SMG looks at nine top review sites: Who's the most biased?

Edge magazine's reviews show most 360 bias while IGN seems to prefer PS3 and Wii.

It's no surprise that game reviews can be contentious issues. Few fan bases are as passionate as gamers. Anytime you introduce opinion into the mix you're more than likely to have someone with the exact opposite view as you. Many gamers have cried foul on internet forums when they see their favorite titles receive less than stellar reviews or see games they personally don't care for achieve scores they feel the title is undeserving of. Often the review scores will simply be written off as "Oh, that's Gamespot. They don't like anything on the Console X."

SMG decided to test that idea to see if there was any credibility to it. We reviewed review sample scores from 9 well known publications to see if there was any evidence of a bias displayed.

The sites under the microscope were as follows: Edge, IGN, Gamespot, 1up, GameTrailers, Eurogamer, Gamepro, CheatCodeCentral and Gamespy.

[JOLLY1]

They are really keeping an eye on gamespy, they are on the list twice. Well then, looks like a pretty good article, all in all. I like graphs.

*edit* It's weird that no one is bring up the IGN stat. I wonder why that is.

[Anon1974]

Fixed! Should have been Gamespy and Gamepro.

[IcyJoker187]

Yup, that's why Gamespot and GT is one of my favorite sites to go to.

Edge gets a big thumbs down.

[gaffyh]

I never trust Edge reviews, the stats (which I'm sure someone will post) show that they are clearly biased against the PS3 and lower the scores. Which means that they also inflate Xbox 360 scores, meaning all of their reviews are worthless imo.

[TheColbertinator]

lame

[SnuggleBandit]

The thing i don't like about IGN is it seems like they buy into the hype and rate all exclusives at least a nine...that and the fact that there brokken down scores don't always make sense when comparing other game(like gta 10/10 graphics and killzone 2 9.5/10 graphics.)

[Shadow Flare]

This is brilliant article #2 that i've seen from this site. Well done darkride. And basically confirms what ps3 fans have been saying for ages. Sites like edge and eurogamer ARE biased. Its ridiculous. So expect them to give uncharted 2 8/10

IGN still hasn't fully won me back to them yet. If they give forza 3 a better mark then GT5 for graphics, it'll be pretty clear to me that they don't score games properly

[HolyOrangeCows]

Gameinformer. I've never read a review from them that gave me the 'bias' vibes I get from Eurogamer, Edge, and IGN.

[heroicjanitor]

So that means that you can average ign and edge to get the metacritic score(for the total games so far, but I doubt it works on a game by game basis, it would be cool if it did:)

[presto717]

Ign cleans up after the xbox. Its a very bias site and is not to be taken seriously.

[hulk_bash1987]

Im pretty sure that Eurogamer gave the game a perfect 10, so the only wild card so far is Edge. But, the way its been going so far maybe we might see a favorable review from them as well. Congratulations to ND they deserve it, and October 13 can't come any sooner.

[Blaze929]

who cares. Thats why I like how alot of sites are doing this N/A score type thing now. This is becoming ridiculously stupid to where people aren't even reading/watching the review anymore, just skipping straight to the score for their childish fanboy antics.

Biased nothing. Like the article says, reviews are just a tool but more importantly, reviews are just one person's OPINION. Who cares if one site scores 360 games better than ps3 games or vise-versa?

With these no score type of reviews becoming more common now, itll bring back what reviews were originally for, OPINIONS and it will make people READ them again instead of skipping straight to the score.

[Foliage]

Once you consider how the PS3 has dominated with the best exclusives, you need to consider again how these reviews are slanted in any instance the 360 comes any where close to the PS3. It's only the truth people, stop crying over it.

[randomwiz]

@Blaze
I like the idea of not giving a score, but they should at least give a description like must buy, buy, rent, stay away, just to get a general idea

The number scores are based on different aspects, so each review is reviewed on a different basis, but they do help give an overall idea of how good the game is.

[commodore64]

Hmmm.

