Is Polygon really anti-Sony?

After seeing Phil Koller gave The Last of Us a 7.5, I knew a wave of anger was headed towards Polygon. Oh was it ever. Accusations of being on Microsoft's payroll and low balling Playstation exclusives flew left and right. So, I decided to investigate.

I combed through every playstation exclusive game they reviewed. Each title is followed by 3 scores: The score Polygon gave the game, the Metacritic average and then the lowest score on Metacritic, just to show the range of scores. Here are the results.
Guacamelee: 9.0/84/6.0
MLB 13 The Show: 8.5/87/6.0
God of War: Ascension: 7.0/80/7.0
Papo & Yo: 6.5/72/40
Soul Sacrifice: 6.5/77/40
Sly Cooper: Thieves in Time: 6.0/75/60
LittleBigPlanet Karting: 7.0/73/40
Black Ops: Declassified 2.0/33/10
Persona 4: Golden 10.0/93/80
Silent Hill: Book of Memories 4.0/58/30
Assassin's Creed: Liberation 6.0/70/50
Ni No Kuni: 6.5/85/50
New Little King's Story 6.5/70/50
Ratchet and Clank: Full Frontal Assault: 6.0/63/45
Starhawk 6.5/77/60
Tokyo Jungle: 8.0/74/30
LittleBigPlanet Vita: 9.0/88/70
Sound Shapes: 9.0/84/60
Dyad: 9.0/82/60
Gravity Rush 7.0/83/60
Datura 6.5/57/40
Resistance: Burning Skies 6.5/60/20
Touch My Katamari 5.0/71/45
Journey 10.0/92/40
Uncharted: Golden Abyss 7.0/80/60
Tales from Space: Mutant Blobs Attack 9.0/86/75

Polygon has reviewed 26 Playstation 3 and Vita games. 10 of the Playstation exclusive games were scored higher by Polygon than the Metacritic average. 16 were scored below the Metacritic average. Of those 16 games, 4 were within 5 or .5 points from the average, which leaves 12 games rated below the Metacritic average.

Now let's look at games that were exclusive to 360.

Battleblock Theater: 8.5/85/60
Gears of War: Judgement 8.0/79/60
Halo 4 9.5/87/20
The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings 7.0/88/45
Dance Central 3 9.5/86/70
Forza Horizon 6.0/85/6.0
Fable: The Journey 4.5/61/30
Steel Battalion 1.0/38/.06
Blood Forge 2.0/42/2.0
Minecraft 7.0/82/55
Wreckateer 6.0/67/40
Deadlight 7.0/68/40
Dust: An Elysian Tale 8.0/83/60
Fable Heroes 4.0/55/30
Trials Evolution 9.0/90/8.0
Fez 8.0/89/70
Diabolical Pitch 4.0/56/30
Kinect Star Wars 4.0/55/30
Alan Wake's American Nightmare 7.0/ 76/50
South Park: Tenorman's Revenge 3.0/52/20

Polygon has reviewed 20 360 titles. 6 were scored higher or on par than the metacritic average, with 14 given scores below the average. Using the 5 point/.5 system we used with playstation games, 1 game is removed from this list, leaving 13 games.

Now let's see what we have:

1. More Sony games rated higher than 360 only games (10 to 6).
2. A higher percentage of Playstation games rated higher than 360 games (36% to 30%).
3. Polygon gave the lowest score recorded on Metacritic for 1 Playstation title and 3 360 titles.

I don't see the bias.

[Crazyglues]

It's not about if they are anti-Sony, it's more about if they are border line stupid as hell...
(this site is doing a huge injustice to people who depend on game reviews to help guide them towards good games)

First you gave The Last Of Us a 7.5 when just about every other reviewer gave the game a 10.0 - Not a 9.5 not a 9. not even an 8.5... they all (which never happens) gave it a 10

-So when your score is so far from the normal scores... (It makes me question your rating ability) -Like maybe you shouldn't even be rating games... you clearly are clueless...

If a room of kids take a math test and 9 kids get the problem right, but one kid gets it wrong.

You don't start thinking the test is too hard, instead you tend to think one kid is not learning right - he/she needs extra help to get it.

