[BreakABone]

Originally Posted by Vampyr

It's my opinion that Wii games should almost always get low scores on graphics, unless they are very artistically unique.

They shouldn't get a free pass because Nintendo flaked out on HD.

I wonder how many people would take me seriously if I said this:

It's my opinion that Xbox 360 games should almost always get low scores on graphics, unless they are very artistically unique.

They shouldn't get a free pass because Microsoft flaked out on 3D.

I mean it sounds almost as absurd to me.

The problem is, and you kind of covered this, when its a game on multiple consoles, graphics sometime factor into the score.

And in general, you will see that reflected in Wii scores
Star Wars, Call of Duty, WWE games, all score lower on the Wii than their HD counter parts. But as you figured, very little crossover between HD games and Wii games.

And the ones that kind of rely on HD graphics and advanced AI generally don't make it because of that.

Anyhow, another mini-rant, but one this reminded me of.

Is I loathe the idea of comparing review scores, which again always happens, but to save myself the time, just gonna quote myself.

Why is it then, the first thing that happens when a video game review is posted is searching for other reviews either from the website/publication, the reviewer or similar genres. And usually without doing anything more than looking at the final score, we begin to have all sorts of rants and raves fill up the internet.
“I can’t believe they gave game A a 10 in graphics, but game B only a 9.9 it looks so much better.”
“Really Game B has a better story than Game A? I don’t think so!”
“I can’t believe they say Game A is the best game on the console, but it scored lower than Game B!”
Those are just blanket statement, though I would be lying if I did say they weren’t based on actual comments I read in regards to games released in the past year! The fact of the matter is game reviewing doesn’t exist in a bubble. What was a 10 2 months ago, may not be considered a 10 today. Hell, what was a 10 last week may not be considered a 10 this week. That’s how fast things change. New games, new ideas, new levels are achieved at a rapid pace. There’s no way to get a uniformed system that allows for a clear progression of quality because honestly it doesn’t exist.

Even taking games from the same series may yield wildly different results. Perhaps, the 2nd game did something remarkable, but in the 2 years between sequels has become commonplace or maybe it builds on the strength of the last game without really adding anything new to the formula. Do you grade it up because it is just as good as the last one but doesn’t really re-invent the wheel or do you grade it down because it plays it safe?

End of the day, because I realize this is getting long-winded, there’s no way to compare review scores. Even if you were to line up perfectly and get the same reviewer, reviewing the same genre, on the same platform and released the same day there’s no way to say that Game A is better than Game B based on a score. And that’s all I want gamers to take away from this, stop bitching and moaning about your soon to be favorite game not getting the respect it deserves based on a random number!