100% broken. I've harped on this issue plenty, as you all know. Scores need to die, more open discuss needs to rise, and we need to judge games on their own merits, not based on what console they are from.

very very VERy very very very broken

..

I could have sworn reviews were a single persons opinion. All these claims of bias and inconsistency is pretty ridiculous (imo), of course there are going to be differences in reviews from the one site, they are written by different people with varying tastes.

I don't see the problem?

I'll take substance over a number any day.

The review system is broken because we have too many possible scores. 9.7? 8.4? 9.9? I've even seen some sites go into the hundredths place. Its stupid. What the difference between a 9.6 and a 9.2? Nothing. The scores are worthless. Hell IGN's game of the year wasn't even their highest rated game (it actually beat out two prefect scores). The fanboy whining and complaining occurs because of these stupid decimals. EX: Halo 3 is better then Killzone 2 because it scored .1 higher. Whats the difference? Take the decimal places out of the equation and reviews will be that much better. Simpler is better. Why do you think so many people trust X-play's reviews so much?

VERY

Gamespot gives a not no high praise (at least one guy) on an update, not a review, and BAM we get this article. Surprise surprise, who would of guessed? OMG not everyone is going to love KZ2, holy crap. According to N4G, love KZ2=great, creditable site. But doesn't love KZ2=biased, paid by MS, yada yada yada. Please lets try to protect KZ2 even more.

N4G is probably the most broken. All this article (and comments) are is people complaining about PS3 games not getting good reviews. boo hoo, cry more.

You guys are defending a game that you haven't even played yet! Seriously, if that's not biased, i don't know what is.

How about you wait until you actually play before making judgments.

Stop crying and go play some video games, seriously. N4G is beyond annoying anymore with all these PS3 crybabies. Anything above a 9 is a great score, relax.

More broken than something that's very f****** broken

Stupid BABOONS....AHHHAHAHAHAHA

1) Anybody and their dog can start a gaming blog now and idiots will listen to them no matter how retarded their opinions are.

2)"Professional" or corporate ran blogs are corporate whores who will give a game what ever score the developer wants as long as the ad cash flow is coming in. Even if a game is complete crap it will get a high score just to keep the money coming.

3) Both the blogs and pro gaming websites are filled with 30+ fanboys (from all sides) who haven't managed to let the Sonic vs Mario type arguments and immaturity go and carry it over into their work. They're blinded by their own self worth and inflated egos and will look over glaring faults in a game just to support what ever company they happen to be shilling for.

If you want a true unbiased opinion download the demo to what ever game you're interested in or rent it. Don't base your gaming on some monkey dancing for sponsors or a 30 year old neckbeard's opinion.

I know it's broken when gta4 got 10 across the board. That is just a load of bull.

Devastatingly broken. It's pretty much meaningless dribble for teenage a gamers to foam at the mouth and help garner "hits"

I've trying to point this out for the past 4yrs.

but opinions now sway potential casual buyers to get a game or not.

a reviewer is supposed to judge a game on its merits.not based off of something else.

"plays like(insert game title)"
"looks like(insert game title)"
"doesn't have such and such like(insert game title)

but personal "OPINION" has changed to serious bias against what ps3 and it's games have to offer.

the opinion is:

if ps3 games don't have multiplayer in a traditionally single player game. or don't have single player for an online only game.or don't have colorful little cute aliens speaking gibberish across the screen.or has too much "variety" or is "a little too clean" or only lets you hold two weapons at a time.or has too many weapons.etc,etc,ETC.

then ps3 games get deducted points for things that the same counterparts on 360 get a PASS on.

you can't claim that gears is a perfect game if the online is broken.but give it 10s.you can't give bioshock a 10 but it has no multiplayer for an FPS game.you can't give gta4 a 10 if it doesn't innovate beyond a better previous version(san andreas) that let you do more.you can't give mass effect 10s if the game has glitches and loads textures 5 minutes later(exaggeration)

you can't give the most overhyped game 10s when the game has poor animation,weak story,sad physics,sub hd graphics and no evolution in multiplayer beyond 16 which was in the previous game.DO YOU EVEN HAVE TO GUESS WHAT THIAS GAME IS?

