[quote name='Kaijufan']I just watched a special on Spider Man 2 on G4TechTV, and is the woman who hosts that show the one who used to co-host Extended Play? I think her first name was Kate, but I could be way off about that.[/quote]
Im not sure if it was her, but you're probably thinking of Kate Botello, who was the original co-host with Leo on the Screensavers From 1998-2000. She left the Screensavers, went on hiatus for a while and came back on Extended Play as the co-host with Adam Sessler from 2000-2002. I liked her a whole lot more than Morgan Webb (who also got her start on the Screensavers) but she didn't seem to have as much chemistry with Adam Sessler (who has been on the show since it started on ZDTV in 1998).
As for the debate about X Play, its much better than Extended Play. Theres no question about that. Extended play was about as boring to watch as an infomercial for one of Ron Popeils new gadgets. As far as comparing it to something like Judgment Day from G4 (which I didn't get prior to the merger) I can't really say that either is really that much better than the other. Morgan Webb isn't as annoying to me, but then again I thought she was annoying when she was on the Screensavers acting as if she had a clue about 9/10ths of the stuff that was being discussed. At least on X play, she seems to at least have an interest in the games, and she has WAY more chemistry with Adam Sessler than Kate did, which makes the show a bit easier to watch.
From Captainfrizo:
What pisses me off about the show is how nearly every single game gets a 3 out of 5. How are they helping purchase decisions when almost every game is rated the same? My brothers and I joke about how they give that score to the games they didn't actually play.
As far as X Play's ratings, I've heard more complaints about them giving popular games bad ratings than giving every game a 3 out of 5. And a lot of games get 3...out of 5s, which is obvious cause 3...out of 5 is an AVERAGE game. X Play has given out a handful of 4 and 5 out of 5s, but also a few 1 and 2 out of 5's as well. For the most part, the majority of games on consoles are nothing but average games, and they get stuck with the dreaded 3...out of 5. And there's nothing wrong with these games really.. description of a 3...out of 5 game from X Play forums:
Three stars: Average
These are fun-to-play, pretty solid titles with a few minor flaws. This is not a poor rating. Most games will fall into this category. There's just little to differentiate this title from the rest of the pack. The game lacks technical or design polish but is still enjoyable. It'll certainly appeal to fans of the genre.
So I don't know why anyone would complain that they give out a lot of 3...out of 5s, because that shows that they are not very loose with their 4 and 5 ratings which they do save for games that are deserving. Just as a game has to be pretty horrible to get a 1 out of 5 (Charlie's Angels, Aquaman..), a game would have to be pretty exceptional to get a 5 out of 5.(Viewtiiful Joe..)