So what does this tell us?

- some review scores are slightly biased to ps3
- some review scores are slightly biased to wii
- some review scores are slightly biased to 360.

Really, there is no conclusive outcome, because different people review different games at different sites at different times.

The whole 'conspiracy against ps3' seems to be a vacuous fallacy.

Although, it must be said, for someone who works as a salesman in the finance industry, Darkride66's statistical method leaves a LOT to be desired.

Some of the methodological problems include:

- Inadequate sample size of review sites,
- Inadequate sample size of selections of games,
- Inadequate hypothesis testing of the results.

Would have been nice to see some correlation coefficients, and coefficients of determination (and interpretation) as pertaining to the scores of each review site. That would give a more meaningful result.

As it stands, it's a nice amateur journalistic article that shows us that really, across the industry, the interpretative bias is about even.
Of course, this is a generalisation, based on the flawed methodology used.

Take it with a (BIG) Pinch of salt, if you please.

[starvinbull]

One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that this guys stats assume that there isn't a general bias or downplaying that works against PS3 exclusives on many game-sites.

It's a shame Edge have got a bee in their bonnet this generation, till a short while ago they were the best read out there on the subject of video games.

[Shepherd 214]

Its because GTA 4 is an open world game with so much going on that it couldnt possibly render Killzone 2 quality graphics. Killzone 2 has nothing but linear environemts to worry about, while GTA has much more ambiance, A.I. routines and orders, and sheer objects on screen interacting with each other. Not to mention the size of GTA 4 is much, much bigger than Killzone 2.

[Syronicus]

Plain and simple. It has been the one ball int he Xbox fanboy court that they toss out every time a great new PS3 game hits store shelves. Now that their bias has been called out, I will remember to book mark this and shove it in their faces when they cry about a PS3 game that is getting rave reviews. Edge, you are a steaming pile of dog poo. Yeah, yo can quote me on that if you like.

[prowiew]

i can bet that nobody here read exclusives reviews to decides if buying a game.

[Shepherd 214]

Someone disagreed with me. This is not up for debate. This is not my opinion. This is fact. There is far more technology going on in GTA4 than Killzone 2. An entire world, teeming with thousands of civilians, cops, enemies, and friendly characters must interact with each other constantly and fluently. The world is much much bigger, which means many more polygons and textures to render. Then you have to worry about draw distances(how far you can see without objects popping up), which GTA4 has its hands much fuller than KZ2. The entire debate is mute. GTA4 has much more tech going on, its fact.

[Simon_Brezhnev]

IGN is more forgiving for 360 exclusives

[Anon1974]

IGN scores averaged higher for all 3 consoles but they were actually harder on 360 exclusives then the PS3 and Wii. Have a look.

[mastiffchild]

He means IGN are less harsh on 360 games than Edge are on PS3 exclusives and he's got a nit of a point, really, as Edge tend to stick the boot in further when they don't like something.

[pansenbaer]

Well hopefully that puts to rest the "Edge is bias" theory.

[FlipMode]

It didn't put it to rest, it proved it.

[thedisagreefairy]

edge is obviousy biased and everyone knows it...i mean c'mon mgs4-8.0

and i always thought ign always showed love to the ps3 like when they gave resistance 2 a 9.5

i like ign though...edge on the other hand will never get a hit from me

[JOLLY1]

miss disagree. Are you saying you like IGN because they are bias toward the ps3?

on a side note, are there such thing as male fairies? Well besides those kind.

[thedisagreefairy]

thanks for the disagree though :)

i like ign because their reviews are always detailed and explain everything they like and dont like with valid reasons. seriously, ign has been THE game review site for over a decade because of how well their reviews are.

[GameGambits]

I actually think Resistance 2 did earn itself about a 9.5....but that's just me. It's a FPS that does exactly what I want. It was the first FPS with alien guns that I actually liked too. It started a great trend with its form of co-op, had a spectacular ending to the single player, and has one of the best and lag free online there is.

