Let's get something straight SW. Metacritic is WAY more important then Gamespot.

But it's rule on system wars that we go by Gamespot. Cows just want to change the rules because of Halo 4. vashkey

Cows ....moving the goalposts since 2005 !

Without any knowledge on the OP, his background or his potential intentions (I am posting this because there's suspiciously large amount of negative replies, so I gotta feelin' something's going on <_< ) I am saying Metacritic by a ridiculously large margin.

A real no brainer for me. Just a question of probability - given how (relatively) mainstream my preferences tend to be, there's a higher chance that I will like what a whole bunch of people liked (It flops hard on Gamespot, but scores AMAZING on Metacritic) than that I will exactly happen to like what some dude liked but majority hated (It flops hard on Metacritic, but scores AMAZING on Gamespot).

Of course, exceptions happen (Gamespot giving both The Witcher 2 and Skyrim 9 out of 10 is way closer to how I would rate the games or at least their relation to each other than Metacritic's 88 to 96), but generally, my preferences tend to correspond more with MC than GS. Besides, I would never rely on single person's opinion.

That said, I don't hold journalists' part of MC in very high regard either. One or one hundred, that's still too small of sample for me and [tinfoil hat] who knows how honest the reviewers can actually be [/tinfoil hat], so I rely more on players' feedback and reviews and as biased and as overeacting as the users' scores on MC or elsewhere tend to be, I can't think of better early warning indicator (that something is off) than MC's review bombing.:lol:

So yeah, a question of numbers for me: few hundreds / thousands of users > few dozens of reviewers > a single reviewer for me any day.

Does that mean Eddie that you agree that the 360 > PS3 in games?

[QUOTE="vashkey"]But it's rule on system wars that we go by Gamespot. Cows just want to change the rules because of Halo 4. jg4xchamp

Not just lemmings though. The majority of the community doesn't want to change the rules. Only a couple hardcore cows are fighting to change them.

Obviously, Metacritic is a better source to go to if you're looking for a collection of opinions about games. I feel that GameSpot is biased as I disagree with many of their reviews.

Oh look eddie's butthurt again that the PS3 is last in games and sales :roll:

Oh look eddie's butthurt again that the PS3 is last in gamesand sales :roll:

blue_hazy_basic

My PS3 and 360 games consists of exclusives only, and the PS3 stack is much higher. What does that tell you?

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"]

Oh look eddie's butthurt again that the PS3 is last in gamesand sales :roll:

GamerwillzPS

My PS3 and 360 games consists of exclusives only, and the PS3 stack is much higher. What does that tell you?

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"]

Oh look eddie's butthurt again that the PS3 is last in gamesand sales :roll:

GamerwillzPS

My PS3 and 360 games consists of exclusives only, and the PS3 stack is much higher. What does that tell you?

That you're an idiot for thinking your stack of games means anything in the real world?

Oh look eddie's butthurt again that the PS3 is last in games and sales :roll:

blue_hazy_basic

Again? Is he ever not butthurt? :?

Like Zeviander said, he's gotta just be buttnumb at this point. A man can only take so much.

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"]

Oh look eddie's butthurt again that the PS3 is last in gamesand sales :roll:

GamerwillzPS

My PS3 and 360 games consists of exclusives only, and the PS3 stack is much higher. What does that tell you?

It's really just a choice. I always use Metacritic or Gamerankings over Gamespot reviews. That should be a given for any true gamer who is serious about getting a game after reading several reviews. Gamespot usually gets about 1 accurate score out of 10 reviews. They have had some really low reviews that were hilarious though. If you checked Metacritic, you saw Gamespot's score at the very bottom of the page of reviews. blackace

what exactly is an accurate review? not the average score, i hope.

Lol @ fanboys switching back and forth between Gamespot and Metacritic for whichever one better suits their argument. I'm sure tomorrow it will be "ONLY GAMESPOT SCORES COUNT." TC needs to get outside more

To some it all up, which ever site ranks PS3 higher is the site we'll use from now on so lets just all agree on this shall we? :o :P

If you only trust GameSpot reviews, you're doing it wrong. You need more opinions, but for the sake of Systems Wars metagame, using just GameSpot allows this board to function. If we used MetaCritic, nothing would flop and there would be non-stop arguments about which sites are credible, which aren't and which should be ignored.

