***Batman: Arkham City - Hype Thread!!! v1.2 *** GS: 9.0, Hype met!

[QUOTE="CaseyWegner"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"] It is not useless, if it had scored 90 here then GS would have underrated it. .5 differences here are a big deal.kuraimen

not when .5 increments are used. :?

To be fair, in order to overrate or underrate something, you need to agree that the 'true' value of the object is above or below the given score.

An aggregate score is not the 'true' value, it is simply an aggregate score. It is the product of every score from 0-100, but it's not the 'true' value. The 'true' value, in which one needs in order to label other scores 'underrated' and 'overrated', is one of the values in the aggregate, but it's not the aggregate score itself.

For example, let's say that the 'true' value of Arkham City was GameSpot's score. Perhaps every other website gave Arkham City 9.5, and thus the aggregate is higher than the GameSpot score, but that doesn't call GameSpot into question (if we knew that they had the 'true' value), it means the aggregate is higher than the 'true' value. Thus, every website that gave it less than 9.0 underrated the game, and every website that gave it more than 9.0 overrated it.

CaseyWegner has it right: comparing propriety scoring systems to the Metacritic average is pretty much useless.

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="CaseyWegner"]

not when .5 increments are used. :?

FrozenLiquid

To be fair, in order to overrate or underrate something, you need to agree that the 'true' value of the object is above or below the given score.

An aggregate score is not the 'true' value, it is simply an aggregate score. It is the product of every score from 0-100, but it's not the 'true' value. The 'true' value, in which one needs in order to label other scores 'underrated' and 'overrated', is one of the values in the aggregate, but it's not the aggregate score itself.

For example, let's say that the 'true' value of Arkham City was GameSpot's score. Perhaps every other website gave Arkham City 9.5, and thus the aggregate is higher than the GameSpot score, but that doesn't call GameSpot into question (if we knew that they had the 'true' value), it means the aggregate is higher than the 'true' value. Thus, every website that gave it less than 9.0 underrated the game, and every website that gave it more than 9.0 overrated it.

CaseyWegner has it right: comparing propriety scoring systems to the Metacritic average is pretty much useless.

[QUOTE="FrozenLiquid"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"] Well I have argued with you over this before. I don't think either of us are going to change our minds. For me, as in IMO, the difference is significant but I accept some others might not think that way.kuraimen

To be fair, in order to overrate or underrate something, you need to agree that the 'true' value of the object is above or below the given score.

An aggregate score is not the 'true' value, it is simply an aggregate score. It is the product of every score from 0-100, but it's not the 'true' value. The 'true' value, in which one needs in order to label other scores 'underrated' and 'overrated', is one of the values in the aggregate, but it's not the aggregate score itself.

For example, let's say that the 'true' value of Arkham City was GameSpot's score. Perhaps every other website gave Arkham City 9.5, and thus the aggregate is higher than the GameSpot score, but that doesn't call GameSpot into question (if we knew that they had the 'true' value), it means the aggregate is higher than the 'true' value. Thus, every website that gave it less than 9.0 underrated the game, and every website that gave it more than 9.0 overrated it.

CaseyWegner has it right: comparing propriety scoring systems to the Metacritic average is pretty much useless.

oh my god! it's one notch! too close! why do you keep using this? it's statistically useless.

[QUOTE="FrozenLiquid"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"] Well I have argued with you over this before. I don't think either of us are going to change our minds. For me, as in IMO, the difference is significant but I accept some others might not think that way.kuraimen

To be fair, in order to overrate or underrate something, you need to agree that the 'true' value of the object is above or below the given score.

An aggregate score is not the 'true' value, it is simply an aggregate score. It is the product of every score from 0-100, but it's not the 'true' value. The 'true' value, in which one needs in order to label other scores 'underrated' and 'overrated', is one of the values in the aggregate, but it's not the aggregate score itself.