It's really hard what you can nit pick against Resistance to mark it off, but if I had to pick something it's just the general pacing of the single player is off. It needs to be more action packed and in your face, but often it seems to be dragging you through it at a slow clip.

IGN for me doesn't show bias---it shows lack of well put together reviews. There's too many times they score the criteria for different games oddly to what they just stated in their review. Like someone mentioned Killzone 2 should have been at the time it came out perfect on the graphics department. Compared to any FPS out there on consoles it is THE best looking...10/10 for that. That's something about Killzone 2 that isn't up for debate, because you just have to look at it to know that is correct.

I go to IGN, Gametrailers, and Giantbomb for reviews. If those 3 give it a solid score than it helps push me in a direction on buying or renting something I was interested in. :)

[fishd]

Edge is not biased.They are just a bunch of morons
Bryond Good & Evil 7?
Gow 7?

GTFO please

[thedisagreefairy]

colbert but how is this lame. this site actually just showed us the numbers...facts not opinions
.

and im watching ur show right now :)

[Saaking]

he just doesn't like the truth. This is a very well written and interesting article.

[talltony]

I dnt care what EDGE gives uncharted 2 because if its a good score they are just trying to win back ps3 fans trust and if its a bad score they are just showing their bias once again. I am done with edge either way cause I know where they stand.

[Anon1974]

360 fanboys don't even realize this is a pro-360 article, proving that not all websites (like Gametrailers, Gamespot, IGN) review's are all biased against the PS3.

Morons...

[Xi]

So it's a bias, and not because they actually felt the games were better or worse...

[thebudgetgamer]

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

:) thats a good question. or what if you have euros?

[SupaPlaya]

to pay with rubies :)

[MeatAbstract]

Classic gamer room does good reviews but they seem to enjoy everything. I feel their passion towards gaming in that they can find entertainment in almost any game they play but surely you'd think theres something out there that'll make you say "I'm really not enjoying this game"

[thebudgetgamer]

i like him because he looks for the enjoyable aspects of the games he reviews instead of looking under every nook and cranny to find things he doesnt like.

like this one for example.

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

[MeatAbstract]

Yeah I remember watching his Darkest of Days review and he does make it sound fun. Many reviewers online would tear that game apart. I agree, its nice to see a reviewer point out of the good aspects of a game while clearly stating the flaws as well.

I remember one of his reviews for a Die Hard game and found it incredibly funny since the it had a horrible controller (forgot the console) but he said it was worth atleast one play through just to see how bizarre it really is. Cowboys jumping from elevators!

[thebudgetgamer]

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

edit: saturn, not dreamcast.

[MeatAbstract]

Yup, thats the one. I would actually want to play that though!

[thebudgetgamer]

i think i was turned off to sega with a the genesis add-ons.

this games seems to hve a bad game fun factor to it i might have to check it out.

[Saaking]

It's very easy.
Any site that gives UC2 less than a 9= biased and/or retarded
Any Site that gives ODST more than an 8= biased and/or retarded.

Exceptions to this rule: Edge, eurolamer, gamerader (sites run by bots, but gave UC2 perfect score).

[Kill Crow]

it's that simples

[GamerSciz]

It's a review site reviewing reviews of other sites? I could swear this sounds like a paradox.

[thedisagreefairy]

a black hole is forming now

2012 is the confirmed date of Armageddon now

[Anon1974]

I've got hardly enough time to play the games I want to play, let alone play games I don't want to play for reviews. Much the same for my limited minions. That's why we post links to Metacritic twice a month for reviews. I figure that should about cover it.

Maybe one day we'll be big enough to offer up our own reviews. :)

[butterfinger]

I don't see that day in your future, Dark.

[NecrumSlavery]

Most people including reviews and forum Mods at G4 are raging bots. You say something that is antixbox and they hop on with their gamercard sigs and hand out PS3 gamers demerits like candy. I trust Adam mostly but the rest of G4 are worthless fanboys, well let's just say Xplay crew, G4 forums, and pretty much everyone but AOTS and Vic Lucas.

