Support NeoGAF

[Cirekiller]

The problem with Polygon is that they scored the PS4 version of Ghosts lower because of performance issues. When you go down that path you better be consistant as a site.

The only reason this version of Tomb Raider exist is because of the graphical upgrade. People are expected to pay full price, because it looks and runs better. So any shortcomming when it comes to graphics should be reflected in the reviewscores. This applies not only for the XBO, but also the PS4!

At this point people should just go to sites with opinions/reviews they trust. I generally read GAF threads to get Polygon reviews for a laugh (will never give that site a view) and move on. Their spin can be hilarious at times, with this whole "yeah it performs worse than than the other version, but performance doesn't really matter for this game so whatever" thing is entirely an excuse they pulled out of their ass to justify the same score. I have never seen this kind of justification during last generation when 360 versions were superior, and I doubt we will see them this generation if the Xbone version is superior (because it will probably never happen).

Edit: I should clarify by "superior" I mean performing better at the same ratio as TR on PS4 and Xbone.

TLDR: Don't take Polygon reviews seriously enough to question them, they will never read any GAF thread about them, and they will never change the way they review games.

Is that true? I thought the Digital Foundry test stated it's lowest drop was 27 frames, highest was 30 frames, and average was 29.98 frames?

Disappointing if the game does suffer from frame rate issues on Xbox One, might actually make me get the PS4 version in stead.

I don't quite agree on always lowering or raising a games score based on performance on each console, I don't think it should ever be done unless one version is just plain broken and awful, which neither PS4 Ghost/One Tomb Raider are, but I don't review games myself, so not like my opinion matters on scoring.

You should probably see the scores for Ghosts from Polygon.

 

[AndrewDean84xX]

This is the first time I've heard of a Hip Hop gamer. Who is he to call anyone out?

 

[Horsemama1956]

must make video ps4s honour is being shit on must defend him

 

[myca77]

Didn't Polygon publish articles stating the Xbox One version having worse frame rate?

Polygon was also one of the first (the first?) sites to publish an article calling out Microsoft on the Machinima-gate.

Honestly, Polygon isn't biased towards anyone, they equally report, question, and call out news, regardless of Developer or Publisher.

This post gets a

Spoiler

7.5

Also why is it that after having an initial disdain for hiphopgamer I now kind of like him?

As for Polygon, they should be called out on their inconsistent BS. And really if you are going to score games in your reviews you should be willing to deduct/add to the score due to the features in the game, resolution, how the game play, frame rate, etc for each platform the game is on. It's a disservice to the readers to not do so.

 

[Nafai1123]

I could personally understand why someone would feel that framerate differences for a fast paced multiplayer shooter like COD are more detrimental for the overall quality of both versions of the game vs. framerate differences for a single player experience.

Sure, I could understand that. I could also understand wanting a higher resolution in a fast paced FPS where you need to identify targets. As others have pointed out since the game was released (Digital Foundry and gamers) the framerate issues in COD on PS4 rarely if ever actually impact the gameplay as much as...say....720p vs 1080p would. My point is that if a reviewer is going to do something drastic like change a score on one console but not the other, it better be for a damn good reason that the SITE overall feels is worthwhile to inform the readers about.

 

[graywolf323]

Is that true? I thought the Digital Foundry test stated it's lowest drop was 27 frames, highest was 30 frames, and average was 29.98 frames?

you're mixing up the cut scene and gameplay analysis

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=758977

 

[Bundy]

Is there a controversy here? Kollar's review update to the game states that the frame-rate is higher on the PS4 version but that it's not the type of game where frame-rate dips affect gameplay. Did he say something on Twitter that's less diplomatic?

Framerate drops to 18fps + looks worse = still the exact same score?
They're a joke site!

 

[mrklaw]

Framerate drops to 18fps + looks worse = still the exact same score?
They're a joke site!

The average is 29.98, pretty much solid 30fps most of the time.

