Catwoman got relatively low scores, but 2 of the 3 reviewers gave it around a 5(the other gave it a 2). Every other EA game though pretty much seems rated higher then it should be. Game Informer, among other magazines seem to rate the games better when it comes to EA products, awarding high scores only if the game is truly worthy of such. EGM loves to claim they are independent, but EA certainly has enough cash to throw around.
Am I the only one who thinks EGM is in bed with EA?
- Thread starter gmzone
- Start date
RaekwonThaChef
CAGiversary!
Well, EA makes some good games, hence the high scores. I don't think I've really noticed any over-rating on EGM's part, though I'd like to see what the think about this whole EA situation, given the recent developments. BTW, now probably isn't the best time to start another anti-EA thread, prepare for another flame war.
If this is a sign of payola they aren't getting much for their money. The current issue of EGM is the first I read in years since my XBN subscription was automatically switched. The scores in general seemed quite conservative with even some big hits getting lower numbers than I'd expect.
There is going to be a fluke occasionally. Maybe those two reviewers were slavish Halle Berry fans. This is why it's best to use gamerankings.com for a cross section of reviews.
There is going to be a fluke occasionally. Maybe those two reviewers were slavish Halle Berry fans. This is why it's best to use gamerankings.com for a cross section of reviews.
Scrubking
CAGiversary!
killswitch64
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 23 (100%)
Is the EA bashing ever gonna stop?
FriskyTanuki
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 36 (100%)
[quote name='gmzone']I don't think a flame war will brew. To be fair, Driv3r(Atari) was rated high when I don't know how the reviewers could justify those scores.[/quote]
It got mixed scores from EGM, 8.5, 7.5, 6.5 aren't very high since it's a 7.5 average or an above average game. EGM should be confronted on the fact that they've started copping out of doing reviews for all of the games they get by adding that stupid page after the reviews.
It got mixed scores from EGM, 8.5, 7.5, 6.5 aren't very high since it's a 7.5 average or an above average game. EGM should be confronted on the fact that they've started copping out of doing reviews for all of the games they get by adding that stupid page after the reviews.
Personally I would have scored 2.0 for Driver. Good point about EGM not reviewing all the games they are supposed to. I liked the reviews I read in Gamestar(now defunct) for the most part. I liked Incite magazine as well, if anyone remembers that? Funny how EGM poked fun at that mag. for using celebs., but what does EGM do now?
Death2Sanity
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
[quote name='killswitch64']Is the EA bashing ever gonna stop?[/quote]
One can only hope.
One can only hope.
I've noticed this over the past several years, especially when it's concerning EA... Other noteworthy games that got inflated scores: Driver 3, Enter The Matrix. You fill in the blanks on the other ones. That, and reading some of the articles, and posts across the net' had me wondering how much of an influence these companies have on the media.
The topic of EGM and other magazines getting paid to write good reviews or for exclusive previews has been a topic for years. Whenever the subject comes up Shoe (editor-in-chief) posts a reply says it is BS and points to examples of video game companies pulling ads from their magazine because of bad reviews.
[quote name='gmzone']I've noticed this over the past several years, especially when it's concerning EA... Other noteworthy games that got inflated scores: Driver 3, Enter The Matrix. You fill in the blanks on the other ones. That, and reading some of the articles, and posts across the net' had me wondering how much of an influence these companies have on the media.[/quote]
They gave Enter the Matrix 3.5's
They gave Enter the Matrix 3.5's
[quote name='thorbahn3'][quote name='gmzone']I've noticed this over the past several years, especially when it's concerning EA... Other noteworthy games that got inflated scores: Driver 3, Enter The Matrix. You fill in the blanks on the other ones. That, and reading some of the articles, and posts across the net' had me wondering how much of an influence these companies have on the media.[/quote]
They gave Enter the Matrix 3.5's[/quote]
Look at their Driver 3 score and tell me theres not something going on there. EGM is not as bad as other companies when it comes to this, but they're not innocent either.
They gave Enter the Matrix 3.5's[/quote]
Look at their Driver 3 score and tell me theres not something going on there. EGM is not as bad as other companies when it comes to this, but they're not innocent either.
I'm starting to dislike EGM nowadays. Is it just me or do they hate on the Gamecube? For one, go to www.gamerankings.com. Look at the scores for WWE Day of Reckoning (awesome game). Nobody gave the game less than an 80% except EGM (they gave it a 56.7%). I read the magazine and all the reviewers came up with the same score. The WWE games on other systems get good scores however. Something to think about when renewing your subscription. Post more examples if you have any (and there are more. I read the mag regularly)
[quote name='gmzone']Maybe it's bad memory, but I don't remember them giving The Matrix game 3.5's!? Of course, what else is Shoe going to say. Yes, we take money all the time from Nintendo, Sega, Capcom, Konami, EA, etc.[/quote]
Yeah your memory blows. I looked up the Catwoman review. It is a 4.5, 5.5, and 2.0 . If they were in EA's pocket they would of given it 8.0's.
Oh and I looked up Enter The Matrix. I was half right. 3.5, 3.5, and a 6.0 .
As for the GCN they often give a multiplatform game on the GCN a lower score since it has no online and the EGM people love online so much. But seriously it is their opinions so of course your not going to agree with them all the time.
Yeah your memory blows. I looked up the Catwoman review. It is a 4.5, 5.5, and 2.0 . If they were in EA's pocket they would of given it 8.0's.
Oh and I looked up Enter The Matrix. I was half right. 3.5, 3.5, and a 6.0 .
As for the GCN they often give a multiplatform game on the GCN a lower score since it has no online and the EGM people love online so much. But seriously it is their opinions so of course your not going to agree with them all the time.
lately EGM has been getting on my nerves as well. Especially after the enter the matrix fiasco. EtM craptacular review did not come out until 2-3 months after the game release. So i bought the turd based on EGM glowing preview of the game. The honesty of a review is worthless if they don't come out on time. Couple that with the fact that they don't offer online reviews... you can never get "late-breaking" reviews.
another thing that gets me is that the reviewer refer to each other in their reviews. I prefer to read 3 independant reviews. If that means that I have to read about the same complaints 3 times so be it. If they want to tag team this shit, then they should do a dialogue review, wait, they already do that, lazy rickerfrackin....
In any case, i either have a viscous case of "back in the day" or EGM has REALLY gone down hill...
another thing that gets me is that the reviewer refer to each other in their reviews. I prefer to read 3 independant reviews. If that means that I have to read about the same complaints 3 times so be it. If they want to tag team this shit, then they should do a dialogue review, wait, they already do that, lazy rickerfrackin....
In any case, i either have a viscous case of "back in the day" or EGM has REALLY gone down hill...
[quote name='injun']lately EGM has been getting on my nerves as well. Especially after the enter the matrix fiasco. EtM craptacular review did not come out until 2-3 months after the game release. So i bought the turd based on EGM glowing preview of the game. The honesty of a review is worthless if they don't come out on time. Couple that with the fact that they don't offer online reviews... you can never get "late-breaking" reviews.
another thing that gets me is that the reviewer refer to each other in their reviews. I prefer to read 3 independant reviews. If that means that I have to read about the same complaints 3 times so be it. If they want to tag team this shit, then they should do a dialogue review, wait, they already do that, lazy rickerfrackin....
In any case, i either have a viscous case of "back in the day" or EGM has REALLY gone down hill...[/quote]
I guess you don't know how it works. If a video game company does not send you an early copy then the review will not be in the magazine just around the time it in stores. They warned readers this happened in an issue too.
another thing that gets me is that the reviewer refer to each other in their reviews. I prefer to read 3 independant reviews. If that means that I have to read about the same complaints 3 times so be it. If they want to tag team this shit, then they should do a dialogue review, wait, they already do that, lazy rickerfrackin....
In any case, i either have a viscous case of "back in the day" or EGM has REALLY gone down hill...[/quote]
I guess you don't know how it works. If a video game company does not send you an early copy then the review will not be in the magazine just around the time it in stores. They warned readers this happened in an issue too.
bread's done