[Anon1974]

-

[butterfinger]

is ridiculously lame. I agree with Colbert. All of these Open Zone idiots are the reason we have articles like this. :)

[Saaking]

Then why the hell are you in the open zone in the first place you moron? IF you don't like it go to the gamer zone.

[Eiffel]

Saaking doesn't like the truth. Har Har Har.

[Anon1974]

We looked at 9 sites, 15 exclusive games per console and examined the over/under based on average review score to see if these games sites exhibited bias. Some did, some didn't. What's lame about that.

Quite frankly, I was surprised how middle of the road Gamespot was with all their reviews, and how IGN seemed to score PS3 and Wii games higher then average. I wouldn't have guessed that. The only one I would have guessed right off the bat was Edge favoring the 360 and that one proved to be true.

I think it's valuable to know, when looking at a game site for reviews, what's their overall reviewing history like. This gives us an idea.

[butterfinger]

that PS3 fanboys like you, DarkRide, are so paranoid that you have to take the time to make these stupid articles. Oh noes, it's another conspiracy against the PS3! lmao. Get a fuking life. I never read what Saaking writes, due to the fact that he can barely form complete sentences most of the time. XD

[Anon1974]

This article had zero to do about the PS3, or any console in general. It's you who're trying to make this about the ridiculous "console wars".

If anything, this article is pro Xbox 360. It strikes right at the idea that all websites have some anti-PS3 bias and disproves this idea. Had you read the article, you'd see that.

Get a life. Real gamers are trying to talk.

[butterfinger]

I'm not going to read an article with this pathetic title and description. A real gamer wouldn't have an article titled "Who's the most biased?". You don't have to pretend to not be a PS3 fanboy, either, it's cool. Most of the kids around here embrace their fanboyism, but you feel the need to deny it and make yourself look stupid over and over again. You almost always submit stupid BS. Perhaps we should all start submitting our own blogs on N4G to prove how great our favorite toys are. No site with actual news would allow this drivel to get posted. Another victory for DarkRide and his PS3 fanboy friends, another loss for N4G's credibility.

[Anon1974]

If you didn't bother to read the article, you have no right to criticize.

Better to keep quiet and be thought a fool then open your mouth and remove all doubt.

You, sir, are a fool.

[butterfinger]

No amount of bullsh!t you spew will get me to give your site a hit. I'll just rest easy knowing that there is a 99.99% chance your site fails and is never to be heard from again one day. Thanks for playing. I could really care less which console this article is supporting (unlike you I own/play all 3), it should've never been written in the first place. The entire idea behind the article is stupid and point less. Of course your dumbass think's it is great. Keep failing, DikRider.

Not to mention, you constantly abuse your contributor privileges on here by submitting low quality articles from your site and pretending as if you had no say in the quality.

[Dampsack]

What a retarded article. You know what IS biased, this article..."our data shows..." When will people realize that a review is just a SINGLE OPINION from some SINGLE person who is predisposed to enjoying certain types of games more than others, which will obviously be reflected in their reviews. Call it bias or whatever you like. Its hard to be a fence sitter when you have to review something you know you wont even enjoy playing right from the start. People always b!tch and whine about this score being too high, or that score being too low...yet if these same whining fanboy b!tches were to write reviews they would face the exact same scrutiny from other whiny fanboy b!tches. Some people like it, some people don't...why is that such an impossible concept for so many. If YOU like it then go buy the damn game. Not sure? then rent it and form you own damn opinion. Who cares what some other jackass' review says anyways? Sometimes from the anger expressed from fanboys over this supposed "Bias" it's as though this reviewer(s) actually crept into your bedroom and diddled your little ass, repeatedly ,for weeks. Have some empathy you ignorant twats.... oh I forgot, kids dont have this, as "empathy" is a 'grown-up' emotion.

"Bias" haha such childish bullsh!t fanboy rhetoric.

