Quote:
Originally Posted by Typhoid
I didn't mean to insinuate that 1 game for multiple platforms should get the same score regardless, I'm saying that the Wii version (or any version of any game) shouldn't get docked marks because of a version (or a like game, for that matter) for a different console.
To say "This game is good, but it's better on (system)" isn't a review. Or to say "This got a 9 on the 360, but I'll give the Wii version a 7 because the graphics are worse" is flawed to begin with because it's entirely irrelevant to the game itself. It should be compared to other games for the same system, not the same game for other systems, or other games for other systems. If I'm reviewing a country singer, I'm not comparing it to jazz-fusion. I'm comparing that country singer to other country singers, or to that specific country singers previous endeavors.
Now, to jump ahead here; say that country singer also released a jazz-fusion album. I still wouldn't compare the two to each other because they're not comparable, despite both being music. Sure, you can compare them - but the comparison wouldn't be accurate to begin with, not to mention highly subjective. Which is a whole other can of donkeys.
I completely agree.
|
That analogy doesn't make any sense. A better analogy is to say "I'm going to review this country singer's album, but I'm only going to compare each song to other songs on the album, instead of taking all the other country album's into consideration."
Sure, you can say one song is better than another on the album, but would it be fair to give a song on the album a 10/10 just because it's better than every other song on the album, even if the singer doesn't do some things as well as another singer?
Reviews only serve one purpose: making a recommendation to a consumer on whether they should purchase a game or not. If a game is released for the Wii and the 360, and is exactly the same in every regard except for the fact it isn't in HD on the Wii, and is blurry with a lot of jaggies, then the reviewer HAS to recommend the superior version to the consumer - and by doing so the reviewer has to give the higher score to the non-Wii game.
If the game is only released on the Wii, then the artistic value of the graphics have to be taken into account. Sometimes that might be enough to bump the score up, but more often or not the reviewer is going to have to dock some points because this Wii FPS doesn't look as good as other FPS's right now, or this Wii RPG doesn't look as good as other RPG's out right now. The whole point of a review and the points on it are to make a recommendation to a buyer.
But this is one of the main reasons I like Giant Bomb reviews. They don't break things down into categories like graphics or gameplay. It has one rating out of five stars, and those stars of all encompassing. Depending on the game, graphics might not even factor into the star rating.