Are Reviewers Too Critical of PS3 Multi-Console Games?

It is understandable that if a professional reviewer-such as the people at IGN or Gamespot-believe that a game is superior on one console over another, that they should rate it accordingly. They just need to be fair and consistent with thier scoring.

[Drekken]

Good read. Still a blog, so I have to be consistent with my criticism of it being posted.

But, he does raise some good points in his speculation. These reviewers are not consistent at all.

[JimmyJames70]

I really, really, do not understand the hate towards blogs on N4G.

There are times when articles posted on blogs are written by writing and editing professionals with a proven track record for writing effective, meaningful, and insightful news.

Some of us just happen to have "real" jobs writing and editing in other areas (like software development) and writing on a blog is a means for us to contribute to the gaming community.

We're not all hacks. Well, sometimes, but not always.

[Jeremy Gerard]

You dont down grade a score for a little texture pop in, you down grade scores for things that really hurt the gaming experience or make the game unplayable on some level.(framerate issues, cripling online issues) The GTA example was horrible, this guys is an idiot.

Another reason 360 games don't get downscored as often is because it is usually the 360 version that runs better, HELLO is this guy a complete moron?

[Utalkin2me]

"Another reason 360 games don't get downscored as often is because it is usually the 360 version that runs better" So he is a moron for speaking the truth. That is not an opinion that is a fact.

[dro]

im sorry but gamespot has been proven to be bias...(-_-)

[Sez]

well look at IGN. they rated fallout 3 with a low score. then went back and changed it. yet no other site did that. what was the reason behind that. and will that start becoming the norm. or was it just a one time thing?

http://www.n4g.com/NewsCom-...

[Foliage]

"You dont down grade a score for a little texture pop in, you down grade scores for things that really hurt the gaming experience or make the game unplayable on some level.(framerate issues, cripling online issues) The GTA example was horrible, this guys is an idiot."

The GTA 4 version on the 360 was significantly worse. It wasn't just texture popins, it was mesh popins. Things would pop up ahead of you out of the blue with no means to avoid it. That makes it very much unplayable for a game that requires weaving through objects and traffic. Let's also not compare online experiences, the xbox Live lag is very crippling at times. Give Gears a try.

[Bill]

Gamers, the media, journalist, everyone fears what they do not understand. To take risks means to expose oneself to failure. Sony has taken a huge risk on the Playstation 3 but I'm here to say, they have not failed. Sony will once again be crowned king of the hill and be known as the company who makes other gaming companies change their corporate mission statement. Unite with me.

[kwicksandz]

Dont sugar coat it, if its inferior to other versions tell us and be straight about i. Multi platform owners base buying decsions on this info.

[ultimolu]

Yes.
Fallout 3 comes to mind, especially when it was probably one glitch?! Developers are starting to develop the games equally on both consoles. Back in 2007, PS3 multiplatforms weren't so hot, except for DMC4, which looks really good on the PS3.

[SSCOOLCHEA]

for the simple fact they have to cut corners to make it work on the xbox . All my ps3 games are exclusive or first party games. It has to be done on the ps3 first .

uncharted
warhawk
heavenly sword
metal gear 4
grand turismo pro
nba 09 the inside
singstar
buzz tv quiz
little big planet
socom
mlb the show
eye of judge
hot shots golf
waiting to get
resistance 2 is next ....god of war 3......killzone 2

wait there is one .....madden . but thats because gameday isnt here yet .

[Aquanox]

It seems that this guy missed this article:

http://www.eurogamer.net/ar...

The advantages and disadvantages in GTA IV could be found in both consoles. There was no clear "winner", other than maybe, in the framerate in favor of the Xbox 360, but not by a long shot.

In fallout, for what we can read at IGN, Gamespot and PSM, the differences were noticeable enough to call a better version. Even the Playstation Magazine pointed it out in their review. This is why it received an inferior score on IGN.

