Approvals 10/3 ▼
Syko (2) - 3632d ago Cancel
Maldread (2) - 3632d ago Cancel
Vip3r (2) - 3632d ago Cancel
BIoodmask (4) - 3632d ago Cancel

Ranking Aggregators = Aggravations

The information provided by the various rating / ranking aggregation sites can be effective in making a decision on a single game. The question is, what sort of a picture do they paint for the comparison of the systems / consoles? Parodies Galore seems to think that, when it comes to painting a the picture of a console, these sites are less than accurate...

Read Full Story >>
Create Report !X

Add Report


The story is too old to be commented.
Tempist3632d ago

Not saying PSN titles are the bomb, but the fact is they are games made specifically for the PS3 and/or the PSP. The Virtual console is comprised of older games already released for a prior incarnation of a Nintendo system.

Comparing the top 20% exclusives would reveal a different contrast given there's a gap between the consoles, which essentially puts them on the level of a game cube plus and a next (current) gen console.

His comparisons are right, but not in my opinion a proper way of showing the data. This would be in some cases a manipulation of numbers to get a desirable outcome.

itatton3632d ago

I agree with what you're saying, however I think that regardless of whether Virtual Console games are new or old doesn't discount the fact that they should be uniquely reviewed for the sake of comparing on a common scale. There are probably a large number of gamers who have never played a lot of the harder to find Turbo Grafx and Neo Geo titles so for them the content is new regardless of it's date of release.

The only reason I chose the top 20% was the time factor for running all of the stats and processing the comparisons. I figured too that most people who don't already have specific titles in mind for purchasing a console are mostly only looking at the A and B rated games.

Although it's a different comparison all together, I really don't consider the Wii to be closer to the prior generation despite the difference in specs when compared to the PS3. I think this generation was focused on a stronger interface with gaming on the Wii rather than more refined graphics as with the PS3. I consider both of them progressions into the next generation, I was just writing the article as a response to the misconception that the Wii only has shovelware with waggle while the PS3 is a far superior and more refined gaming platform when in actuality they are on a more even playing field and both have a lot of good quality titles to play.

Tempist3632d ago

Alright, fair. Then perhaps you should take it a step further and look at the bottom 20 - 25% and see what the results are for that.

Do a full spectrum of games that get x% rating and see where things are lining up over all. Sure the top 20% may draw a large crowd, but there's the gimmicky crowd that will get games rating be damned.

grilledgorlupa83632d ago

A lot of game reviewers treat a review of how good or bad instead of treating it as if the game is worth your time and money. Atleast that way you can know if its a good or bad game on the 2 values that is not all opinion and also the the 2 values no one has enough of.

The other reason is reviewers dont understand that a 1-10 scale just doesn't work on reviewing games just because the average on the scale is at 7 (which is because a 7 is C which is a passing grade for school) so you end up not using 5 points of the scale.

Out Now! >>
Out Now! x
"It’s a joy to simply spend time in a world so expertly crafted" 9.5/10 "It was definitely worth the wait!" 9.5/10 "The game will shock and surprise you!" 9/10