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...

[Tempist]

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.

[itatton]

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.

[Tempist]

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.

[grilledgorlupa8]

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.