360 has biased reviewers on it's side.mostly english speaking sites and mags.ps3 has bettered the 360 by having

better rated games
a better rated system
better rated features
better sales performance based on year to year sales.

but can't catch a break because playstation is bending xbox over after all the negative hate.and these same haters have been called on all they were wrong on and have been called out.they refuse to acknowledge that they were wrong about ps3 since 2005.not one has said:

"hey,we were wrong about ps3."
"it's a great system and doesn't need saving."
"does have games and is reliable."
"has a great next gen format in bluray and cell is not just for movies watching."
"killzone 2 lived up to the target trailer."
"ps3 is a true next gen system that is worthy of being in your entertainment center."
"the games are steller."

nope.you won't hear that from them.because they bought a 360 and were lied to by microsoft.and will gladly take more $800 dollar swag bags to sway new purchasing customers from buying ps3 and its games.

apocalypse...................

definitely broken...because its american...anything american tends to break

I will use Killzone 2 (the big trend in game discussion recently) as an example.

It's pretty funny how every review says the game is graphically unbelievable, but very few reviews (even the ones that take a paragraph to drool over the graphics) actually give it a 10 for graphics. Like what was the point of writing about how the game is the new model for excellence and not awarding a score that relates to that. I guess Bioshock and whatever other games they say were 10's for graphics really deserved it - even though at the time maybe they did. But just as an example it seems like game journalism is a pawn to the brainwash factories that employ and/or sponser them.

The thing is it seems like at most major websites the critics are fanboys and in the hands of publishers. There's often outright lies posted about games in reviews and they're obviously loaded with bias. For example, Gamespot said that MGS4 is a technically more advanced game graphically, when it's not, no debate there, it isn't. Same thing with critics lying outright about game length. Many critics for example were saying Dead Space was a 10-12 hour experience, two friends who played it said it's more like 7-8 at the most, or all of those Gears of War reviews claiming the game was 8-10 hours long when in reality it was 5-6. Grand Theft Auto 4 was another case, it was loaded with framerate issues, yet most critics claim it ran perfectly smooth, there didn't seem to be any backlash about it till the PC version was released. Then there's the review scale, there's no point to a numerical system when the range is never explored, most games fall between 50% and 100%, making the whole point of the system pretty much moot. The whole thing is just up beyond belief, most of these people wouldn't even pass their first year high school journalism class.

good read, he makes very good points especially about gta4 and gears 2. Id be pissed if reviewers hyped up a game that has serious multiplayer issues and didnt mention it in their review. You know if killzone 2 encountered the same problems they would shyt on it just like they did with counter-strike

What do you think? These fan toys have not even played the game! Even if they got a beta they don't have a full experience with it! The graphics look a little subpar for a AAA title yet PS3 people seem to think it will be perfect. NOT look at it!!! Freeze a frame of it, almost anywhere compare it to a top 360 game HELLO, this is part of why people hate irrational fans. Yeah PS3 is a good machine but it is still inferior in the graphics department. I told you people this is system savior number 13 it will not happen!!! Just AAA title number 10 says sales. Not going to save anything with graphics like that. The game play had better be worth it. That I can't comment on but, gametrailers.com have the positive and the negative on this game. I'm pass. There are better PS3 games for my money.

I think N4G has passed the tipping point where the constant PS3 fanboyism is quickly turning this site into a joke.

This article is not news, it's not even informed opinion. One person/site gives one game (that you haven't played) 5% less than this other game, and suddenly the entire internet is an anti-Sony conspiracy.

Yeah, right on.

How about that fake moon-landing huh?

Resistance 2 is horrible
wasted $60 on that low quality crap

To figure out that this is a mindless article by some spazzy Sonytard whining that killzone 2 didn't get 10's across the board. It got good ratings from most reviewers. Stop twitching already! It's just another fps! I'm eager to see the fanboy freakout from the sales figues.

People get too excited about reviews. A lot of people mistakenly think that they have the right to demand unbiased media be published at all times, when in fact no such right exists, and nor should it.

We have freedom of press. It ensures that people can publish really any opinion they feel like, no matter how biased, ridiculous, or downright obnoxious. Their freedom to do that is, and should be, protected at all times, because there's no form of media control which is not profoundly bad for society.

So, what to do then...?

The simple answer is to find a reviewer, mag, or site that you like. Some one who has a similar taste to your own, who's words you trust, and who writes reviews that are useful to you.

Too often reviews are dragged into the fanboy console 'war' when it shouldn't matter to any one gamer as an individual if some reviewers are talking out their arse and publishing scores that don't make sense.

It's not worth the energy to give a crap.

Oh, and also...From what I've seen the KZ2 scores (which I assume triggered this article) that I've seen for the most part look entirely reasonable. They're great scores, so what's the problem?

My comment goes for any general review that a person doesn't like.