 

[8byte]

God, so many things he just doesn't get.

Games are not shown on a platform because the platform holder was developer friendly. They are shown first because the hardware allows those titles to look better, and clearly they want to show off the best version of their title. This is the primary reason, "ninety plus percent" of the time.

 

[Wereroku]

How can you possibly read any review with this sort of mindset? I simply don't get it. Such is the nature of reviews that the person writing it is at least in some ways subjective. Objectively the framerate is worse, yes. Does that effect this reviewers enjoyment of the game? In this case no - so what's the problem exactly?

If not, each game would be getting the exact same review scores across the board.

Its not the review that I am disagreeing with it is the score that is applied to the review. Arthur said that they meet and vote on them as a group and I believe they should follow the same protocol for each game. I understand bayonetta having a bad framerate is worse than TR having one but numerical scores should be consistent.

 

[MajorPain]

30 fps in this game is not a big deal, now a game like COD needs 60 fps.

 

[B.O.O.M]

I think this needs to be stated because some seem to be under the wrong impression. The reviewer isn't the one assigning the score.

"Once a review is complete, the reviewer meets with a group of senior editors to determine which score on our scale properly reflects the text as written. We do not write with scores in mind."

So the score isn't different because it's different reviewers. It's the same process. It's a collective effort in assigning a score. If one game was panned for shortcomings in performance, it should be applied to every game.

As for Polygon being biased I don't need to see them sign a confirmation letter on the matter. Their review editor is Arthur Gies and we know what kind of a person he is. I have seen their coverage of the two systems too including the cringe worthy PS4 live stream.

Polygon is biased as shit. You just need to open your eyes and see the signs to notice it. They have no consistency or fairness in the scoring of the reviews. I do not take such a 'media' outlet seriously as they have no credibility. That's all I have to say on this subject

 

[Bundy]

The average is 29.98, pretty much solid 30fps most of the time.

Nothing wrong with what I said. It can drop to 18fps, which is horrible.

The PS4 is clearly better. I looks even better. So... same score?
Sorry, typical Lolygon.

 

[PBY]

If you think Polygon has some nefarious agenda, I can't have that conversation with you. Everything will be twisted through confirmation bias to prove your point even though numbers don't really bear out that point.

 

[BotoxAgent]

30 fps in this game is not a big deal, now a game like COD needs 60 fps.

60 fps is always a big deal. I am for anything that makes the experience a higher fidelity all around.

Even if it's not a big deal for you or anyone else, Polygon should still objectively adjust their scores to highlight any differences. They are reviewers after all and should heavily scrutinize their products.

 

[sechsterangriff]

Speedy Blue Dude
This Post Brought To You By the Microsoft Xbox One™, The All-in-One Entertainment System
(Today, 07:47 PM)

So, beautiful.

I guess the tag isn't self-explanatory enough...

Anyway, like I said in another thread I treat Polygon (and almost every other big site for that matter) like I treat N4G. Sometimes you find great stuff (featured articles and interviews for example) but you have to filter through a lot of shit (double standard reviews).

 

[atomsk]

If you think Polygon has some nefarious agenda, I can't have that conversation with you. Everything will be twisted through confirmation bias to prove your point even though numbers don't really bear out that point.

c'mon man, you just gotta have FAITH

 

[Theecliff]

Is that true? I thought the Digital Foundry test stated it's lowest drop was 27 frames, highest was 30 frames, and average was 29.98 frames?

That was specifically for cutscenes. The lowest framerate recorded for gameplay was 18fps.

 

[Squire]

Fair play to the man, i really dont trust most of the games media at this point.

The irony is HHG is a known shill.

 

[OneUh8]

The issues aren't even relatable, in my opinion. One of them, the PS4 version of Ghosts suffered from consistent and constant frame rate drops, compared to the practically steady frame-rate found on Xbox One's version.

