Is it just me or is there something wrong here???

[EHWfedPres]

Lets see, it's game comparison time!

Deathrow - Visually speaking, it does stuff that the ps2 could not possibly handle. Bump mapped textures, amazing light effects, perfect character animations, etc. The list goes on and on...

GTA Vice City - Character models that many N64 games laugh at, horrible sun lighting, textures that a PSone can handle easily, etc.



Now, lets see...which game has better graphics?

Gamespot seems to think that Vice City does for some reason, cince they rated it 9 in the graphics department and only game Deathrow an 8...





Now, if thats not enough, there's a thread in the gamespot Xbox forum somewhere that has a big list of biased ratings for Xbox games, etc...i checked the first 7 pages and didnt find it so if you want to look for it, please feel free to do so...what a bunch of goddamm idiots working at gáyspot...

[carlbme]

Quit complaining, the fact is that if you don't like it don't go there. If you do, don't come to use complaining.

I know at least a few people here, just like myself, who are getting tired of the fighting, whining and general complaining for no real reason.

[thunderkiss2k1]

Originally posted by carlbme
Quit complaining, the fact is that if you don't like it don't go there. If you do, don't come to use complaining.

I know at least a few people here, just like myself, who are getting tired of the fighting, whining and general complaining for no real reason.

Dont assume that you are speaking for everyone. And if he wants to voice his opinion about Gamespot, well, he has a right to. Peace.

[rio2012]

Well u should consider that the ps2 is a few years old and to handle a big @ss city like vice city with grafics like that is impressive even if the grafics are CRAPPY.

[carlbme]

I said "at least a few people here". FEW being the operative word. Which of course would imply that I do not speak for anyone exact for those who agree with me. NOT for everyone.

[l Maximus l]

I agree, EHWfedPres, something is a little fishy there...

[lefiend]

yo, in case u havent noticed, almost every reviewer gives the score out of 10 based on what the system can handle

and for the ps2, gta is amazing so they give a 9

for xbox, deathrow is good, not what the xbox is capable of so 8

u see?

they arent biased, they judge the systems on what they should be at in terms of grafx etc......

peace

[MerimacHamwich]

The problem is there is no disclaimer saying that the ratings are based on what the system has to offer. So people who aren't into gaming like most of us, go there and see GTA gets a 9 and Deathrow gets an 8 and they think that GTA is a better game than Deathrow. This ofcourse being false as we all know. However, there is no clear disclaimer on the site saying, "The following rating is based on what the system of said game can handle." Therefor people get the wrong impression. So is there something wrong with gamespot? YES! Heck we do not even know for sure if that is indeed how they rate games becuase where on the site does it say that? So I personally just see them as biased against the xbox. Much like someone saying a pinto is a way better car than a Ferrari. It is plain crap. No wait, it is super crap of DOOM!

[SlightlySycho]

Pretty much what lefiend said. You can't judge a game's based graphics based on what another system can do. Would you consider a comparison of the XBox and GameBoy Color's graphics fair?

[Evil_Dr_Beefy]

Wow, a gamespot is bias post.....Mmm...they are starting to pile up aren't they....enjoy....

[Reversion]

You are all incorrect and i am correct

[Squidpie]

Originally posted by SlightlySycho
Pretty much what lefiend said. You can't judge a game's based graphics based on what another system can do. Would you consider a comparison of the XBox and GameBoy Color's graphics fair?

So I suppose that you think this also explains why they will rate an Xbox game lower than a PS2 or GC game when its the same game but its on more than one system?... they will give the non Xbox one at least a little higher rating than the Xbox one....explain that one.

[Crazy Joe]

Originally posted by MerimacHamwich
The problem is there is no disclaimer saying that the ratings are based on what the system has to offer. So people who aren't into gaming like most of us, go there and see GTA gets a 9 and Deathrow gets an 8 and they think that GTA is a better game than Deathrow. This ofcourse being false as we all know. However, there is no clear disclaimer on the site saying, "The following rating is based on what the system of said game can handle." Therefor people get the wrong impression. So is there something wrong with gamespot? YES! Heck we do not even know for sure if that is indeed how they rate games becuase where on the site does it say that? So I personally just see them as biased against the xbox. Much like someone saying a pinto is a way better car than a Ferrari. It is plain crap. No wait, it is super crap of DOOM!

one of the head guys there wrote a huge article about this and how they rate it on what the system can do. it's not a disclaimer, but it has been dealt with.

[Hugh_Jass]

I think the main problem is that we really haven't seen what the XBOX can do. In fact, I doubt we'll see XBOX pushing the limits until 11/2003. The programmable nature of the graphics chip is unexplored territory.

[EHWfedPres]

Ok then, explain Kingdom Hearts getting a 9 in the visuals department...if thats the best they can do, or close to it, then something is SERIOUSLY wrong here...

[MerimacHamwich]

There may be an article about how they rate games but is it under every rating? If not then it is not enough. The general way of rating a game is to rate it based on what has been done before across all platforms. Thus this is what people exp[ect when they visit the website. If there is not an easily accesible and visually obvious disclaimer on how they rate games then they are doing something wrong. In that case they would still be bashing the xbox and promoting the ps2. Maybe they got a threat from microsoft and they wrote an article to prevent any lawsuits but in reality they really do hate Microsofts product and are biased against it. However the possibility of getting sued ushered them into lying and writing an article about how they are unbiased. The main point I am trying to get across is that unless there is an obvious discliamer, heck even small print under the rating, then they are being biased. This is a world of easily swayed consumers who rarely look into things and expect a company to provide them with all important information upfront. If the company does not provide this then most consumers will take the "product" at face value. Thus, they see a small car, they think it has low horsepower. They see a rating of 8 on an xbox game and a rating of 9 on a PS2 game they think the PS2 game is better.

[yall]

I must agree with Mr. Hamwich. Not only is it unfair to review games in that manner, but it gives the wrong impression to the uninformed consumer. This wouldn't be so bad except for the fact that these companies take alot of payola from Sony and developers. Plus it contributes to ps2 fanboy trolls who come ion here post things like....

'tonee hahwk 4 is bdr on PPPSS22. donmt belive mr ? ck owt gamspot htey said 9.2 for ps2 caus its online not miorcosoft. xbox live suvx they coulndt get it to wurk,only 9.1 ha ha. right i not a fanyboi. suckers.p 2sw ruled'