Gamespot is biased LINK!

how is giving the games on the better system a higher score being biased?

Oh yes, I'm sure Gamespot deliberately didn't choose the only time in the game that actually gives shadows. :roll:

Edit: They have updated the comparison feature with new PS3 screenshots. The PS3 shots still look as lackluster as they did without the simple player shadowing now shown.
Raidea

There is a difference between and accidental error and deliberately missguiding people.cakeorrdeath

The ONLY time that shadows DOESN'T show is 4:15 daytime, the rest HAS shadows. It seems deliberately to me.kentaro22

Read it here
But we knew this already didn't we?
-Reggaeton-

Very interesting post because I am still wondering how in gods name does PDZ score an AAA and RFOM which is clearly a better all around game offline and online then PDZ is and still didnt manage to get an AAA?

And who here has played Virtua Fighter 5 and DOA 4? Virtua Fighter 5 is alot more smoother and lookz way better then DOA 4 and yet DOA 4 still gets a higher score then Virtua Fighter 5, I mean there was no online but if u rate DOA 4 graphics Higher then Virtua Fighter 5, right der already shows me something is wrong because we all know that Virtua Fighter 5 is superior to DOA 4 in graphics.

And how does zelda not get an AAA for the wii. I swear this game in my mind was funner and better then any of the AAA titles that were given on the xbox 360, besides Oblivion but id still take it over it due to all the loading times n stuff on oblivion.

The way that gamespot is going, the ps3 wont ever get an AAA title with the way they rate games.

Read it here
But we knew this already didn't we?
-Reggaeton-

[QUOTE="deviates1080"] Of course they are. And so are all the other many sites that criticised the PS3 for any reason or didn't rate Resistance as highly as the Sony fanboys.Jandurin

You lost all credibility when you said that. Not that you had any credibility in the first place. :shock:

[QUOTE="Magical_Zebra"]

[QUOTE="Jandurin"][QUOTE="deviates1080"] Of course they are. And so are all the other many sites that criticised the PS3 for any reason or didn't rate Resistance as highly as the Sony fanboys.Jandurin

You lost all credibility when you said that. Not that you had any credibility in the first place. :shock:

My sarcasm detector has been broken for....well.....all my life.  ;)

[QUOTE="-Reggaeton-"]Read it here
But we knew this already didn't we?
squallff8_fan

Very interesting post because I am still wondering how in gods name does PDZ score an AAA and RFOM which is clearly a better all around game offline and online then PDZ is and still didnt manage to get an AAA?

And who here has played Virtua Fighter 5 and DOA 4? Virtua Fighter 5 is alot more smoother and lookz way better then DOA 4 and yet DOA 4 still gets a higher score then Virtua Fighter 5, I mean there was no online but if u rate DOA 4 graphics Higher then Virtua Fighter 5, right der already shows me something is wrong because we all know that Virtua Fighter 5 is superior to DOA 4 in graphics.

And how does zelda not get an AAA for the wii. I swear this game in my mind was funner and better then any of the AAA titles that were given on the xbox 360, besides Oblivion but id still take it over it due to all the loading times n stuff on oblivion.

The way that gamespot is going, the ps3 wont ever get an AAA title with the way they rate games.

[QUOTE="deviates1080"] Of course they are. And so are all the other many sites that criticised the PS3 for any reason or didn't rate Resistance as highly as the Sony fanboys.Jandurin

I knew Gamespot was biased when they gave RFOM less then a 9 when its one of the best shooters I ever played and has hands down some of the best graphics ever, I own both RFOM and GeOW and RFOM graphics are much better. Kimahriii

roflcopter. Does that make IGN biased as well?

RFOM graphics: 8.5

GeOW graphics: 10

I knew Gamespot was biased when they gave RFOM less then a 9 when its one of the best shooters I ever played and has hands down some of the best graphics ever, I own both RFOM and GeOW and RFOM graphics are much better. Kimahriii

[QUOTE="Raidea"]Oh yes, I'm sure Gamespot deliberately didn't choose the only time in the game that actually gives shadows. :roll:

Edit: They have updated the comparison feature with new PS3 screenshots. The PS3 shots still look as lackluster as they did without the simple player shadowing now shown.
kentaro22

[QUOTE="Jandurin"][QUOTE="deviates1080"] Of course they are. And so are all the other many sites that criticised the PS3 for any reason or didn't rate Resistance as highly as the Sony fanboys.Magical_Zebra

You lost all credibility when you said that. Not that you had any credibility in the first place. :shock:

[QUOTE="Magical_Zebra"]

[QUOTE="Jandurin"][QUOTE="deviates1080"] Of course they are. And so are all the other many sites that criticised the PS3 for any reason or didn't rate Resistance as highly as the Sony fanboys.haols

You lost all credibility when you said that. Not that you had any credibility in the first place. :shock:

The ones that are biased are the ones that calls it.

[QUOTE="-Reggaeton-"]Read it here
But we knew this already didn't we?
squallff8_fan

Very interesting post because I am still wondering how in gods name does PDZ score an AAA and RFOM which is clearly a better all around game offline and online then PDZ is and still didnt manage to get an AAA?