Same problem here, there is no test to see if you should even be rating games...Are you smart enough to understand a normal logic test.

Clearly Polygon can't - and whatever there process is, it's seriously broke - how can every other site that plays the game see it as a 10.0 ( - http://cdn2.gamefront.com/w... )and you have it as a 7.5

That tells me something is wrong with how you are reviewing games. Your that one kid in the math class who doesn't get it. (A review should use common sense, and have logic) - In the review he says he's upset about the violence being exposed to the little 14 year old girl... uh hello, did you forget it's the end of the world. (the game is about how everything would be if these were the last days, end of the world as we know it because of the infection)

So you think everyone will be all nice in the last days, and go next door and say oh, "excuse me, do you have any milk because we ran out 3 weeks ago and I was wondering if we could borrow some" - "oh your all out, ok, well thanks anyway"...

I mean what is wrong with these people it's the end of the world as we know it, of course it's going to be violent and it's going to be hard as hell to survive. Wake-up it's not a fairytale go free the smurfs game..

It's about the real effects of a society being broken after an infection spreads world wide... I mean if you couldn't get that from a game named The Last Of Us, I really don't know how to help you.

(And Polygon is a site I would not go to for a review on any game, clearly they suck at reviewing)

.____........___...
.____||......||.......|___||
||.........___||............ ||

[oof46]

"First you gave The Last Of Us a 7.5 when just about every other reviewer gave the game a 10.0 - Not a 9.5 not a 9. not even an 8.5... they all (which never happens) gave it a 10"

Of the 60 reviews on Metacritic, twenty-nine sites gave it a 100 and 31 gave it a score of 98 or lower, so, no. It wasn't 100 across the board.

Let's go back in time and look at Shadow of the Colossus, which is a much loved ps2 game. The highest score is 100 and the lowest score is a 60. Does that make the reviewer who gave it a 60 wrong? No. It just means that is the score he feels the game deserves.

Let's change mediums and look at movies. The Dark Knight was widely hailed as the greatest comic book movie when it was released. On Metacritic, it has a bunch of 100s and a lowest score of 50. Does that make the reviewers who gave it a 50 dumb? Or that they don't get it? Of course not, it just means that's how they viewed the movie.

"In the review he says he's upset about the violence being exposed to the little 14 year old girl... uh hello, did you forget it's the end of the world. (the game is about how everything would be if these were the last days, end of the world as we know it because of the infection")

Either you took one line and expounded on it or you didn't really read the review but are repeating what others have said. The reviewer mentions that it was satisfying to successfully sneak by enemies so he didn't have to expose Ellie to any more violence than needed...that's it. That's all he said about it. He did not say anything negative. What detracted from his experience was AI partners walking in front of enemies, but they don't get alerted and shaky shooting mechanics (which he did mention improves with upgrades). But what detracted from his experience were the parts where sneaking wasn't an option, but he was forced to fight waves of enemies, because it didn't jive with the mechanics that Naughty Dog established through out the rest of the game. Does it merit that much of a deduction? I don't know because I haven't played the game, and neither have you.

[Crazyglues]

Ok I'll agree to disagree, no disrespect to you, you have a very valid point, it is the reviewer view point...

-But at what point do we say this does not make sense... So I give a movie that get's 10's across the board a 2.0 -Is it possible I missed what the whole movie was about..

And yes in all fairness, I should not call them dumb, but I just meant it brings your review into question, because it's so far off..

but ok fair enough I see your point - I don't want to call them dumb, but I seriously question that review - We will see when the game comes out.

Nice Blog post by the way.. It's a great discussion - I disagree but it's a good point you make.

We will how well that review holds up when I've played the full game

.____........___...
.____||......||.......|___||
||.........___||............ ||

[McScroggz]

I get what you are saying, but there are reviewers and publications that, be it a specific genre or just in general, are not fair and consistent in their reviews.

Let's take The Dark Knight, for example. The movie has several 50 scores, and quite frankly it's hard to understand how somebody could score the movie so low. I understand people have differing opinions, but as a professional reviewer I should feel confident in your knowledge and taste/objectiveness if you are more harsh/lenient. Say what you will, but TDK simply is no where near a 2.5 star/50% caliber movie and it's hard to take those reviews seriously.

