score gives a "WTF" on my face.

Haha by the way, i don't like Halo at all. I never like fantasy shooter, if shooter for me, it should be realistic like Battlefield 2, Counter Strike.

sieudaochich

[QUOTE="BrianC6234"]

[QUOTE="castlevaniaX"]Jeff..we know the real reason. It's about not giving AAA score to any PS3's game coming in the holiday season.

So, you say it might not appeal to other consumers ...well, tell that to New York Times that says the following:

The first game to truely deliver the long-sought " You are playing a Pixar Movie " experience.


Jeff..what a score you would give to Uncharted, or shall I say it all depends on the cheque ?


Jeff...Sorry, but let me say the following:


Shame on you


castlevaniaX

Actually that was just a joke. The Post is a rag so I just said that would be more Gamespot's type of paper. The New York Times review was a great one.

The New York Times? You might want to try the New York Post based on what these guys write. :o

After being initially ticked off by the contradiction riddled, lame excuse, half-baked, mentally deficient "review" shoved down our throats courtesy of one, Aaron Thomas, I decided it was time to move on. I never go to Gamespot.com for reviews anyways. I have a link on my toolbar directly to these forums so I don't have to look at the sorry attempt at a video game site. I have always hated Gamespot and their awful rating system, their biased reviewers and their lack of regard for any semblance of journalistic integrity, but a measly 7.5 for one of the best games of the year was not going to be the straw that broke the back of a camel that had died long ago.

I only wished that Gamespot had retracted the review or left it as is. The one thing I really didn't want to see was Gamespot trying to justify the blatantly BAD BAD BAD review with an even worse eplaination that seemed to destroy any credibility that they had been able to retain. By using the reasoning that they did, Gamespot has made all other reviews on this site a moot point. If a platformer, that in the review was said to be too varied with too much gameplay, was appealing to only a platform game fan, then a sports game should not have any mini games because it would no longer be appealing to casual fans. According to Gamespot, the only way to make a good game is to stick to the bare minimum because varying gameplay is gonna drive away the layperson.

Forget about the fact that millions casual gamers that aren't great at FPSs will find the online multiplayer aspect of Halo 3 (9.5) completely USELESS leaving you with a 6-8 hour campaign ripe with repetitive levels that have nothing new to offer. Forget about the fact that other than the 500,000 people in the US that watch hockey, it is a completely foreign entity in which they would have no interest in playing a video game (8.5) of. In fact, forget about that not everyone will like Gears of War (9.6), Bioshock (9.0), Orange Box (9.5) or any of the other million shooters that are in existence with little reason to be. The fact remains, according to Gamespot, the game is on the 360 and 90% of the time, that is enough to warrant a good score. None of this means anything because Aaron Thomas doesn't think that 99% of the gaming population will like platformers and doesn't want them to buy this game under false pretenses. The fact that Ratchet and Clank is amazingly deep, with rich, vibrant graphics, extremely fun, varied gameplay, an original sense of humor, means nothing because Aaron Thomas said so. And in this case Aaron "a little salt is all spice I can handle on my life" Thomas' word is that of the law around this place.

Argh this stupid follow up to that stupid review has only managed to make me mad again. Poor reviews don't normally anger me, but hypocracy and stupidity always will.

lols microspot made me laugh :p

But yeah I do think that ratchet's a great game much better then a 7.5 which gamespot also gave out to conan BTW...because that game is so ingenuative and has such high end graphics and a "compelling" story doesn't it gamespot.

Never again will I pay atention to a gamespot review after this R&C BS.

version2pnt0

Amen to that brother.

If you all think Aaron was high when he made the review there's a UK magazine, Game(TM), that gave the game 60%.

That's why the game's score gone down to 89%.

But man they'll let anyone do reviews. I'm gonna start making reviews judging only what other reviews say.

[QUOTE="Zeke129"]

No, this is why. Watch the nice little "our partners" graphic. Doesn't seem to work in Firefox.

Gue1

everything's clear now! LOL

...we better be careful then, this could end up being a suicide thread.:roll:

shame on Gamespot, R&C looks good, gameplay is fun and they give 7.5. the score gives a "WTF" on my face.

Haha by the way, i dont like Halo at all. I never like fantasy shooter, if shooter for me, it should be realistic like Battlefield 2, Counter Strike.

sieudaochich

You've said it all. I agree 100%

bah who care's about gs reviews.. it's all about ign or Gametrailer!!Hardpunkfan

I agree. Not because of this review but ign and gametrailer do better reviews in last 6 months.

No, this is why. Watch the nice little "our partners" graphic. Doesn't seem to work in Firefox.

Zeke129

That's actually pretty funny, and more than enough to raise a few eyebrows.

