It is crap that Gamespot rated Velvet Assassin higher than Bionic Commando? Wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that there is Velvet Assassin ads are all over that site >.>...
Tom McShea reviewed it and constantly talked it up on the Hotspot while most of the other reviewers were skeptical. It's most likely a situation of one of the people who actually enjoys brutally difficult stealth games reviewed it for them. Bionic Commando is also getting some crazy varied review scores. IGN and Giant Bomb like it a good bit while Gamespot and Game Informer weren't too fond.
Enough of this GameSpot hate. We are the world people, whether you like it or not. Let's heal the world together. If you can't handle GameSpot scores, then beat it.
@Osaladin: No, but I had sex with your mom, then jumped back to the past in my time machine and had sex with your mom's mom, then I went to sleep in my hyperbolic time chamber for 80 years and had sex with your daughter.
thats kinda stupid that they did that but as CenturionCajun said some people like that kind of game and i gess velvit assasin would apeal more to the people who like that kind of game than bionic commando would to the people who like that kind of game
I know right. Anyway both are games I have had some interest in but I think only end up with one of them. Right now I am leaning toward Bionic Commando.
They didn't score it that much higher than a lot of other sites. Brad seemed to hate it a lot more than most people, His review is the lowest one on metacritic.
Damn, Michael Jackson distracted me from what the topic of this thread was.
Anyways, it's just their opinion. Also, a game that gets a higher score than the other doesn't mean that it's actually better; Jeff Gerstmann said that about the PC and the 360 versions of the original Gears of War.
I honestly don't see what the fuss is about scores. Even less all this bullshit about "bias" It's a fucking number, how does it affect yours or anyone elses enjoyment of the game?!
What the hell do you think a review is? It's a personal opinion. A personal opinion that can be expressed in anyway it wants to.
That said, Gamespots current opinions are barely one rank above the forum goons cry of "Halo am teh bestest11!!"
If Gamespot rated Bionic Commando lower than Velvet Assassin it means is that the reviewer of Velvet Assassin liked the game and the reviewer at Giant Bomb (Jeff) liked Bionic Commando. If you want to draw up some great conspiracy then you can. I suggest you start at the grassy knoll. What does it mean if a third site, say G4 rated both as average. Does that mean that Gamespot and Giant Bomb are in the pockets of game publishers? You worry too much about who said what about whom like all the game websites are in internet junior high.
By the way, Gamespy said the it heard from 1UP that Kotaku is going to ask Destructoid to the spring social but that site is waiting for Joystiq to ask, but Joystiq is taking Gamasutra. Pass it on.
Who cares about the damn score? Seriously, why are people continually hung up on some "number" that supposedly is the "end all be all" when it comes to games.
Numbers, ratings, stars whatever, don't matter. At all. I guess there needs to be advocacy group created to raise people's awareness of the ridiculousness of ratings. *sigh*
The last few days Terminator: Salvation has been plastered all over both Gamespot and IGN. It got scores of 6.3 and 5.0 respectively. If GRIN and Warner Brothers are paying people off then they must not be paying much.
No matter how objective a reviewer of anything tries to be personal bias will seep in. Personally I hate racing games. I can look at Motorstorm or Burnout and see a well made product that would strongly appeal to fans of that genre. However, I can't get more than an hour or two of enjoyment out of them before I want to pick up a shooter or RPG. Therefore, if tasked with reviewing a racing and/or car tuning game I might not be so kind to it. Not because it's bad but because I don't have fun playing those kinds of games.
Log in to comment