But, honestly I think movie critics in general have become very pretentious and overly critical when there IS a difference between critical analysis and a review. But that's not the point.

As for Polygon, it's not that I feel they are biased. To me I simply don't feel confident in trusting Phil Kollar's reviews. His criticisms TLOU review were either very nitpicky (which he even cited) or seemed strangely hollow like the notion that he felt bad for some of the actions he did. I would hope that a reasonably intelligent game journalist/critic/reviewer would understand how feeling bad for committing an act in a game about a post apocalyptic world is an impressive feat and shows the great writing and characterizations of the game.

He was the same person who scored Ni no Kuni a 6.7, and while I felt his review then had many of the "oddly nitpicky/hollow" criticisms apparent in his TLOU review, I'm willing to admit that he was simply too harsh and not the right person for the review rather than call into question his actual ability to review games.

That's my problem, at least. The text, and how he lauds many aspects of the game, simply does not fit with the score nor does it make his opinion seem credible. Biased? No. A good review? No.

[Crazyglues]

@ McScroggz

I agree with everything you said..

I'm just going to say this I think everything Polygon does is suspect.

-As other users have pointed out there are a lot of things in-question when it comes to this site./ -But Naughty Dog did the right thing and said, "everyone is entitled to there own opinion"

-And I agree- so I'll take the high road and just say -Good Review- No! -Not even close.. in my opinion.

Will I go to this site or listen to anything else they have to say ever, No.. (they lost all creditability with that review)

I don't like to waste time on things that are stupid - Life's just too short... In my Humble opinion.

.____........___...
.____||......||.......|___||
||.........___||............ ||

I'm out of bubbles so forgive me As I can't respond to further comments..

[HammadTheBeast]

7/10 for The Last of Us

9.5/10 for Dance Central 3

Shows what their standards are.

[oof46]

10/10 for Journey and Persona 4: Golden. Yes, we see their standards.

[coolbeans]

You're cherry picking reviews between two games in separate genres, different price points upon launch, and what kind of controller is required for them to function.

Very poor comparison.

[Thabass]

You have PS4 in your signature. Whole post is now invalid.

[dedicatedtogamers]

I can only speak for myself, but I don't call Polygon "biased" because of their reviews (they're just trying to be EDGE-y and make a reputation for themselves being the tough guys). I call Polygon biased because of their coverage of the Xbox One. Since Adam Orth #dealwithit, Polygon has been a mouthpiece of Microsoft PR. They're done nothing but give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt, they've spun bad news, and when it comes to the WORST bits of news, they report it but don't give any opinion on it (which they do plenty of times on other games/topics).

[Capodastaro]

You show me 3 articles about Polygon being a MS news buffer and I'll show you 3 articles which do the same for Sony.

All you seem to do is just cherry pick articles to what fit your needs. Your latest blog shows it, you use an article which just accuses MS of bad practice... Accusations needs proper backing up which you neglect to do.

Besides nobody likes MS, but you seem to be extra butthurt about something, spreading misinformation doesn't help.

[moegooner88]

It's not like they are so desperate to give MS the benefit of the doubt, to the extent that they would rush an article without even going through the available info first, and then lying by stating that the available info has changed, even though it has been the same since MS published it ... oh wait

http://www.playstationlifes...

[TongkatAli]

Gamefaqs is Anti Sony and have an greater effect then Polygon. You can't say one good thing on that site about Sony.

I'm exposing that shit cause it's over 9000 in trolling over there and its not from MS fanboys, LOL.

[Gimmemorebubblez]

All your answers lie in the link below.
http://www.n-europe.com/for...

[Christopher]

What I notice with Polygon is that they take big titles/franchises, and score them harder than any other franchise out there.

PSN and XBL games tend to get the best quality reviews and scores attached to them. On disc, major franchises tend to get lambasted.

Why? Because those major franchise games will be more discussed than the others and people will click their reviews more if they rate them harder than they do other games.