In short, for System Wars the GameSpot only rule works because this board is basically a game. But if you're taking this board seriously outside of SW, you need help.

You need to get laid, man.freedomfreak

I agree, only irrational people with the agenda of making their console look better would disagree. Eddie is a Cow, and thats no secret, that doesn't make what he's saying any less true. Lets not try to pretend that Eddie is the only fanboy on this board, ahem, Canyoudigit, Delta, KaraateChop, Mems, Suds,Super 600, The Game, Fizzman, etc. All of you guys are just as much of a fanboy as Eddie. At least what hes saying has weight to it. Also, this poll proves nothing, just that theres more Lems on here than Cows. The fact that you guys will back one persons opinions over an industry says a lot about your "Amazing" game library. Otherwise this poll would've went the other way.

If you only trust GameSpot reviews, you're doing it wrong. You need more opinions, but for the sake of Systems Wars metagame, using just GameSpot allows this board to function. If we used MetaCritic, nothing would flop and there would be non-stop arguments about which sites are credible, which aren't and which should be ignored.

In short, for System Wars the GameSpot only rule works because this board is basically a game. But if you're taking this board seriously outside of SW, you need help.

DontGetBigIdeas

This, This, and THIS

To some it all up, which ever site ranks PS3 higher is the site we'll use from now on so lets just all agree on this shall we? :o :P

SecretPolice

Yeah, because youve never switched sources to help your case, amiright? No no, Lems NEVER do that.:roll:

[QUOTE="SecretPolice"]

To some it all up, which ever site ranks PS3 higher is the site we'll use from now on so lets just all agree on this shall we? :o :P

NineTailedGoku

Yeah, because youve never switched sources to help your case, amiright? No no, Lems NEVER do that.:roll:

:P

I agree, only irrational people with the agenda of making their console look better would disagree. Eddie is a Cow, and thats no secret, that doesn't make what he's saying any less true. Lets not try to pretend that Eddie is the only fanboy on this board, ahem, Canyoudigit, Delta, KaraateChop, Mems, Suds,Super 600, The Game, Fizzman, etc. All of you guys are just as much of a fanboy as Eddie. At least what hes saying has weight to it. Also, this poll proves nothing, just that theres more Lems on here than Cows. The fact that you guys will back one persons opinions over an industry says a lot about your "Amazing" game library. Otherwise this poll would've went the other way.

NineTailedGoku

So not trusting the flawed metric of a weighted average means I'm a fanboy?

And let's get one thing straight, kid. I don't hold any reviewer's opinion of any game in high regard because those opinions are utterly meaningless in comparison to my own. I couldn't care less if some critic exploded with impudent praise of a game if I don't end up liking it. I respect the opinions of certain writers (Hello there, writers at Eurogamer) but as I said, if they like a game I don't, their opinion doesn't mean much to me.

I use GameSpot scores for the sake of the metagame and no amount of impotent cow rage is going to change that seeing as we've had votes and all votes have gone toward the continued use of GameSpot scores for the GameSpot metagame.

Does it change the fact 360 has about 160 quality games over PS3? TC is butthurt!

You need to get laid, man.freedomfreak

WHO THE HELL CARES

[QUOTE="NineTailedGoku"]

I agree, only irrational people with the agenda of making their console look better would disagree. Eddie is a Cow, and thats no secret, that doesn't make what he's saying any less true. Lets not try to pretend that Eddie is the only fanboy on this board, ahem, Canyoudigit, Delta, KaraateChop, Mems, Suds,Super 600, The Game, Fizzman, etc. All of you guys are just as much of a fanboy as Eddie. At least what hes saying has weight to it. Also, this poll proves nothing, just that theres more Lems on here than Cows. The fact that you guys will back one persons opinions over an industry says a lot about your "Amazing" game library. Otherwise this poll would've went the other way.

The_Game21x

So not trusting the flawed metric of a weighted average means I'm a fanboy?

And let's get one thing straight, kid. I don't hold any reviewer's opinion of any game in high regard because those opinions are utterly meaningless in comparison to my own. I couldn't care less if some critic exploded with impudent praise of a game if I don't end up liking it. I respect the opinions of certain writers (Hello there, writers at Eurogamer) but as I said, if they like a game I don't, their opinion doesn't mean much to me.