For example, let's say that the 'true' value of Arkham City was GameSpot's score. Perhaps every other website gave Arkham City 9.5, and thus the aggregate is higher than the GameSpot score, but that doesn't call GameSpot into question (if we knew that they had the 'true' value), it means the aggregate is higher than the 'true' value. Thus, every website that gave it less than 9.0 underrated the game, and every website that gave it more than 9.0 overrated it.

CaseyWegner has it right: comparing propriety scoring systems to the Metacritic average is pretty much useless.

which reminds me... Why does everybody trust Metacritic when they make certain reviews count for more than other reviews. How fair is that? They consider some sources more credible than others. They also count both 'A' and 'A+' as 100/100... Makes no sense. Gamerankings is a far better agregate site.

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="FrozenLiquid"]

To be fair, in order to overrate or underrate something, you need to agree that the 'true' value of the object is above or below the given score.

An aggregate score is not the 'true' value, it is simply an aggregate score. It is the product of every score from 0-100, but it's not the 'true' value. The 'true' value, in which one needs in order to label other scores 'underrated' and 'overrated', is one of the values in the aggregate, but it's not the aggregate score itself.

For example, let's say that the 'true' value of Arkham City was GameSpot's score. Perhaps every other website gave Arkham City 9.5, and thus the aggregate is higher than the GameSpot score, but that doesn't call GameSpot into question (if we knew that they had the 'true' value), it means the aggregate is higher than the 'true' value. Thus, every website that gave it less than 9.0 underrated the game, and every website that gave it more than 9.0 overrated it.

CaseyWegner has it right: comparing propriety scoring systems to the Metacritic average is pretty much useless.

CaseyWegner

oh my god! it's one notch! too close! why do you keep using this? it's statistically useless.

[QUOTE="CaseyWegner"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"] But what is the "true value"? All the individual values are opinions, what opinion is more valuable than the rest? I prefer to compare it to the average of the opinions since it shows more or less how the game is regarded overall by the whole professional gaming community not to just one. Besides you can round MC scores to a .5 system and compare, the significant differences basically remains. You round Gears 3 score to a .5 scale and it gives you a 9. It stills show it was overrated by GS. Anyways this is my opinion people, you're welcome to justify your own analysis but I don't agree with it.kuraimen

oh my god! it's one notch! too close! why do you keep using this? it's statistically useless.

what has it accomplished for you here? thinking that being one notch away from the average is an indication of bias?

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="FrozenLiquid"]

To be fair, in order to overrate or underrate something, you need to agree that the 'true' value of the object is above or below the given score.

An aggregate score is not the 'true' value, it is simply an aggregate score. It is the product of every score from 0-100, but it's not the 'true' value. The 'true' value, in which one needs in order to label other scores 'underrated' and 'overrated', is one of the values in the aggregate, but it's not the aggregate score itself.

For example, let's say that the 'true' value of Arkham City was GameSpot's score. Perhaps every other website gave Arkham City 9.5, and thus the aggregate is higher than the GameSpot score, but that doesn't call GameSpot into question (if we knew that they had the 'true' value), it means the aggregate is higher than the 'true' value. Thus, every website that gave it less than 9.0 underrated the game, and every website that gave it more than 9.0 overrated it.

CaseyWegner has it right: comparing propriety scoring systems to the Metacritic average is pretty much useless.

Pikminmaniac

which reminds me... Why does everybody trust Metacritic when they make certain reviews count for more than other reviews. How fair is that? They consider some sources more credible than others. They also count both 'A' and 'A+' as 100/100... Makes no sense. Gamerankings is a far better agregate site.

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="CaseyWegner"]

oh my god! it's one notch! too close! why do you keep using this? it's statistically useless.

CaseyWegner

what has it accomplished for you here? thinking that being one notch away from the average is an indication of bias?