Ahhh there, I feel better. LOL Im not mad.

[Carlton Banks]

lol Look at you go, getting mad because someone wants to know if sites have bias.

[Anon1974]

All the article does is examine if some sites show a bias based on the average. Of course some sites reviews are harsher then others, just like some seem to love everything like Paula Abdul. What this article looks for is when are they inconsistent? What sites are harsher on one console versus another.

I don't think there's anything wrong with examining that. I like to know if a site gives a low score - is it because they don't like the game or is it because they just don't like the console and the game has nothing to do with it.

That's nothing to get bent out of shape over.

[psiom]

Dampsack: Why is it such a hard concept for you to grasp?

People look at reviews to help them make decisions about games. With me so far?

Biased reviewers are obviously not worth as much to gamers in this role as non biased reviewers, because the skew they add is not shared among most people (Hence...the use of the term BIASED).

It's not about outrage or fairness or console wars. It's about outing the people that aren't doing a very good job at informing gamers on what's good and what's not.

It's all subjective obviously, and you might go to a biased site and completely agree with everything, but by definition, MOST people probably wouldn't.

[Dampsack]

Damn straight Carlton! Someone's gotta set things straight around here HAHA

[spektical]

the last point is excellent . if you have trusted a review site go with that review site. Above all your the only one that will like/dislike the game.

[xcox]

it shows a "game journalist" who's just received his package from redmond with a kind note:

"thx for jumping in! here's a free xbox360 with 3 years gold membership to help you stay fair and balanced"

there seem to be a bug in the GameTrailers data: they've been sucking M$'s c0ck real dry just like (missing?) kotaku BTW

[Anon1974]

I figured with all the botched comparisons they has done, surely we would have seen a 360 bias with their reviews. It just wasn't there. They tended to review PS3 and Wii games better then average. Shocked the hell out of me.

As for Kotaku, I looked at including them but they only have a handful of reviews that are all over the map. For example, of the 15 exclusives we looked at for the PS3, Kotaku had reviews for only six of them. Hard to do a comparison like this with so small a data sample.

[hulk_bash1987]

But it's a pretty good read.

[Thoreau]

screen shots of the game and nuances such as load times and development hiccups, other than that, i pay no attention to the final score. humans are biased animals.

[mastiffchild]

In a world where the words and the nymber at the end often bear little to no relation to each other that's a good way of looking it it fella. Thing is you're possbly(probably) well versed enough in the industry to be able to do that but some of our number just aren't and need more info to help make up their minds if it's a game they aren't sure of(maybe they're a newer gamer or just didn't play the previous game in a series etc).

I agree, though, that tech issues and things like that are definitely the kind of stuff any review can furnish you with, or should be able to at least! Bias is just another variable you need to take into account when reading a bunch of reviews these days.

[Kiroe]

"Once you find a reviewer you trust, stick with them but don’t rely on reviewers or game comparisons to make up your mind. Happy gaming!"

Personally, I rely on a mix of both reviews and comparisons. Before purchasing a game, especially if there is no demo, I will check out a few of my trusted review sites to see how the actual game is (gameplay, story, length, etc.). Then if I decide it is worth a second look I will refer to comparisons to help determine which version looks and performs better. This is a formula that hasn't failed me yet.

[GiantEnemyCrab]

lol @ the article picture. It implies that all these sites show some extra love to the 360 even when the data doesn't show it.

One thing I can say is SMG & darkride66 are slanted twords PS3.

I can guarantee you that if the PS3 wasn't being effected by this, the article would never exist.

/wishes he could take back the hit and will never make that mistake again.

[Anon1974]

Kinda grasping at straws there, aren't cha? There's nothing in this article that can be construed as "anti" or "pro" any console. You'd know that if you had read it. The conclusion shows one site biased towards the 360, another biased towards the Wii and PS3.

How on earth did you figure this is somehow all about Sony?