These kids with blogs should inform themselves a bit before sending their own stories to n4g.com

[Raoh]

An example of this is Grand Theft Auto IV. Here is a quote directly from IGN, "While GTA IV is pushing the PS3 and 360 to the limit, it also runs amazingly well. Sure, there are framerate hitches here and there and (particularly on the 360) there is some texture pop in, but it actually runs better than I expected." If the technical problems of Fallout 3 for the PS3 are enough to lower the score by .2 when compared to the 360 version, why have we never seen a PS3 version of a multi-console game get a higher score for the same reason?

_____________________________ _____

good point.

[PatchMe360]

I started boycotting websites awhile back and officially dont visit any, anymore. Just too frustrating. I know when the games that I wanna play are coming out and really dont need some stupid writer to ruin games for me. Ignorance is bliss i guess.

Not to mention a lot of the articles are so poorly written that i really dont feel im missing out on much.

Plus it cuts down on frustration. However not only for ps3 but also my 360 and PC all 3 of which i use to check sites daily.

Why bother anymore.

Now go eat a plum.

[she00win99]

ign gave eternal sonata better score on ps3(8.7) than xbox 360(8.3). if its inferior they should rate it lower so that the lazy developers will learn their lesson just like EA..

[PirateThom]

I've noticed that, even when the PS3 version is better, they tend to give a single score, but once a problem appears in the PS3 version it gets a separate score.

I've also noticed in exclusives though where they tend to give 360 games a "pass" where they wouldn't give PS3 games.

Don't think I'm being bitter, I bought The Orange Box for 360 because of supposed problems, I wouldn't accept it if it was the other way around, but the fact it happens is ridiculous.

[sinny]

Its true that reviewers tend to lower the score of the PS3 versions if the game is slightly worse than the 360 version. But not in the opposite case... when the 360 is worse
Now, that it's not the case of fallout 3 , the game looks way worse on PS3 for the screenshots and videos i saw. I don't think the 0.2 difference was only because of one glitch.
The thing that i don't understand its why the pc version had the same score than the 360 . In that case the difference was a lot more than between 360 and ps3...
I really don't understand reviews this days.... they are too subjetive , reviewers are doing it all wrong.

[Rocky87]

I think this is all a significant conspiracy!

[PSWe60]

fanboys are found everywhere, I don't think it'll ever stop. Unfortunately for the PS3 there are still haters out there.

[BlackTar187]

Game is great no doubt 8/10 and I love being bad int hat game the commentary from the NPC are priceless but the game has so many issues its not even funny and I see 10's everywhere. no one barely mentions that you can be playing for 6-8 hrs and lose everything when handing out reviews.

[Imallvol7]

I feel the same way about this with Oblivion and Fallout. There are glitches and messes everywhere. HOW DOES THAT CONSTITUTE 10'S!?!?!?

[Danja]

Fable 2 is a good example because lately they've been reports of major bugs in the game and im wondering how did this game get 10's didn't reviewers experience these glitches also or they just scored the game based off Hype and didn't wantr to piss anyone off...

Same thing with Assassins Creed last year

[0verdrive]

well in all fairness, ign did say that assassins creed ranked among the biggest letdowns in gaming history. i do think many other reviewers just gave assassins creed good scores based on how bit the scope of the game was, rather than the actual game itself.

[stevenhiggster]

You know if Fable was on PS3 it would've gotten 4/10 for it's glitches!

[Harry190]

Have you played Ninja Gaiden 2? I can't believe the game got through quality testing.

[Imallvol7]

Great Point!!!

[Area_51]

I take notice if a game is better on the ps3 they will grade the same. If the 360 got the better version they will show that with the score being different. Lets face it we're long enough in this Gen. to have the games looking the same.

[lowcarb]

Maybe they are tougher on the PS3 because at launch Sony said the console would be 4 times as powerful as 360, and it isn't. Well where is this so called power because so far I'm dissapointed myself in what the PS3 has been putting out. I haven't seen anything superior on PS3 and if it was it was because of a developer trying to be shady. Show me a games that visually isn't possible on 360 Sony and maybe I might agree that review sites are harsh on your box.