[QUOTE="Pikminmaniac"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"] But what is the "true value"? All the individual values are opinions, what opinion is more valuable than the rest? I prefer to compare it to the average of the opinions since it shows more or less how the game is regarded overall by the whole professional gaming community not to just one. Besides you can round MC scores to a .5 system and compare, the significant differences basically remains. You round Gears 3 score to a .5 scale and it gives you a 9. It stills show it was overrated by GS. Anyways this is my opinion people, you're welcome to justify your own analysis but I don't agree with it.kuraimen

which reminds me... Why does everybody trust Metacritic when they make certain reviews count for more than other reviews. How fair is that? They consider some sources more credible than others. They also count both 'A' and 'A+' as 100/100... Makes no sense. Gamerankings is a far better agregate site.

if the average of the game is not a 0 or 5 then gamespot's score can be nothing but biased to you.

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="Pikminmaniac"]

which reminds me... Why does everybody trust Metacritic when they make certain reviews count for more than other reviews. How fair is that? They consider some sources more credible than others. They also count both 'A' and 'A+' as 100/100... Makes no sense. Gamerankings is a far better agregate site.

CaseyWegner

if the average of the game is not a 0 or 5 then gamespot's score can be nothing but biased to you.

[QUOTE="CaseyWegner"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"] It is not useless for me. Even a 1 point in MC is significant for me. Specially considering how much it takes to go up or go down one point there. One review can't change the average most of the time.kuraimen

what has it accomplished for you here? thinking that being one notch away from the average is an indication of bias?

you don't believe it happens by chance because you always ignore the big picture. you miss the forest for the trees.

[QUOTE="CaseyWegner"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"] I think MC and Gamerankings are similar. The overall differences between the games remain. You look into the Gears3 score for example and the difference score-wise here is similar, they usually fluctuate in one or two points.kuraimen

if the average of the game is not a 0 or 5 then gamespot's score can be nothing but biased to you.

yes. and we all know you subscribe to a very flawed system to come to that conclusion.

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="CaseyWegner"]

if the average of the game is not a 0 or 5 then gamespot's score can be nothing but biased to you.

CaseyWegner

yes. and we all know you subscribe to a very flawed system to come to that conclusion.

[QUOTE="CaseyWegner"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"] Everything we humans do is biased, there's no such thing as completely objective behavior. Now some biases are more evident than others. I don't pretend to claim that GS has a conspiracy to overrate or underrate some games, I don't know and really don't care that much. I just think many of their reviewers have preferences that are noticeable which can be seen as a bias.kuraimen

yes. and we all know you subscribe to a very flawed system to come to that conclusion.

of course. he was the one who came up with the flawed system in the first place.

I think GS should change how they do reviews since kuraimen thinks Gears 3 was overrated. Even though GS does reviews before most sites, after the dust settles they should change their score according I.E if a 360 game is above the MC average lower it, but leave it if a PS3 game is lower like MGS4.

I think GS should change how they do reviews since kuraimen thinks Gears 3 was overrated. Even though GS does reviews before most sites, after the dust settles they should change their score according I.E if a 360 game is above the MC average lower it, but leave it if a PS3 game is lower like MGS4.

Grawse

So... as of now, this is the most critically acclaimed superhero game of all time, yes?

[QUOTE="Zassimick"]

And yet the only penalty against it in the review was that the bosses were too easy. I understand that we'll never get an answer as to why, but can't really be described or defined doesn't satisfy my curiosity as to why it didn't score higher.

Again, I'm not disappointed in the score which is what some people seem to think by my curiosity. Its a fantastic score. The review and the score to me don't match up entirely, that's all. If you're fine with the review and the score that's okay, but I also think its okay for me to be curious as to why instead of just settling with some thing that can't be defined.

CaseyWegner

penalty? i just told you that that's not how it works. the game was good enough to score as high as it did...not as low as it did. there are always going to be undefinables.

Yes, penalty. There is a section labeled under every review titled 'The Good' and underneath that is 'The Bad.' There we see a list of good points and bad points. I assume the bad points are taken into consideration when reviewing a game but maybe I'm mistaken.