[QUOTE="CastleBomb44"]Cant say, but maybe; just maybe that game sucks for real. megaton3k

AAA 99% virtually everywhere says your a fanboy/troll.

why cant people distinguish betweeen your and you're??? :|

bah who care's about gs reviews.. it's all about ign or Gametrailer!!Hardpunkfan

It's all about SELF. I could care less about any sites review because as I always say "At the end of the day I have a mind of my own".

i have to say, all that little note to the fans about the review only made it worse. to say they dont feel the game will appeal to everyone...is rather obvious. but that also means gamespot felt i would be thrilled by the grace of god known as halo3...which i was rather dissapointed in...gamespot has been making bad calls IMO.

oblivion for the 360 got a higher score than the ps3 version...when the ps3 version has better visuals and included more content than the base 360 game had (360 you could pay extra and get the content...but not the visuals).

Here is the supposd reason that they gave a AAA game that score

GameSpot's Jeff Gerstmann writes

"To use the Review of the Moment as an example, when we give Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction a 7.5, we're not saying it's "average" or something. This isn't school, and a 7.5 doesn't translate to a C+. We're effectively saying that fans of these sorts of action platformers, and to an even greater extent, fans of the Ratchet series, will probably have a blast. But we're also saying that its appeal might not extend so far beyond that group due to issues mentioned in the review text."

So hey what do you think about this statement, write your oppinions about it and lets see what gamespot do

arnoldocastillo

people are realizing what gamespot is all about... the forums... nothing else.

i get more information from you guys posting here than i could ever get from any review on gamespot. and i give more credibility to some random, avatar-less, 3 posts old forum user talking about how the friend of his friend of his friend liked the this or that game, than to any "professional" review in this website.

i'm glad i got this out of my system :)

After being initially ticked off by the contradiction riddled, lame excuse, half-baked, mentally deficient "review" shoved down our throats courtesy of one, Aaron Thomas, I decided it was time to move on. I never go to Gamespot.com for reviews anyways. I have a link on my toolbar directly to these forums so I don't have to look at the sorry attempt at a video game site. I have always hated Gamespot and their awful rating system, their biased reviewers and their lack of regard for any semblance of journalistic integrity, but a measly 7.5 for one of the best games of the year was not going to be the straw that broke the back of a camel that had died long ago.

I only wished that Gamespot had retracted the review or left it as is. The one thing I really didn't want to see was Gamespot trying to justify the blatantly BAD BAD BAD review with an even worse eplaination that seemed to destroy any credibility that they had been able to retain. By using the reasoning that they did, Gamespot has made all other reviews on this site a moot point. If a platformer, that in the review was said to be too varied with too much gameplay, was appealing to only a platform game fan, then a sports game should not have any mini games because it would no longer be appealing to casual fans. According to Gamespot, the only way to make a good game is to stick to the bare minimum because varying gameplay is gonna drive away the layperson.

Forget about the fact that millions casual gamers that aren't great at FPSs will find the online multiplayer aspect of Halo 3 (9.5) completely USELESS leaving you with a 6-8 hour campaign ripe with repetitive levels that have nothing new to offer. Forget about the fact that other than the 500,000 people in the US that watch hockey, it is a completely foreign entity in which they would have no interest in playing a video game (8.5) of. In fact, forget about that not everyone will like Gears of War (9.6), Bioshock (9.0), Orange Box (9.5) or any of the other million shooters that are in existence with little reason to be. The fact remains, according to Gamespot, the game is on the 360 and 90% of the time, that is enough to warrant a good score. None of this means anything because Aaron Thomas doesn't think that 99% of the gaming population will like platformers and doesn't want them to buy this game under false pretenses. The fact that Ratchet and Clank is amazingly deep, with rich, vibrant graphics, extremely fun, varied gameplay, an original sense of humor, means nothing because Aaron Thomas said so. And in this case Aaron "a little salt is all spice I can handle on my life" Thomas' word is that of the law around this place.

Argh this stupid follow up to that stupid review has only managed to make me mad again. Poor reviews don't normally anger me, but hypocracy and stupidity always will.

MisterEngilsh

WOW. You tell em brutha. That was awesome and totally totally agree.

GameSpot's Jeff Gerstmann writes

"To use the Review of the Moment as an example, when we give Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction a 7.5, we're not saying it's "average" or something. This isn't school, and a 7.5 doesn't translate to a C+. We're effectively saying that fans of these sorts of action platformers, and to an even greater extent, fans of the Ratchet series, will probably have a blast. But we're also saying that its appeal might not extend so far beyond that group due to issues mentioned in the review text."

then how are we suppose to take the rating system then? at what point does the game become bad? does a 2 just mean fans of the series will enjoy the game? or does a 2 mean the game is broken and no one should really pick this game up? from his explination that means 2s are just nitch games, where as 9s are over hyped main stream games...

change the name from score to hype meter please.