[Danja]

I can't recall Sony ever saying the PS3 would be 4x times more powerful than the 360 , they did say 2x though but w/e..

fact still remains the PS3 is more powerful than the 360 so Sony wasn't bluffing about there technology , and as reviewers whatever Sony said shouldn't affect the way they review a game because at the end of the day there job is to inform the gamers about how good the game is not if Sony was right about how powerful there console is.

and if you haven't seen games to justify the PS3 power then obviously your blind to the world , Uncharted , RFOM2 , KZ2 , R&C , MS2 , LBP , to name a few...

Power doesn't always mean graphics the PS3 is doing things we haven't seen on the 360 look at RFOM2 there's no online game that can match it on the 360 , GT5p is the most realistic looking racing so far this gen

[GarandShooter]

'Maybe they are tougher on the PS3 because at launch Sony said the console would be 4 times as powerful as 360, and it isn't.'

What utter nonsense, when they review a game, they're reviewing the developer's work, not the console.

'I haven't seen anything superior on PS3 and if it was it was because of a developer trying to be shady.'

So if a multi is better on the PS3, it's because of a developer trying to be shady? Do you actually believe the garbage you post?

There should be STATED GUIDELINES for reviews (and they may differ from one reviewer/publication to another), kind of like all games start with a perfect score, and deductions are made based on issues with the game, then the 'Entertainment or Fun Value' would be the most subjective part of the review.

[lowcarb]

The PS3 isn't more powerful so quit lying to yourself seriously. Also I stand by my comment and PS3 shouldn't be given any special review privileges or sympathy points like we see happening with LBP. Garbage or not what I spit out is the truth although it sounds cruel or biased.

[0verdrive]

disagreed. multiplatform games are programmed with both systems in mind, so they dont utilize the full potential of either of the systems. a real signifier of the power of a console are first party exclusives, and if you look at the lineup of each system, its pretty clear that ps3 has more horsies under the hood. i mean, its not like ps3 CANT run gears, its just that it wont be licensed to them. there ARE questions however if an xbox would be able to run mgs4, kz2 or heavy rain. most would say no.

[MIKEY1223]

what do you mean by sympathy points for LBP?

[Nicolator]

Quit fooling urself the ps3 is not stronger than the 360.. if u wanna make such statements to best back urself with figures and facts... i mean processing facts

[GarandShooter]

@lowcarb

You're completely missing the point. I did not assert that the PS3 was more powerful. I did not say PS3 games deserve preferential treatment, but equal treatment. If a graphical glitch that the PS3 has on a multiplat is enough to lower the score, the same should hold true when the 360 version comes up short, bottom line. That's just simply fairness and honesty in the review system.

In your original post, you stated if a PS3 game is better it's due to a developer being up to something shady. It's a conspiracy theory, that equates to the PS3 fanboys saying MS paid to get a good review.

And you are correct, you do come acrossed as biased. As far as truth goes, I would need to see evidence of a developer doing something shady to make the PS3 better version, otherwise it's just an opinion, not based on facts.

[Jack Bauer]

i play and enjoy my games and make my own conclusions on the games i play...the fallout problem seems to be quite evident tho, bad example used imo... i mean even a playstaion mag said the 360 version ran better... gta and other cases idk, i never played the PS3 version to compare...although i never had framerate problems in my 360 version...no more then i thought a game like that would have.

also this is prolly why the ps3 should be lead platform for multi games... 360 to ps3 ports seem to have noticable problems...while vice versa has almost unnoticble problems.

[scottmichael]

its a shame there arn't any more games which look better on the ps3 so we could put this blog to the test

[Brawler]

what about burnout? i remember that being better on ps3

[PirateThom]

A lot of EA games surprisingly are now better on PS3.

[scottmichael]

piratethorm, like what? lol

Burnout was the same....

And i cant think of any EA game that has been 'better' on the ps3...

[cmrbe]

reviewers are too harsh on PS3 exclusives.

[scottmichael]

which exclusive you talking about?

MGS got 10's all over the show
as has LBP
as is Resistance 2,
Uncharted had 9's all over the show

Unless you mean the true masterpeice that is Haze

[cmrbe]

HS and RC TOD. Uncharted should have gotten near tens as well as that was a near perfect game.

Now watch reviewers try to find the stupidest thing to mark down R2. I won't be surprise if Gamespot says it has too much variety.