Why do you seem to think that I believe every game starts off at a 10? Nowhere did I say it does and I have not said that "well this point in 'The Bad' must drop it .25 points, so where's the other .75?" Well guess what? I don't believe every game starts at a 10 and works its way down. I have stated more than once that the reason I question the score is because the review, to me, doesn't match up with the score. I hope that settles that.

And I don't settle for undefinables, I told you that. At least I don't want to so I question those undefinables. I feel there is a reason for everything hence why I'm asking why things are. And to be honest I don't quite understand what the problem with that is. You may list it as an undefinable and be satisfied. Fine, but I ask the question. Was it that the reviewer didn't have as much fun with it as other games or was it an actual technical consideration with the video game? Or it could have possibly just been that the easy bosses took that much away from the experience? As I've stated, we may never know and that is your undefinable. But I don't want to just settle with that so I question.

I have stated that I know it has scored high and I am immensely satisfied with it, but after the reading review I ask the question why not a higher score? Did I say I wish it had scored higher? No. I personally woud like something a little more than undefinables, even if I can never get them. But I question.

So... as of now, this is the most critically acclaimed superhero game of all time, yes?

UnrealLegend

http://www.destructoid.com/gamestop-to-put-arkham-city-catwoman-pass-in-used-copies-213711.phtml

Gamestop is kinda off.. lol.

http://www.destructoid.com/gamestop-to-put-arkham-city-catwoman-pass-in-used-copies-213711.phtml

Gamestop is kinda off.. lol.

GD1551

Good for them I say. Anything to piss of WB is great in my book. Although I can't imagine WB not taking some sort of legal action.

http://www.destructoid.com/gamestop-to-put-arkham-city-catwoman-pass-in-used-copies-213711.phtml

Gamestop is kinda off.. lol.

GD1551

Wow it's still at 98 on metacritic after 10 reviews, this could be one of the best scoring games this gen.Qwark-PS-Snake

Has anyone noticed that the walmart arkham asylum offer is now gone? what gives?

I would really like a confirmed pc release date, im dying here... :D

I would really like a confirmed pc release date, im dying here... :D

PcGamingRig

Shut up,crime!!

Has anyone noticed that the walmart arkham asylum offer is now gone? what gives?

TheEroica

What was the offer?

Edit: Oh the free copy of AA?

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

http://www.destructoid.com/gamestop-to-put-arkham-city-catwoman-pass-in-used-copies-213711.phtml

Gamestop is kinda off.. lol.

mrmusicman247

How so? I honestly think this is a very despicable act by gamestop.

[QUOTE="mrmusicman247"][QUOTE="GD1551"]

http://www.destructoid.com/gamestop-to-put-arkham-city-catwoman-pass-in-used-copies-213711.phtml

Gamestop is kinda off.. lol.

GD1551

How so? I honestly think this is a very despicable act by gamestop.

I would really like a confirmed pc release date, im dying here... :D

PcGamingRig

Wow it's still at 98 on metacritic after 10 reviews, this could be one of the best scoring games this gen.Qwark-PS-Snake

Has anyone noticed that the walmart arkham asylum offer is now gone? what gives?

TheEroica

[QUOTE="mrmusicman247"][QUOTE="GD1551"]

http://www.destructoid.com/gamestop-to-put-arkham-city-catwoman-pass-in-used-copies-213711.phtml

Gamestop is kinda off.. lol.

GD1551

How so? I honestly think this is a very despicable act by gamestop.

Why is it despicable? It's business and it's perfectly legal. Used sales are a part of any industry. Once the retailer has acquired the product they can go by whatever means they desire to sell it. Gaming isn't a white knight industry, its an industry like any other. I'm just curious how GameStop will be getting all the codes.

jamejame

This is why I am saying this. They are getting the codes from WB and then turning around and using them to circumvent WB's anti used sale measures. Very low.

[QUOTE="PcGamingRig"]

I would really like a confirmed pc release date, im dying here... :D

Sushiglutton

So, what action adventure game this gen could possibly top this game (is skyward Sword the only possibility)??? Is there even anything that challenges the first Arkham agame?

