I'm just going in reverse chronological order. Blame MS for not releasing many exclusives. Or blame Polygon for not assigning Gies to review them.
Crimson Dragon reviews for Xbox one
- Thread starter Fatboi1
- Start date
So far I have data up to July. That's four months of data and the only trend I see so far is that Gies doesn't love shooters like everyone else does. His scores tend to be above average on genres that don't have many games made in them recently and below average in shooters that the market is oversaturated with.
I wish I could dap myself right now.
I wish I could dap myself right now.
TheGodling
Los Ingobernables de Sala de Cine
This is a shame, along with Jet Set Radio Future it was Panzer Dragoon Orta that made me decide to buy an Xbox back in the day.
Arthur Gies Reviews 2013
I'm done; I decided to use only 2013 reviews. No need to go back further. If you look at Sony vs MS exclusives in a vacuum, he rated Sony exclusives slightly below averages and MS exclusives slightly above averages but I don't think it's nearly enough to say he's biased IMHO:
I don't think people are forming their opinion of Gies over these 6 reviews (or better yet, the rest of his repertoire). Instead, they are forming opinions based on their own preconceived notions spawned from their own fandom.
EDIT: It got real quiet in this thread @Fatboi1 @Rekkapryde @Rico
I'm done; I decided to use only 2013 reviews. No need to go back further. If you look at Sony vs MS exclusives in a vacuum, he rated Sony exclusives slightly below averages and MS exclusives slightly above averages but I don't think it's nearly enough to say he's biased IMHO:
I don't think people are forming their opinion of Gies over these 6 reviews (or better yet, the rest of his repertoire). Instead, they are forming opinions based on their own preconceived notions spawned from their own fandom.
EDIT: It got real quiet in this thread @Fatboi1 @Rekkapryde @Rico
Last edited:
He talks mad junk about Sony and Killzone. He's a clown, your data doesn't disprove his biases.Arthur Gies Reviews 2013
I'm done; I decided to use only 2013 reviews. No need to go back further. If you look at Sony vs MS exclusives in a vacuum, he rated Sony exclusives slightly below averages and MS exclusives slightly above averages but I don't think it's nearly enough to say he's biased IMHO:
I don't think people are forming their opinion of Gies over these 6 reviews (or better yet, the rest of his repertoire). Instead, they are forming opinions based on their own preconceived notions spawned from their own fandom.
EDIT: It got real quiet in this thread @Fatboi1 @Rekkapryde @Rico
Haha youre right. Your anecdotes are better than facts. My fault
Arthur Gies Reviews 2013
I'm done; I decided to use only 2013 reviews. No need to go back further. If you look at Sony vs MS exclusives in a vacuum, he rated Sony exclusives slightly below averages and MS exclusives slightly above averages but I don't think it's nearly enough to say he's biased IMHO:
I don't think people are forming their opinion of Gies over these 6 reviews (or better yet, the rest of his repertoire). Instead, they are forming opinions based on their own preconceived notions spawned from their own fandom.
before i ask my question let me say: i'm not getting in yall back and forth cause i dont care about critic reviews, just reading through the thread brought a question to mind:
using your info: if this guy constantly rates sony exclusives slightly below avg and xbox slightly above avg, you dont think they shows bias?
I think a lot more proof is needed than 3 games slightly below average for Sony and 3 games slightly above average for MS in the course of a year. That's not proof to me. Looking at those 6 games in a vacuum (which, really, only fanboys think is relevant), I think it's entirely plausible that his own personal opinion deviated from the average in the way his scores indicate. It's not like he knew what the average would be ahead of time and then decided, let me knock a point because it's Sony or let me add a point because it's MS. I think those detracting from this particular reviewer are grasping for straws, reflecting their own bias.
Doctor Wily
CapcomSwag
Support once great franchises off the strength of hindsighted nostalgia brehs.
my thing with this clown is that they gave this dude the task of reviewing a franchise he was already on record as being biased against. That's all breh.
i agree, more info is needed and it could be those reflecting their own bias...i'm just asking a 'what if' based off your info....yes, this is a small sample so no judgements can be made, but is it just a coincidence to make one console's slightly higher/lower for 3 games for each?...maybe, maybe not...
it was a 360 Kinect game for fukks sakes. don't know why anyone would drop $ on this tbhDestructiod seems to rate above the average.
Polygon below.
Crimson dragon will probably be the first free game for games for gold X1
every launch has one of these bad last gen ports
Can I ask why this is an issue? Should you go out of your way to only give reviews to people that you know are predisposed to liking the series? I don't know how they go about handing out reviews but I think that a fair system, on aggregate, sometimes includes assigning reviewers that you know may not like a game and sometimes includes assigning reviews that you know may like a game. If you as a reader knows he doesn't like the franchise, you can take that into account when reading the review. The problem is most people are too attached to a score. They see the score and they're like "aw man, the average is being lowered, fukk this guy". When that should not be a concern of theirs whatsoever. If you want to read a reviewer that shares your opinion 100% of the time, you better start writing reviews.
But look at these threads - that's not even what people want. Posters think a 7.5 is good if it's for their console and bad if it's for the other console
. They just want to use review scores to confirm their own opinions - even if they haven't played the game yet!
he gave Charlie Murder (never heard of it) a 7.5 when the meta average was 78
Can I ask why this is an issue? Should you go out of your way to only give reviews to people that you know are predisposed to liking the series? I don't know how they go about handing out reviews but I think that a fair system, on aggregate, sometimes includes assigning reviewers that you know may not like a game and sometimes includes assigning reviews that you know may like a game. If you as a reader knows he doesn't like the franchise, you can take that into account when reading the review. The problem is most people are too attached to a score. They see the score and they're like "aw man, the average is being lowered, fukk this guy". When that should not be a concern of theirs whatsoever. If you want to read a reviewer that shares your opinion 100% of the time, you better start writing reviews.
But look at these threads - that's not even what people want. Posters think a 7.5 is good if it's for their console and bad if it's for the other console
I pretty much gave up on gaming journalism a while back man. shyt is so full of shyt. Couple that with the fact that the vast majority of gaming journalists aren't even journalists doesn't help.
I judge games now based on what I see and past experiences with the game types and franchises. Also, only people I trust who like similar shyt I do.