I use GameSpot scores for the sake of the metagame and no amount of impotent cow rage is going to change that seeing as we've had votes and all votes have gone toward the continued use of GameSpot scores for the GameSpot metagame.

Oh isn't that cute, you call yourself telling me off. Anyways kid, don't deny youre a fanboy. This board is full of fanboys, the first step is to admit it. Ive seen you post and youre no better than the posters you accuse of "Cow Rage". Thats besides the point, a group of opinions are better than one opinion. Yes were on Gamespot, but only because they have good forums. The reviews here are extremely questionable. Dont see how anyone could defend GS review after the Kane and Lynch fiasco.

Does it change the fact 360 has about 160 quality games over PS3? TC is butthurt!

PAL360

I don't think filler games like Hitman Blood Money, Bully, Moto GP 06, and Culdcept Saga are anytning to be butthurt about. Have fun with those "160 extra" games though.

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

Does it change the fact 360 has about 160 quality games over PS3? TC is butthurt!

NineTailedGoku

I don't think filler games like Hitman Blood Money, Bully, Moto GP 06, and Culdcept Saga are anytning to be butthurt about. Have fun with those "160 extra" games though.

what's a "filler" game? :?

[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

[QUOTE="NineTailedGoku"]

I agree, only irrational people with the agenda of making their console look better would disagree. Eddie is a Cow, and thats no secret, that doesn't make what he's saying any less true. Lets not try to pretend that Eddie is the only fanboy on this board, ahem, Canyoudigit, Delta, KaraateChop, Mems, Suds,Super 600, The Game, Fizzman, etc. All of you guys are just as much of a fanboy as Eddie. At least what hes saying has weight to it. Also, this poll proves nothing, just that theres more Lems on here than Cows. The fact that you guys will back one persons opinions over an industry says a lot about your "Amazing" game library. Otherwise this poll would've went the other way.

NineTailedGoku

So not trusting the flawed metric of a weighted average means I'm a fanboy?

And let's get one thing straight, kid. I don't hold any reviewer's opinion of any game in high regard because those opinions are utterly meaningless in comparison to my own. I couldn't care less if some critic exploded with impudent praise of a game if I don't end up liking it. I respect the opinions of certain writers (Hello there, writers at Eurogamer) but as I said, if they like a game I don't, their opinion doesn't mean much to me.

I use GameSpot scores for the sake of the metagame and no amount of impotent cow rage is going to change that seeing as we've had votes and all votes have gone toward the continued use of GameSpot scores for the GameSpot metagame.

Oh isn't that cute, you call yourself telling me off. Anyways kid, don't deny youre a fanboy. This board is full of fanboys, the first step is to admit it. Ive seen you post and youre no better than the posters you accuse of "Cow Rage". Thats besides the point, a group of opinions are better than one opinion. Yes were on Gamespot, but only because they have good forums. The reviews here are extremely questionable. Dont see how anyone could defend GS review after the Kane and Lynch fiasco.

I'm curious, which banned/suspended Cow are you, hiding behind that alt? You must be one I've tangled with in the past, having such knowledge of my posting history and style.

And meh, call me a fanboy if you like. I don't really care. I'm not a fanboy, I just play one on the internet.

I am here because I enjoy the forums, true enough and not because I "trust" their reviews. I'm not defending GameSpot reviews in the slightest. I'm merely maintaining that they are what we use for the metagame. Period. We had a vote a little while back and the matter was decided. No use prattling on about it now.

You need to get laid by ten men.freedomfreak

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

Does it change the fact 360 has about 160 quality games over PS3? TC is butthurt!

NineTailedGoku

I don't think filler games like Hitman Blood Money, Bully, Moto GP 06, and Culdcept Saga are anytning to be butthurt about. Have fun with those "160 extra" games though.

How about games like The Witcher 2, Left 4 dead 2, Fez, Minecraft, Metro, Alan Wake, etc?

The problem with Metacritic, or GameRankings, is that the scale is based out of 100, and there are more an more sites going to "star" ratings.

4 out of 5 stars isn't really 8/10 in most people's minds; but that's what it equates to on Metacritic. Unless everyone agrees on a standard (like ESRB ratings), then those sites need to be taken with a grain of salt.

The other problem I see is that unknown sites get equal weight in the ratings. Some site with 10 viewers a day gave Halo 4 a 2/10. Now, we can debate the score Halo 4 should get - but a 2/10? Really? There were two other sites that gave it a 5/10 - meaning that Haze, Lair and Steel Batallion were no worse than Halo 4; which is a total bunch of crap.

That's like giving Uncharted 3 or God of War 3 a 2/10 or a 5/10. Rediculous.

Which review source do you think people will trust more? Gamers, Industry insiders, devs, etc, everyone in general?

Eddie-Vedder

I trust my self, i look on gaming sites and other people's view on games for information and a broader perspective. Just like i do with everything els.

So not trusting the flawed metric of a weighted average means I'm a fanboy?

And let's get one thing straight, kid. I don't hold any reviewer's opinion of any game in high regard because those opinions are utterly meaningless in comparison to my own. I couldn't care less if some critic exploded with impudent praise of a game if I don't end up liking it. I respect the opinions of certain writers (Hello there, writers at Eurogamer) but as I said, if they like a game I don't, their opinion doesn't mean much to me.

I use GameSpot scores for the sake of the metagame and no amount of impotent cow rage is going to change that seeing as we've had votes and all votes have gone toward the continued use of GameSpot scores for the GameSpot metagame.

The_Game21x

[QUOTE="PAL360"]

Does it change the fact 360 has about 160 quality games over PS3? TC is butthurt!

NineTailedGoku

I don't think filler games like Hitman Blood Money, Bully, Moto GP 06, and Culdcept Saga are anytning to be butthurt about. Have fun with those "160 extra" games though.

When it comes to measuring a games critical success.

No. I'm not saying the metagame needs to use Metacritic, even though it should I get the whole we're on Gamespot thing.

However, nooblets that brush off Metacritic as if it were less worthy then a Gamespot review :lol: The ignorance is mind boggling.

FACT. Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo and EVERY SINGLE Dev and Publisher in this industry use Metacritic as a gauge to measure a games critical success.

FACT. Metacritic is just a collection of opinions, although it's a collection of educated opinions, and 100 educated opinions >>>>>>>> 1 educated opinion.

Yes Metacritic isn't perfect, but it's WAAAAAAY closer to perfection then Gamespot is, or any other single website.

Simple question, imagine a game you're hyping is released.

2 Scenarios.

1. It flops hard on Gamespot, but scores AMAZING on Metacritic.

2. It flops hard on Metacritic, but scores AMAZING on Gamespot.

Which review source do you think people will trust more? Gamers, Industry insiders, devs, etc, everyone in general?

Eddie-Vedder

Game reviews on any site, especially the scores, are not important unless you're a mindless idiot.

Isn't personal opinions better than reviewers opinions?

Isn't personal opinions better than reviewers opinions?

guard12

The problem with Metacritic/Gamerankings is that PC games always have a much lower average due to not having nearly as many as fanboy padding sites/magazines that consoles have, or payed reviews. Due to this i'll stick to GS, even though they still give lower PC scores due to standards...atleast its not due to fanboy magazine padding.

The problem with Metacritic/Gamerankings is that PC games always have a much lower average due to not having nearly as many as fanboy padding sites/magazines that consoles have, or payed reviews. Due to this i'll stick to GS, even though they still give lower PC scores due to standards...atleast its not due to fanboy magazine padding.

Jankarcop

We are talking about games here. Nothing is imortant.

[QUOTE="Jankarcop"]

The problem with Metacritic/Gamerankings is that PC games always have a much lower average due to not having nearly as many as fanboy padding sites/magazines that consoles have, or payed reviews. Due to this i'll stick to GS, even though they still give lower PC scores due to standards...atleast its not due to fanboy magazine padding.

blue_hazy_basic

[QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"][QUOTE="Jankarcop"]

The problem with Metacritic/Gamerankings is that PC games always have a much lower average due to not having nearly as many as fanboy padding sites/magazines that consoles have, or payed reviews. Due to this i'll stick to GS, even though they still give lower PC scores due to standards...atleast its not due to fanboy magazine padding.

Eddie-Vedder

[QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"][QUOTE="blue_hazy_basic"] hmmm so what you're saying is that eddie's reasoning of biased and troll scores balancing each other out won't work for the PC?!?! :o What a shame it was so perfect up until that point lolTessellation