And who here has played Virtua Fighter 5 and DOA 4? Virtua Fighter 5 is alot more smoother and lookz way better then DOA 4 and yet DOA 4 still gets a higher score then Virtua Fighter 5, I mean there was no online but if u rate DOA 4 graphics Higher then Virtua Fighter 5, right der already shows me something is wrong because we all know that Virtua Fighter 5 is superior to DOA 4 in graphics.

And how does zelda not get an AAA for the wii. I swear this game in my mind was funner and better then any of the AAA titles that were given on the xbox 360, besides Oblivion but id still take it over it due to all the loading times n stuff on oblivion.

The way that gamespot is going, the ps3 wont ever get an AAA title with the way they rate games.

IMHO and as an owner of both games I think DoA4 is just a better game overall. The enviorement interaction and ,not to beat a dead horse, but online play add an awful lot to the gameplay. VF5 characters may look a tiny bit better but the difference is nearly unnoticeable.

this is trolling, the thread should be closed and TC should be moderated for violating TOSmwa

Very interesting post because I am still wondering how in gods name does PDZ score an AAA and RFOM which is clearly a better all around game offline and online then PDZ is and still didnt manage to get an AAA?

squallff8_fan

Standards, a 9.0 2 years ago is not a 9.0 today.

And who here has played Virtua Fighter 5 and DOA 4? Virtua Fighter 5 is alot more smoother and lookz way better then DOA 4 and yet DOA 4 still gets a higher score then Virtua Fighter 5, I mean there was no online but if u rate DOA 4 graphics Higher then Virtua Fighter 5, right der already shows me something is wrong because we all know that Virtua Fighter 5 is superior to DOA 4 in graphics.

squallff8_fan

If you had bothered to read Gamespot's review system FAQ you'd know that they don't compare games cross-platform. A 9.0 in graphics on one system does not equal a 9.0 in graphics from another system. And Virtua Fighter 5 got such a low score because it's essentially VF4.5.

And how does zelda not get an AAA for the wii. I swear this game in my mind was funner and better then any of the AAA titles that were given on the xbox 360, besides Oblivion but id still take it over it due to all the loading times n stuff on oblivion.

squallff8_fan

There were other sites that actually rated Zelda lower than GS, and it was for the same reasons GS did.

*sigh*

Of course GameSpot is biased. Theres no way that was a simple mistake. They just want to keep the Playstation 3 down. Every multiplatform game is automatically better because it's on the PS3, no matter what. :roll:

I'm really tired of people claiming GS is biased just because they don't agree with their point of view. You didn't see me running around here screaming "BIAS!" last year when they were bashing the 360's launch titles by comparing them to PS2 games.

Whether it was accidental or not, or whether GS is biased or not, the damage has been done. Even with the 'updated' correction, it doesn't change the fact that many people read the article at the time feeling that the 360 was performing better than the PS3.Pangster007

If you need to make your point so bad that you link a badly spelled diatribe from some random guy on a forum  board why don't you just link us up a few from PS3_FTW?

Trolling is bad.

Here is the full text in all of it's Bias GS owning glory...

"if you remember when gamespot did there camparison of the ps3, and the other system games,they tryed to state the the other system graphics of madden was better than the ps3, because of the stadium shadows that appear when you play. I played madden last night and i noticed the the ps3 version did have showdos and infact they where deeper and sharper than the other system version. The setting that puts shadows out, is when your playing in th 4:15 mode for the time of day.

so when gs did the comparisen they purposly put the 360 version on the 4:15 time of day mode and didnt for the ps3, there for making the shadows appear on the the 360 and not the ps3 version. I emailed them last night, telling them how bias they are and everything,and look what they did.

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6162742/p-3.html

they snuck in an update, like it was nothing. like people are actually reading this now. hahahahahahahaahahhahah then they state that you cant see the reebock symble on the ps3, when clearly when you look at the pic, you can see it right there.


i really belive ms has gamespot, on the money roll. i mean comparing rushed launch games to 2nd gen games, u have got to be kiding me, no wonder they gave full auto2 for a waaaay lower score than the gave the full auto for 360. we need to spread this.

also for the comparison, they refused to use hdmi cables for the games for ps3, and cod and fight night are plaing in 480p, they thought that the ps3 would upscale the game for thouse game but it didnt concidering thegames where created before the update to the sdk units devs have."

Here is the update that GS made to their BS comparison after this member exposed them on thier little trick...

"Madden 07

When we first looked at the comparison screenshots, we had to double check to make sure we had an identical 1 p.m. game time and clear-skies weather settings for both systems since the fields appeared very different. We booted up the game again and confirmed that the stadium wasn't casting any shadows on the field in the PlayStation 3 version. [Update: We just checked Madden 07 again. The 4:15 p.m. setting produces on-field shadows in the PS3 version.] The Xbox 360 had sharper textures on the character models in the close-up shots shown between plays. You can actually see the jersey material and the Reebok logo on the player in the Xbox 360 shot. One GameSpot editor did note that the PS3 jerseys looked better than the 360's while players were in motion. "