The other, the Xbox One's version had a lower frame rate than the PS4, but practically remains a steady 30, leading to no obvious annoying frame rate drops. The PS4 version is superior, but the Xbox One version doesn't have any "issues", performance wise, unlike the PS4 version of Ghost, which did have performance issues.

I, at the very least, think their different issues.

and yes, I would feel the same way if Tomb Raider on Xbox One was 60 frames, with constant frame rate issues, or the PS4 version of Ghost was 30 frames, with a steady frame rate.

First the framerate issue on Ghost is because of the fps jumping above 60fps. Second, you are going to sit here and say the xbone version does not drop below 30?

Why did I even respond to that drivel.. whatever lol.

 

[OverHeat]

First the framerate issue on Ghost is because of the fps jumping above 60fps. Second, you are going to sit here and say the xbone version does not drop below 30?

Why did I even respond to that drivel.. whatever lol.

If it was this they would have cap the Framerate in a patch already.

 

[nib95]

Gotta say, that was a great video. On point on a lot of things. Wish more journalists would actually tell it like it is the way HHG often does, but these days they're too busy avoiding stepping on toes, pandering to the big names and marketing dollars, or being corporate apologists.

On the subject of Polygon, they're somewhat of a joke and laughing stock anyway. I doubt many take them that seriously so it is what it is. They have only themselves to blame. Inconsistent, jaded, misleading tripe, and certain employees (Gies) who continually drag their image through the mud.

 

[Thorgi]

This is the dumbest controversy ever, and Phil Kollar doesn't deserve to be treated poorly because of these awful framerate/resolution wars. He never said that higher frame rates didn't make a difference for others (he even stressed that it's very important to some people), just said that unless he saw them side to side, he wouldn't really notice and it didn't bother him.

Honestly, pick something more worthwhile to be upset about.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

If you think Polygon has some nefarious agenda, I can't have that conversation with you. Everything will be twisted through confirmation bias to prove your point even though numbers don't really bear out that point.

There is nothing nefarious about getting paid to say something. It's just business. Polygon are mercs, and right now Microsoft are the highest bidders. One day Nintendo or Sony might become the highest bidders and Polygon's opinions will change accordingly. I don't understand this controversy at all, it's like getting mad at Fox News. Nobody cares about Fox News anymore, why do people keep caring about Polygon?

 

[PBY]

There is nothing nefarious about getting paid to say something. It's just business. Polygon are mercs, and right now Microsoft are the highest bidders. One day Nintendo or Sony might become the highest bidders and Polygon's opinions will change accordingly.

Sigh.

 

[MMaRsu]

This is the dumbest controversy ever, and Phil Kollar doesn't deserve to be treated poorly because of these awful framerate/resolution wars. He never said that higher frame rates didn't make a difference for others (he even stressed that it's very important to some people), just said that unless he saw them side to side, he wouldn't really notice and it didn't bother him.

Honestly, pick something more worthwhile to be upset about.

If he doesnt see a difference he shouldnt review games as a profession.

 

[nib95]

If it was this they would have cap the Framerate in a patch already.

It is because of this, and it is capped. But the way they've coded it, it stutters ever so slightly when it wants to go beyond 60fps but can't because of the lock.

Tomb Raider on the Xbox One also drops frames, down to 18fps in fact. Just not often. But by the same token, the PS4 version of Ghosts doesn't stutter often either. It barely affects the experience, which overall is smooth. Smoother in fact than most games, and smoother than the Xbox One version of Tomb Raider.

 

[CDV13]

Hmm, I guess it can be looked at that way.
Though War Thunder isn't available in NA as yet.

Yea that is true. Speaking of which, I don't understand why it isn't out here yet. I have it from another account, but don't see why it isn't out here. Oh well.

 

[JABEE]

Something to consider with your criticism, I actually don't believe that Phil Kollar picks a score.

I believe Arthur and a group of editors assign numbers to these games based on what the review text says.