As for the articles on my site - they have a tendency to focus on the PS3 as that's where I find there's the most misinformation and when I see sites printing bald faced lies and half truths as fact, that will usually give me an idea for editorials.

There's plenty of articles on the site about the 360 and Wii - but it just so happens right now the actual news is being made by the PS3 - so yeah, there's a few more Sony articles at the moment.

But you probably check under your bed at night for phantom PS3 fanboys, so my guess is trying to reason with you is pointless. Anything that's not 100% "Go Microsoft" is probably instantly written off in your little reality, if your posting history is anything to go by.

Another poster for the ignore list.

[GiantEnemyCrab]

There is a difference for my preference for the 360 over the PS3. I don't make a website and create "articles/news" and pretend to be unbiased.

I read the story and yes the numbers you pull are fact but your repeated "bias" conclusions are BS. How many times can you use the word "bias" in the article anyway? I guess you need to drive that point home huh?

You need to look up the definition of bias as the way it's implied here.

"to cause partiality or favoritism in (a person); influence, esp. unfairly:"

So these "bias" are influenced unfairly? I'd rather think they are just one persons opinion. But you didn't say that.

Then you basically turn it around at the end and say well, despite all the garbage I just typed reviews are just a tool.

Well, no sh*t Sherlock.

[Anon1974]

Once in the heading, once in the subheading, once in the body. Yeah, I'm really beating people over the head with it, aren't I.

Bias: a particular tendency or inclination, esp. one that prevents unprejudiced consideration of a question; prejudice.

If one or two reviews are off the norm, ok. That's understandable. If the majority of your reviews show you being hard on once console but soft on the other - that's evidence of a bias leaking into reviews.

Plenty of people bash one console's titles over another, and they're entitled to that opinion. This just shows some sites leanings, and that's important to know if what you're looking for is a fair evaluation of a game as opposed to an opinion that's colored by dislike for one console over another. I think that's important to know when evaluating reviews, don't you?

If you said "I give Uncharted 2 a 6 out of 10, but I don't like the PS3." I'd say - "Ok. You have the right to your opinion, but I think I'm going to go with someone who likes the console if I'm looking for a fair evaluation." There's nothing wrong with that.

You don't go looking for commentary on African culture and history from a racist, do you?

And with that, back on my ignore list you go.

Edit: And speaking of ignore list, I see Commodore decided to show up above there. I'm sure he's found some why to turn this into something related to his whole console wars obsession. Let me guess! He's posting links to something completely unrelated! Ooooh...don't tell me! He's saying the numbers don't prove anything, and then posting other numbers that aren't related?
Do yourself a favor. Rather then take anything he says at face value, just glance at his posting history. That should clear up how reliable his opinion is. By the way, the ignore button is right under his icon. Do yourself a favor.

[butterfinger]

You hit the nail on the head. Basically if I see something submitted by DarkRide, I never click the link. My computer sees enough garbage on a day to day basis.

Also, thanks for the advice DarkRide. I almost forgot that the ignore button was directly under your flameboy avatar (very appropriate character, I might add).

[DailyAddict]

So, the higher scores of games on certain platforms couldn't possibly have anything to do with just typically overall better quality of games? It HAS to be fanboy'ism? I'm sorry, but if you average out the PS3/360/Wii exclusive scores across ALL networks, PS3 exclusives have typically scored higher overall. That just has to do with a better quality game. By this article's impression, every site on the net would be PS3 bias if you're averaging out exclusive game scores.

Fail

[Anon1974]

This article is dealing with how much above or below the averages. If a game reviewed really well, as some of them did, all we did was check to so how much above or below the norm the sites were, and then we did this for each magazine for 45 exclusive titles across all three platforms to see if there was a trend. Like with Edge. They had a tendency to be one of the tougher reviewers overall, but it was clear that they were harder on Wii and PS3 games over 360 games.

How high or low the review scores on average were wasn't a factor, just how much above or below the average score.

Did that clear it up?

[GiantEnemyCrab]

Thank you OP!

[testerg35]

So a site is biased if it gives good scores to 360, but not biased if it gives good scores to PS3 games because PS3 games deserve it? I'm also guessing that everyone of the sites on the article have been called biased by PS3 fans. I believe they even called a PS3 site biased towards the 360 :)

[Anon1974]

If a site gave above average scores on PS3 games and above average scores on 360 games, like Gamepro, that just means they give higher scores then average. If a site gives above average scores on a consistent basis to one console and consistently low-balls another console, that is clearly evidence of a bias. Or, like Edge, gives below average scores to everyone, but always hammers the PS3 and Wii games versus the 360, that comes out in this type of over/under look at the scores.

[testerg35]

darkrider66, you've been here long enough to read through all the posts. Please name a site that PS3 fans have not accussed of being biased against the PS3. I don't mind PS3 fans being upset at some sites, but whenever a site gives a bad score to a PS3 game, they're automatically labled biased.

[Tainted Gene]

good point...ex, ign is always claimed to be bais against PS3 games.
Contrary to the findings in this very article.

[mt]

they never play games ..

[DelbertGrady]

Isn't this darkride66's site? One of the biggest PS3 fanboys on N4G. Surely makes it credible.

[hard joe]

it's based on data
not personal subjective opinion
this explains why x360 exclusives get higher score easier
than ps3 or wii

[DelbertGrady]

Cause data can't be skewed...

[Anon1974]

And what's funny is if you bothered to look into this, you would see it's true. But you don't bother with actually checking to see if the story has any truth to it before you start flying off at that mouth, do you now, Soda?

This information is available to all. If you doubt what's posted, verify the data yourself. Until you get off your ass and verify whether the data is correct yourself or not, you have no right to criticize - stfu. Seriously.

If you examine the same data, find out I'm wrong somehow, then we'll talk but in the meantime don't sh!t all over my work because you're too lazy, and too prejudiced, to verify the data yourself.

[Shnazzyone]

it's just interesting to see. Amazing how inflated scores are on IGN. But they are an ad machine these days. No surprise. I think gamepro and 1up look like they should be my review scores of choice. Small bias to wii on 1up but it is extremely marginal. Overall they seem like they are the least biased of all of em'.

[Anon1974]

He's off his rocker.

"Some of the methodological problems include:

- Inadequate sample size of review sites,
- Inadequate sample size of selections of games,
- Inadequate hypothesis testing of the results."

The metric used for the average was Metacritic - often with 75 to 100 reviews calculated into their average. That was what these sites were compared against. Complaining about the size of the reviews sites just shows he didn't read the article.

The size of the selection of games was limited to well known exclusives, because otherwise not all the sites covered them. For example, I tried to compare MLB - The Show and Disgaea but the problem is, only a handful of sites reviewed these games. For full effect, necessity dictated that I select exclusives that the majority of the sites reviewed. Again, Commmodore obviously didn't think that criticism through.

"Inadequate hypothesis." I didn't come to a conclusion. I observed that some sites seemed to display a bias based on this info. How could you possibly prove opinion skewed their review scores? Ridiculous. Just goes to show Commodore didn't even bother to think his criticisms through.

As for not using "correlation coefficients" now he's just proving his ignorance. Anytime you take averages and examine how far they are off the mean you're dealing with correlation coefficients.

Here's more info if you're not familiar with these:

"If the variables tend to go up and down together, the correlation coefficient will be positive. If the variables tend to go up and down in opposition, with low values of one variable associated with high values of the other, the correlation coefficient will be negative."

This is my 4th chart. Way to prove your ignorance, Commodore.

Commodore talks a good game, but if you look at what he says, it so quickly unravels it's clear the emperor has no clothes, and is quite possibly a prat.

[butterfinger]

Pot. Kettle. Black.

[DonCorneo]

it's the other website that score ps3 exclusives a lot lower.. there are a lot of xbot reviewers out there and that's why the meta ratings of ps3 games are so low.

ign et al are just giving the ps3 unbiased reviews.