There are only two exceptions to this rule from your presentation: Gears of War and Halo. All other major franchise releases scored below average.

So, here's the list you should be looking at:

God of War: Ascension: 7.0/80/7.0
Sly Cooper: Thieves in Time: 6.0/75/60
Ni No Kuni: 6.5/85/50
Ratchet and Clank: Full Frontal Assault: 6.0/63/45
Starhawk 6.5/77/60
Uncharted: Golden Abyss 7.0/80/60

vs.

Gears of War: Judgement 8.0/79/60
Halo 4 9.5/87/20
The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings 7.0/88/45
Forza Horizon 6.0/85/6.0
Minecraft 7.0/82/55
Alan Wake's American Nightmare 7.0/ 76/50

This is more a case of them trying to judge major franchises more harshly. And, to me, that's not a fair representation of the quality of said games in comparison to the collective.

Side note: The 20% score for Halo 4 is just plain ridiculous. I mean, others are as well, but that one stands out to me as a horrible review. 2/10 game represents a game with massive flaws and bugs in it. That is not Halo 4.

[HammadTheBeast]

Agreed. A completely broken game is a 2/10.

[svoulis]

I think what people are failing to realize is that you can't compare 2 games such as TLOU and Dance Central, as they are 2 completely different genres. Sure a 7.5 seems low to us, and to most when other known reputable sites give it a 9 or above, but that doesn't matter. For a number of reason they could have thought otherwise. Just take it as it is, not every reviewer will like every game. I hated Halo 4 (it felt like washed up garbo) but sites gave it 8 and 9s across the board. I may not be a reviewer (I've had my share of doing it on N4G), but I'd like to think that most gamers felt the same way.

[TooTall19]

I have a new found respect for Polygon. If he didn't enjoy playing it, then it's his job to write about it.

[McScroggz]

I understand and agree that a review should represent a person's opinion. However, I think game writers use the, "reviews are opinions," card in order to deflect from a poorly written and contextualized review. A review should reflect, more than anything else, the writer's opinion on the quality of the game - and while personal opinion certainly is a large part of that it's unfair for a reviewer to not take into account the objective quality versus his/her opinion.

For instance, take somebody who has never played a JRPG. Then, have them review one. Chances are they are going to grade MUCH harsher because they aren't used to the JRPG elements we have come to love or become accustomed to. If I don't like puzzle games, I should not review a puzzle game unless I am able to compare my opinion versus an informed, more objective opinion. I don't believe Phil Kollar can do that.

To me the most damning thing is his view on some of the violence in the game making him feel bad. That is absolutely one of the goals in TLOU, for us to question how far we would go in a post apocalyptic world. It would be like watching Saving Private Ryan and then disliking the movie because the storming the beach at Normandy scene was too vivid. It was purposefully vivid to showcase how unsettling war is and the strength it takes merely to survive (among other things).

No reviewer is perfect, but as terribly overused as "he just didn't get it," is, I feel like Phil Kollar didn't get it. Not only that, but then he didn't have the introspection or professional to consider if his opinion might be off on the game.

[AngryLemur]

You guys are missing the vital point, the reviewer is the biased one. The whole problem, as McScroggz said, is the wrong man for the wrong job. Phil Kollar was reviewing the game as Phil Kollar, not as the average gamer. This is the major problem with additional reviews above, the reviewers aren't the same person.

Why do you think Supreme Court judges serve for life? It's so the interpretation of the Constitution stays consistent. This is the main problem for all game reviewing sites, the reviewer isn't consistent, so you will get inconsistency in reviews.

So is the site Polygon biased? Maybe. But one thing for sure is that the reviewer is, and judging by the use of probability, you're more likely to draw a 10/10 for The Last of Us, over a 7.5/10. Simple math.

[oof46]

Isn't every game reviewer reviewing the game from their perspective? That's what draws people to certain reviewers: their points of views, favorite types of games, introspection, etc. If someone reviews a game as an "average game"...what would be the purpose of a video game reviewer?

Oh, and double checking on Metacritic, Polygon's score is no longer the lowest score. Another site gave it a 6 out of 10. Where are the torches and pitchforks?