So if you want to criticize someone for putting the number on the review it would probably be Arthur Gies's hand on the trigger.

Review scores in general are questionable, but that's how I believe it works at Polygon.

 

[Thorgi]

If he doesnt see a difference he shouldnt review games as a profession.

Counting frames/pixels is hardly a make or break part of the job. This isn't Digital Foundry, and unless it makes a crucial difference to what playing it feels like (i.e. dropped frames, stuttering), I don't see why it would be such an important sticking point.

If it's important for you, that's great. If it's not important for the person reviewing it, that doesn't mean they're suddenly not "qualified" to review games. It's their opinion. You have yours, they have theirs.

 

[BotoxAgent]

If he doesnt see a difference he shouldnt review games as a profession.

yeah, if you are writing for an enthusiast site, you should be obsessively reviewing the differences, much like an A/V Home Theater mag that obsesses over color accuracy, gamma, and black levels between different tvs.....same goes for a theater, book, or movie critic, etc.

If you are going to approach reviews through a lens of an average joe, i don't find it very useful or entertaining.

 

[mattiewheels]

Surely no one is really surprised by this. Gies won't let a PS version get a higher score.

I can't believe there hasn't been an Arthur Gies OT where everyone just gets it out of their system. In this quoted poster's eyes, he's out to sabatoge anything that Sony does? Take a step back, man. I've listened to what he has to say many times and he comes across as objective, just with different tastes than his detractors pretty much. I think the people who have a problem with him have had no experience of actually hearing him out, actually contextualizing what they're slamming. All I'm saying is...realize that these writers aren't cardboard cutout villans with black and white objectives or something.

 

[nib95]

Counting frames/pixels is hardly a make or break part of the job. This isn't Digital Foundry, and unless it makes a crucial difference to what playing it feels like (i.e. dropped frames, stuttering), I don't see why it would be such an important sticking point.

But it does make a big difference, is noticeable, is important to gamers and does affect the value assigned to a game. Why do you think many people even bought next gen consoles in the first place? For fancy new graphics and tech. The whole 720p vs 1080p thing is a joke. There's a massive difference between the two, and the idea that we'd be playing 720p games on these new systems a year ago, would have been laughed at.

Resolution is one thing, but Tomb Raider, BF4 etc, have better frame rates AND better visuals on the PS4 version, but of course Polygon would omitt this but go after COD on PS4, which I'd imagine the vast majority of gamers would say the PS4 had the better version of. That's how far Polygons bias has allowed them to a stray.

On a side note, 1080p does affect gameplay. You can see more in the distance, better aim at far away enemies etc, which are not as clear or visible in 720p. Obviously detail, graphics and immersion wise there's a difference too.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I can't believe there hasn't been an Arthur Gies OT where everyone just gets it out of their system. In this quoted poster's eyes, he's out to sabatoge anything that Sony does? Take a step back, man. I've listened to what he has to say many times and he comes across as objective, just with different tastes than his detractors pretty much. I think the people who have a problem with him have had no experience of actually hearing him out, actually contextualizing what they're slamming. All I'm saying is...realize that these writers aren't cardboard cutout villans with black and white objectives or something.

His tastes apparently include games with online only DRM which didn't work for a month after release? Have you actually forgotten about Gies and the SimCity debacle already? I mean come on, Gies didn't become the villain for no reason. He's the biggest heel in gaming journalism because he earned it. No one is out to get him.

 

[Mononoke]

The guy tends to ramble on too long, and sometimes he loses his point. He would be infinitely better if he tidied up his speeches (to be fair, I think some of this appeal is how casual he is). Anyways, I can't hate the guy, because he has so much passion. I wish more journalists had this kind of passion and drive.

 

[BotoxAgent]

Counting frames/pixels is hardly a make or break part of the job. This isn't Digital Foundry, and unless it makes a crucial difference to what playing it feels like (i.e. dropped frames, stuttering), I don't see why it would be such an important sticking point.