So, what action adventure game this gen could possibly top this game (is skyward Sword the only possibility)??? Is there even anything that challenges the first Arkham agame?

Pikminmaniac

I found GOW3 to be a more enjoyable game than Arkham Asylum though I am not sure they can be compared....

But Arkham City just looks bigger and better. I was surprised how much I enjoyed the combat in the first game, it's really simplistic but made you feel like you are Batman, it was rhythmic hitting and using counters, dodging etc. I am glad that's kept intact albeit refined for Akrham City.

[QUOTE="Pikminmaniac"]

So, what action adventure game this gen could possibly top this game (is skyward Sword the only possibility)??? Is there even anything that challenges the first Arkham agame?

Swift_Boss_A

I found GOW3 to be a more enjoyable game than Arkham Asylum though I am not sure they can be compared....

But Arkham City just looks bigger and better. I was surprised how much I enjoyed the combat in the first game, it's really simplistic but made you feel like you are Batman, it was rhythmic hitting and using counters, dodging etc. I am glad that's kept intact albeit refined for Akrham City.

but when you get into those challenge stages for combat, it gets rather deep indeed. I triple medaled every challenge and then looked on youtube to see what other people did. I was completely amazed! It took me forever to manage 50,000 points on the more difficult version of Rumble in the Jungle, but somebody managed to earn over 200, 000 points! That's the range of skill in the combat and it's brilliant

but when you get into those challenge stages for combat, it gets rather deep indeed. I triple medaled every challenge and then looked on youtube to see what other people did. I was completely amazed! It took me forever to manage 50,000 points on the more difficult version of Rumble in the Jungle, but somebody managed to earn over 200, 000 points! That's the range of skill in the combat and it's brilliant

Pikminmaniac

Yeah the challenge missions really made me appreciate the combat even more, the timing has to be perfect to get the highest scores.

[QUOTE="jamejame"]

Why is it despicable? It's business and it's perfectly legal. Used sales are a part of any industry. Once the retailer has acquired the product they can go by whatever means they desire to sell it. Gaming isn't a white knight industry, its an industry like any other. I'm just curious how GameStop will be getting all the codes.

GD1551

This is why I am saying this. They are getting the codes from WB and then turning around and using them to circumvent WB's anti used sale measures. Very low.

It's not low as long as the codes are being paid for. To get the online pass, you have to pay $10 extra to get it if you buy the game used. GS is simply paying for the codes themselves and putting them in the used game copies. mrmusicman247

They are obviously doing it to steal some of the early sales from devs while the price is at its highest. It's pretty low if you ask me.

[QUOTE="mrmusicman247"]It's not low as long as the codes are being paid for. To get the online pass, you have to pay $10 extra to get it if you buy the game used. GS is simply paying for the codes themselves and putting them in the used game copies. GD1551

They are obviously doing it to steal some of the early sales from devs while the price is at its highest. It's pretty low if you ask me.

[QUOTE="GD1551"]

[QUOTE="mrmusicman247"]It's not low as long as the codes are being paid for. To get the online pass, you have to pay $10 extra to get it if you buy the game used. GS is simply paying for the codes themselves and putting them in the used game copies. mrmusicman247

They are obviously doing it to steal some of the early sales from devs while the price is at its highest. It's pretty low if you ask me.

Notice I said when the price is at its highest? Used games start to trickle in after the first week.

[QUOTE="jamejame"]

Why is it despicable? It's business and it's perfectly legal. Used sales are a part of any industry. Once the retailer has acquired the product they can go by whatever means they desire to sell it. Gaming isn't a white knight industry, its an industry like any other. I'm just curious how GameStop will be getting all the codes.

GD1551

This is why I am saying this. They are getting the codes from WB and then turning around and using them to circumvent WB's anti used sale measures. Very low.

So, what action adventure game this gen could possibly top this game (is skyward Sword the only possibility)??? Is there even anything that challenges the first Arkham agame?

Pikminmaniac