[Darrius Cole]

Uncharted is it.

Uncharted is the only game that I have ever played that will run from beginning to end with no load times, no glitches, no bugs, no framerate hiccups, and no bad camera angles. Uncharted does all this while being the best looking console game ever made, by the way that is not an exaggeration, and having a range of difficulty levels and telling a good story.

Simply put, it is a masterpiece, the Mona Lisa of this generation.

[Lou-Cipher]

I think there are alot of games that should be scored differently on different systems.

If a game is not as good for any reason it should be scored lower.

I absolutely hate MS as a company, but the 360 games deserve better scores if they look better,or play better.

If a 360 game has achievements and the PS3 game does not have Trophies then the 360 should be scored better.

We need to realize that reviews are not to be used as a way to belittle a certain console, but they are there to help inform us of pro & cons of games that we might be interested in.

[power of Green]

Are you kidding!, the media is no longer mentioning the PS3's shortcomings, I was surprized the media has mentioned it with the two latest games and the only reason they did that is because folks are getting these game and releasing info before the mainstream can.

They have been trying to get away with giving the same scores and not mentioning the differences at all, that alone should raise a red flag, it takes underground media and sites like Eurogamer to tell the truth.

They did it with DMC4, GTA4, Farcry 2 on and on.

[y0haN]

The media also ignores the Failbox Fee Fix Me's massive shortcoming known as NOT FUСKІNG WORKING!

[power of Green]

I wouldn't blame them as consoles offer their own news more and more reviewer companies must rely on the happiness of the few remaining consumers and PS3 fans will destroy a company's REP, so lately they have tended to cater to PS3 fans feelings.

[tda-danny]

WTF are you talking about?

[BlackTar187]

"WTF are you talking about" That made me laugh.

Im not agreeing or disagreeing here just thought that was funny.

Game on people stop the hate play the games you may regret this time in yor life later.
its like Nsync fans fighting Backstreet boy fans

[DiabloRising]

Reviews are opinions. These pieces are meant to INFORM us, yet all too often gamers look at some arbitrary score and attempt to JUDGE what they have yet to even play. Reviews are not facts, and never will be.

I want to know the differences in the game versions for purchasing assistance. What I don't want is people blowing the differences out of proportion, which is what we see all too often. That goes for ANY platform.

I also want to see some standards. Don't knock a game like Ratchet for having "too much variety" and then praise another for having the same thing. Don't dock a game .5 points for having a game breaking bug(Fallout 3), and ignore it in another review (Fable 2). Give me some consistency. When you dont have standards and consistency, it only lets your own personal bias show through. And yes, EVERYONE has some level of bias.

In the end, its we consumers/gamers who need to shrug off review scores and start taking the review itself more seriously. Numbers mean nothing, so we should stop putting so much stock into them.

[0verdrive]

amen.

[Aclay]

I think that reviewers are Critical towards all PS3 games period whether they be multiplatform or Exclusives.

Developers need to develop the PS3 and 360 game separately to bring out the best in both consoles or just have the PS3 as the lead platform.

When a 3rd party PS3 game ends up looking or performing worse than the 360 version, it makes the Playstation 3's hardware look bad, but really it's the developers themselves that should be getting slammed.

Multiplatform games led on the PS3 never had such issues like some games that were led on the 360 first and then ported to the PS3; and PS3 exclusives like MGS4, Uncharted, GT5P, and Heavenly Sword look amazing and run as smooth as butter with no literally no issues what-so-ever.

[Swiftfox]

Perhaps its time the get rid of seprate scores entirly. After all, it is the same game, the only diffence is it is on seprate consoles. So in essence the terms "Ps3 version" or "Xbox 360 version" should not apply.

In fact why not get rid of final scores entirly. Simply do the review like normal but simply don't give them a final grade. Let the words of the reviewer speak the issues of both as they have been doing and let the consumer decide, instead of everything riding on ".2"

[DiabloRising]

As you can see, I agree. Games are more dynamic today when compared to earlier consoles. Now we have patches, updates, extra content, etc. What are you going to do, constantly re-score a title like Warhawk? That's just silly. Drop scores, and go Kotaku's route - IE list things you loved and things you disliked.

