"Xbox 360
With an underwhelming assortment of launch titles, Microsoft's new game platform (in U.S. stores Tuesday, November 22nd) isn't setting the world on fire... yet. But if you are desperate for a pricey, next-generation console, it's the only one around until Playstation 3 eventually arrives in '06."

Here's your console blurb that was posted for the Xbox 360 system. Talk about NOT being unbiased. The game reviews that are the lifeblood of your website are giving decent reviews on the launch titles... and you slam it in your blurb? Pricey??? Are you that biased for Sony? The PS3 is supposed to be released at the exact same $399 price... or higher? You are supposed to be unbiased and publish facts.

And then you even go so far as to advertise for Sony at the end of the blurb. Then the forum editor actually goes out of the way to post "Don't buy the Xbox 360" as a thread. Wow.

Good job. Way to show your journalistic chops. Why don't you tell me your political reviews now and post those as unbiased fact?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: xXxGabexXx,

You're slamming Metacritic for a bullcrap reason, so I'm going to have to defend them. Actually, I consider it fact. The system is pricey. The launch titles suck - Just look at the reviews. The Xbox 360 is the only next-gen console until PS3. