Leigh Alexander isn't a good writer because she has a better command of the English language than other writers or even a unique and accomplished style. She has interesting things to say and the honest verve to communicate them at any rate. That's rare, I'd say. This very characteristic makes her obnoxious on podcasts and great on paper.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Edge 229 (new format) scores, features, Hitman cover
- Thread starter Visualante
- Start date
lowrider007
Licorice-flavoured booze?
zoukka said:
I would agree if Edge dropped scores altogether, it seems hypercritical that they seem to make a point of priding themselves on the body of text in their reviews then they will add a number at the end of it that contradicts that, either go all the way or conform, move to a 5 point system at least, I hate Edge in it's current form, but if they ditched the scores, I'd sign up for a sub straight away.
Edge is a lot more than just the reviews. Have a friend or relative cross out the scores with a marker before you read it if they bug you to such a bizarre degree.
Someone was saying the same thing you are now back in the 90s when they only gave Diablo a 7. All we're getting from you is nostalgia and conspiracy theories.
Riddick said:
Someone was saying the same thing you are now back in the 90s when they only gave Diablo a 7. All we're getting from you is nostalgia and conspiracy theories.
Goldmund said:
Leigh Alexander is the perfect example of how low Edge has gone. The old Edge would never hire kotaku monkeys like her ilk, the new Edge is desperately trying to save itself from irrelevance so it's hiring her kind to get controversy, attention and sales. Their reviews serve the exact same function.
Foliorum Viridum
Banned
Er, go on...X26 said:
As far as I'm aware, Edge is the only publication to actually use the 1-10 scale rather than the 6-10 scale.
Foliorum Viridum said:
They use a random number from the 5-10 scale to rate good games and a random number from the 1-4 scale for bad games. They're a joke and their reviews aren't only inconsistent compared to their other reviews or metacritic scores but usually inconsistent between the text and the score. They're controversial for controversy's sake.
Visualante
Member
Harsh :I it's not my fault these threads are circuses.JaseC said:
I think they do?dexterslu said:
DryEyeRelief
Member
Foliorum Viridum said:
Whatever scale they use, it still represents the 6-10 perception of quality. metacritc.
Blizzje said:
It's also the magazine that pretends to rate innovation bashing good games and giving them low scores for the lack of it and still gives 10s to a franchise like Halo that has stayed almost the same since 2001. Don't try to make sense of the magazine you won't succeed.
lucius
Member
I don't totally buy the excuse Edge just rates games low, they throw around 8's and 9's. They gave Enslaved an 8 and that was a technical mess at times, I would rate the game an 8 like the majority if reviewers, but on this so called mythical "Edge review scale" it should be rated a 6 or even lower, just BS.
If Infamous 2 is a 6, Enslaved should be a 5 in their "Edge review system"
If Infamous 2 is a 6, Enslaved should be a 5 in their "Edge review system"
Riddick said:
It's also a magazine written by many individuals, no matter how hard some people want to lump them together under some arbitary "consistency".
Keep feeding the ass kisser publifications.
lucius said:
There is no system beyond the grade scale. Every writer has their own way of using it.
zoukka said:
I don't know about you but I see a lot of consistency on their Halo scores.
Also this excuse about multiple writers is usually made up to damage control the terrible quality of a magazine or site. If they don't want to be a fucking joke all writers should abide by certain rules like rating innovation for example.
Android18a
Member
I like the PostScript section on the reviews. Adds a nice new layer. The paper is lovely too.
zoukka said:You are not living in the real world. I can't believe I'm reading this
Pfft, that's the best argument you could offer?
And btw if they're being as inconsistent as they want and have absolutely no standards why shouldn't I put Edge in the same category as other crap like kotaku and IGN?
Shurs said:
EDGE scale is 5 = Average. Every writer abides to this. But they do not have an arbitary limit on how low you can grade a game from the devs that gave you exclusivity or sent you ten PR screenshots.
How do you argument against something so ridiculous. Like do you actually wish the editors to prowl around the writers and telling them to subtract/add points from their reviews basing on... I don't even find the words help me out here.
soldat7 said:
How exactly? Or are you comparing a score given to a game decade ago to a completely different kind of game made last year?
Black Republican
Member
haven't played infamous 2 but i enjoyed the 1st one, surprised the 6 score isnt being defended alot. Is it too much like the 1st game?
More Fun To Compute
Member
Bento said:
It is not. I did a search on their database for games made by Westwood and Origin since they were two of the best western RPG developers.
semiconscious
Gold Member
Riddick said:
as is true with most review sources, 'mots' is only ever used when the reviewer's got other problems with the game, & despite the fact that, at this point, it's basically applicable to over 95% of all games. the constant appearance of this completely arbitrary, moronic 'slam' is my single biggest gripe with game reviews in general...
meanwhile, i just traded in an 8 (l.a. noire) for a 6 (infamous 2), which resulted in a $15 purchase price - thank you, team bondi!
...Infamous 1 to Infamous 2 is like Uncharted 1 to Uncharted 2.Black Republican said:
It's more of the same, but bigger and better looking. But it is a lot less repetitive than Infamous 1.
I don't understand the 6 either. It seems edge scores mainly on innovation, in this case I can see why LA Noire would score higher than Infamous 2. But overall, Infamous 2 is the better game. IMHO of course.
TheOctagon
Member
I wish they'd dump the scores just to save you guys from yourselves.
Oh man, you guys are great. Seeing conspiracies in review scores over 15 years of a magazine. Because RPGs don't get amazing scores.
Do any of you remember those games at launch? Diablo 2 was shit at launch. Witcher was as well. Morrowind was a broken pile of shit at 1.0.
Their review scores make sense, you just have to think about things and read all of the worlds. Their Witcher 2 score seems justified, I disagree with them some, but they are right in the targeting system is broken. They also probably got screwed and had to reload a dozen times due to some bullshit part of the game, and are including that in their score.
Do any of you remember those games at launch? Diablo 2 was shit at launch. Witcher was as well. Morrowind was a broken pile of shit at 1.0.
Their review scores make sense, you just have to think about things and read all of the worlds. Their Witcher 2 score seems justified, I disagree with them some, but they are right in the targeting system is broken. They also probably got screwed and had to reload a dozen times due to some bullshit part of the game, and are including that in their score.
GillianSeed79
Member
Aeana said:
From what I gathered from the online review their major gripes were that, according to them, the story was too much of a slow burn and took too long to get going, they spent too long building up Foltest's backstory and other than that I think their main gripes were some complaints some of the user interface stuff like skill upgrade paths and inventory mechanics.
Rahxephon91
Banned
Surprised at the Witcher 2 score. Though I guess a 6 from Edge still means it's solid, I'm not sure why it would score just a 6. The game is pretty fantastic. Just play the beginning and you will be probably treated with one of the best intros to a WRPG ever.
Not surprised at the Infamous 2 score. The first game was pretty bad, and the sequel seems to improve on it to the point of just being an ok game. 6 seems good enough for a pretty mediocre game.
LA Noire diffidently deserves the 8. Great story, with some interesting gameplay.
Not surprised at the Infamous 2 score. The first game was pretty bad, and the sequel seems to improve on it to the point of just being an ok game. 6 seems good enough for a pretty mediocre game.
LA Noire diffidently deserves the 8. Great story, with some interesting gameplay.
OldJadedGamer
Banned
Eveyone has their own say about the scores but I found that the vast majority of the time with a few tiny exceptions that EDGE review scores have matched my own personal tastes on games so I end up trusting them the most.
I love Edge, I really do, I have been a subscriber for many, many, years (and not being from UK, that means 70+ pounds each year), but if there is something I have learnt is that they are completely illiterate to speak about WRPGs. And I'm not talking about numbers, their reviews about them makes no sense, they don't focus in any of the stuff that matters in a RPG probably because some silly editorial guideline.
Just ignore them, I stopped reading them time ago.
Meh at the change of format, it´s the third one, my library will look like a roallercoaster.
WTF!
Just ignore them, I stopped reading them time ago.
Meh at the change of format, it´s the third one, my library will look like a roallercoaster.
WTF!
Corky said:
No, because according to Edge apologists it's OK for the magazine to be extremely inconsistent. So Witcher could be much worse or much better. Also LA Noire or Enslaved could be a far worse games than Infamous (imo they are) unlike what Edge scores suggest but since Edge is just being Edge you just don't know. Different reviewers you see...
So in other words Edge scores don't mean shit. There's no real standard, it's just random scores sometimes from good reviewers (if there are any left) and some times from kotaku monkeys who were told to score strictly.