If it's important for you, that's great. If it's not important for the person reviewing it, that doesn't mean they're suddenly not "qualified" to review games. It's their opinion. You have yours, they have theirs.

I agree and disagree. They can still qualify as reviewers. But since new next-gen systems are released, acknowledging tech differences are important right now, esp. for multiplats. Any differences should be important, esp. considering that games aren;t exactly cheap these days, and should be acknowledge.

Then It's up to the audience to decide if those parts are important to them.

And 1080p/60fps is still a new thing for most console-only players....and few have truly experience all that glory to be in a position to prematurely dismiss it.

 

[5amshift]

HipHopGamer should be the last person to mention bias.

 

[badb0y]

At least he's calling them on their shit. No one else seems to have the balls to say anything when there's an obvious discrepancy with Polygon's scoring policy.

 

[Thorgi]

But it does make a big difference, is noticeable, is important to gamers and does affect the value assigned to a game. Why do you think many people even bought next gen consoles in the first place? For fancy new graphics and tech. The whole 720p vs 1080p thing is a joke. There's a massive difference between the two, and the idea that we'd be playing 720p games on these new systems a year ago, would have been laughed at.

Resolution is one thing, but Tomb Raider, BF4 etc, have better frame rates AND better visuals on the PS4 version, but of course Polygon would omitt this but go after COD on PS4, which I'd imagine the vast majority of gamers would say the PS4 had the better version of. That's how far Polygons bias has allowed them to a stray.

On a side note, 1080p does affect gameplay. You can see more I'm the distance, better aim out far away enemies etc, which are not as clear or visible in 720p. Obviously detail, graphics and immersion wise there's a difference too.

I just feel like this strays uncomfortably close to "objective review" territory. He's open about the difference between Tomb Raider on Xbox One and PS4, but in his opinion, it doesn't make it a truly worse experience. I imagine in another review, another site WOULD say "Yeah this makes the game worse," but that's the value behind having multiple voices sharing their opinions. Just because he thinks it's not a big deal doesn't mean he's awful or biased or shouldn't be writing about games.

I would also ask that you not hoist the actions of other Polygon writers onto Phil. His views are his own, and just because other Polygon writers have preferred one console over the other in their reviews doesn't mean it automatically applies to his. Though much of that conversation on author before outlet is probably best saved for another time.

 

[Unknown One]

The version with the better graphics and performance should get higher points accordingly. No if and buts about it. It's a disservice to the potential consumer to score it the same since a lot of them look at the overall number for graphics.

 

[PBY]

I just feel like this strays uncomfortably close to "objective review" territory. He's open about the difference between Tomb Raider on Xbox One and PS4, but in his opinion, it doesn't make it a truly worse experience. I imagine in another review, another site WOULD say "Yeah this makes the game worse," but that's the value behind having multiple voices sharing their opinions. Just because he thinks it's not a big deal doesn't mean he's awful or biased or shouldn't be writing about games.

I would also ask that you not hoist the actions of other Polygon writers onto Phil. His views are his own, and just because other Polygon writers have preferred one console over the other in their reviews doesn't mean it automatically applies to his. Though much of that conversation on author before outlet is probably best saved for another time.

You totally get my thoughts on reviews.

 

[not_so_special]

Didn't Polygon publish articles stating the Xbox One version having worse frame rate?

Polygon was also one of the first (the first?) sites to publish an article calling out Microsoft on the Machinima-gate.

Honestly, Polygon isn't biased towards anyone, they equally report, question, and call out news, regardless of Developer or Publisher.

polygon is as biased towards the xboxone as you..so...

 

[jett]

Just out of curiosity: Is there also a "PopGamer"? Or a "AlternativeRockGamer"?

The world is not ready for that.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

Two minute hate threads for Polygon may be cathartic, but they're not very productive. HipHopGamer being the catalyst just makes it worse.