You know how you write an unbiased review. You come up with a theory, collect data, analyze it, then come up with a thoughtful conclusion!!! Oh wait... A review is filled with uncircumstantial opinions based on hearsay facts with no supporting statements whatsoever.

people should honestly
put aside the console hate
and review it as if though its a game not an exclusive

Nothing wrong with Game Reviews. Every reviewer has an opinion. That's why it's nice to have a site like metacritic where they tally every reviewer for the average. Majority rules.

The real problem is that sony fans complain about every ps3 exclusive not getting a perfect 10. KZ2 got a few 8's and all of a sudden you get wah wah wah* It's just an opinion. Get over it.

Oh, come on...

The gaming media's just as bias as the news media...

...oh...

...I see your point.

You know what I do with all these reviews? Get industrial toiler paper and print all the reviews on it.... You know what comes next.

It's funny because you know Resident Evil 5 is gonna score so high when every one knows there's serious problems with the game.

Only reviews I "care" about are the ones on gametrailers.com
Their video reviews are both amusing and give me the info I'm looking for along with gameplay footage of what they hate/like. However, I rarely buy anything just because of a review... Most important for me is that I find the gameplay footage attractive and controls are decent.

There's definitely a problem when you have a game like Resistance 2 scoring a 9.5 from IGN and then Killzone 2 scoring a 9.4. I definitely don't feel that R2 deserved that score and I haven't played Killzone 2 but I'm sure it's better than R2. That game felt so forced, guns were placed so badly and some sections were incredibly boring, like the retarded swarm, that was horrible. I have a feeling I will be blown away by Killzone so that gives me the sense that reviews are definitely broken.

Aliens baby.

It's bad that I have to change, #'ed ratings to
R for Rent
B for Buy
People, need to stop selling wolf tickets ratings

Nice to see some decent commentary on this subject. In the long run its best for us all if they do standardise the process. If a game deserves good reviews then give it.

I think most of us agree reviews needs some work.

While it goes for any reviewer/media source, you see idiots here blame each other (xbox fanboys this, ps3 fanboys that).

Can it get more pathetic around here? seriously.

MEHHHHHH

Games need to reviewed in according the the visuals (note, NOT graphics, the actual artistic stance of the game), the quality of animation, character design/background appeal, story and strong concepts in how it trie to set itself apart.

In other words, I think people should review games in

Visuals (The overall artwork and style, not the power behind it)
Animation (How strong is the animation and attention to small details that make the game more immersive)
Appeal of characters (Character design, likability)
Narrative (How the game presents itself in story)
Originality (Being different from the crowd)
Concepts (Not enough games get reviewed depending on what concept its trying to introduce/use)

All this no matter on whatever system it's on.

Yes the current review system is broken. Mainly due to "journalists" who grew up with PS brand giving anything on PS3 a great score regardless of whether it actually deserves it or not. And reviews do nothing to sales. Just look at PS3 and Wii as an example. Great scoring PS3 games recieve low sales and low scoring Wii games recieve great sales. Most reviews rated Wii Music low because they couldnt understand the "game" wasnt made for them. But they give LBP a high score based off of what could be in the game, not what actually is. And then look at sales. Wii Music is nearing 3m and LBP took 3 months to hit 2 million and that's with most places selling it at 29.99.

Gaming Journalist no longer represent the average gamer, so of course their reviews are kinda pointless. Their reviews typically represent the minority of gamers. Why else would sales so completely contradict reviews today? Most have some grudge against the Wii and will openly say not to support it, yet they have the most software sales this gen. How can that be if gaming journalists today actually represented the opinion of the majority?

lets have websites that review other websites game reviews
that way everything in life will be fair and unbiased, and websites like N4G can go back to not existing. You see before the Internets, we had gaming magazines, those magazines had a letter to the editor section in them, and readers of that magazine could comment there. Now we have the internets and every single mind dropping that has to do with gaming is available and scrutinized. This is a killzone 2 advertisement disguised as an article about gaming review fairness.

The PS3 is now the underdog console (most expensive as the underdog, the end is nigh). The underdog attitude is to be overly defensive and ready for a fight from all your percieved enemies. Killzone 2 is being treated badly thus the PS3 fanboys (not the majority of rational PS3 owners) come in a blah blah blah.

Perhaps PS3 fanboys should call the ACLU killzone 2's civil rights are being violated. The game looks amazing I'm sure it will be fun.

Has this got something to do with the recent surge of Killzone 2 reviews? I think we got some p*ssed Xbots trying to now make out that the reviews are all wrong. They should have really brought this up when Halo 3 was getting reviewed. I know that was a load of bullsh1t.

reviewing a game has been and always will be a subjective matter.

I wonder what this article is trying to express.

Personal opinions always include bias.

best is to rent a game or ask trusted friends about it.