[GarandShooter]

When there is a significant difference between console versions, I'd like to know. That's one of the benefits of being a dual console owner, behind being able to play exclusives, of course. But if the difference is I have to boot both versions, and pause at just the right spot to find this version has 13 more jaggies than the other version, give me a break and give it a rest. Ridiculous things like that, that have zero impact on the gaming experience, should be held in contempt by 'gaming journalism professionals', and they should be policing their own ranks, so to speak.

And as I and others have previously stated, I would like to see some standards or guidelines, published ahead of the reviews.

[tatotiburon]

lol another blog attacking the official sites....priceless

[Dannagar]

It's my impression that the Xbox 360 had the better version of GTAIV. It's native resolution was 720p where as the PS3's version was native 640p ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wik... The 360 didn't have a mandatory install like the PS3. Plus it had simple things such as custom soundtracks and achievements from day one.

P.S. Didn't Eternal Sonata on PS3 get a better score than it's 360 counter part.

[MrWeymes]

I disagree with you about the 360 having the superior version of Grand Theft Auto 4, but you are right about Eternal Sonata. Gamespot gave the PS3 and 360 versions the same score, an 8.5, but IGN gave the PS3 version an 8.7, whereas the 360 version got an 8.3.

[JeepGamer]

To me at least it seems like if there's a minor issue with a PS3 game or more to the point an insignificant difference between the PS3 version of a game... The reviewers just can't help themselves and make it all about the minor issue instead of the overall game.

It also seems like when a PS3 game is released that has a problem and said problem gets fixed it's a "screw up" and when the same thing happens to a 360 game its a "wonderful company addressing an issue right away".

There is anti-PS3 sentiment amidst the whole gaming news and information industry that just won't let up.

[EasilyTheBest]

If the PS3 version isnt as good even if its just by a small margin I would prefer to know.
People who have 360 and PS3 would also want to know Im sure.
I dont think reviewers are being to critical either, the PS3 was suppose to blow the 360 out of the water graphicly after all.
What happened?

[GWAVE]

What happened? There's a very simple answer to that: take a look at Ratchet&Clank, Little Big Planet, MGS4, Uncharted, Heavenly Sword, and the upcoming Resistance 2.

Those games were all developed with the PS3 architecture in mind, and consequently those games are some of the best-looking games on the market. Heck, Ratchet&Clank (a 1-year-old game) looks leaps and bound better than Banjo Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts (a brand-new game).

Obviously, multiplatform developers aren't going to want to spend extra time and money on the PS3 version of a game if they can make both versions look "good enough". Just like Gears of War and Lost Odyssey (360 exclusives) are two of the best examples of the 360 hardware, so too are the PS3 exclusives the best examples of the PS3 hardware.

[ChrisGTR1]

its a valid point. if i bought the orange box on ps3 id be pretty pissed if they didnt tell me it was all messed up compared to pc/360 versions. if the 360 version suckd id want to know the same thing so i could pick up the ps3 version. but the way the systems are made its always the ps3 version that is the one with possible lackluster cuality.

[GarandShooter]

'but the way the systems are made its always the ps3 version that is the one with possible lackluster cuality.'

Well I own both systems, and I would so love it if you could explain how the differences in system architectures causes this 'quality' phenomenon to occur. Links would be nice if you're going to get all technical and throw numbers around and stuff like that. I await your fact laden response.

[livespawn]

i have both consoles and would like to know if a game is better on one or the other. but, i don't think a numerical value should be taken off unless the bugs are really game changing, instead at the end of the review note the differences between versions and i will be happy.

[moe84]

Good read, prime example of why I don't follow the "rating" system of any website or magazine. That, and each rating is based on opinion, and different entertainment setups. If the tests were always done on the same console(exact), and same TV that would be one thing to consider. But since they aren't...

their opinions don't matter. Like mine, or any opinion here.

[theEnemy]

Money Makes People Do Lame Things.

[supremacy]

socom got nailed by gamespot for its glitches and issues, meanwhile gears 2 and fable 2 had been reported to have similar issues. but regardless were left untouched.

now i know that socom is an online only game and that maybe thats why it deserves the scores it got.

but okay lair? got bad reviews for its control scheme, not so much that there was something actually wrong with the game. so in a way i do agreed with the article, sometimes i do see these things happen and cant help but to think otherwise.

better yet here is a scenario resistance 1 and gears of wars 1 came out on the same date and only gears had a better score of the two now, gears might have been the better game than, but resistance really wasn't that far behind, in fact it was one of the better games than, and still is played by many to this date.

my point is resistance 2 is a few days away and so is gears 2 and although gears 2 to my personal opinion isnt that far different than its predicessor is getting the same great score as before as where resistance 2 is a much different game than the previous, however the graphics comparison is the same as it was with these two games in the past.

so whats has change? why has resistance 2 suddently gotten such good scores? see what i mean?

now many here will argue and say why do so many fanboys praise killzone 2 when supposedly the 1st one flopped? see today it seems as long as a game has some pretty graphics and some nice controls a descent story thats a perfect game in many of these reviewers eyes.

im not trying to take gears glory away im just pointing out some smaller facts thats all, now take into account the 1st gears was short, had issues and a poor story.

i love gears always have but i honestly think yourself s, exactly why does a game deserves a perfect score? what makes it so great? i mean bioshock a fps shooter with silent hill and resident evil elements gets a perfect score through out 10 magazines? yet these same magazines and sites pointed out a few flaws in the game same with halo 3?
similar situation with littlebigplanet, but instead the scores get hampered lol what a joke this industry has become. really in all honesty i think all games should get treated with the same level of respect and integrity.

kane and lynch got a bad score on gamespot, and we all know what happened than...they though because the site was paid to advertise the game that it would rate it perfectly. lol. so... honestly when honesty comes to play in this industry you get fired...lol

seriously the system needs to change asap, seriously.

[supremacy]

i don't want to sound like an a hole but you know what....here look at this article.. http://www.gamedaily.com/ar...

hopefully some of these sites and magazines see the light.

[Axe99]

If you look at metacritic, it shows that, even at the aggregate level, review scores are a bit of a mess. For example, games that are generally seen as 'as good as the same on PS3 or the 360' but score higher on the 360 include Oblivion, Bioshock, skate, Burnout Paradise, R6V2, GRAW2 and Dead Space.

On the other hand, it cuts the other way (scores higher on PS3, despite being pretty much the same game, quality and all)for Civ:Revolution, Battlefield:Bad Company and the atrociously mauled (for the 360) UT3 (four points lower - something very strange went on here, particularly given Epic's UE3 tends to run a bit smoother on the 360, and the 360 is a more shooter-centric beast).

While (as a PS3 owner, but someone who has been tempted to pick up a 360 for Halo/Gears/Mass Effect) I sometimes feel that PS3 exclusives seem to get a bit less positive 'vibe' (and this is more a historical thing - LBP and R2 have been doing just fine for buzz this year), the scores seem plenty reasonable. I guess what the aggregated stats show is that reviews, even once they're averaged out, can still be all over the shop. Oblivion, for instance, was noted as clearly better on PS3, and yet scored lower. UT3, on the other hand, was arguably the same on both, and definitely not 4 % points lower on 360!

Probably the big thing that this shows, is that there's a range of statistical error (call it reviewer judgement error ;) ) that means that a difference of 0.1-0.5 in a score probably doesn't mean much. It also shows that it cuts both ways, _but_, you do tend to hear more about PS3 games that score less than you do about 360 games. What this suggests to me is that the reviewers, by and large, probably aren't doing such a bad job, but the 360 fanboys are likely doing a better job of preaching their console to the interwebs. As a PS3 owner, I'd like to think it's because us Sony fanboys are too busy enjoying our console to get involved in those kind of shenanigans. On average, of course.

From a more pragmatic perspective, it probably means next to nothing in terms of how much fun one will have with the game (I loved R6V on the PS3 - sure it had slightly muddier textures and less vibrant lighting, but it was damn good fun all the same). Game on everyone, and have fun :)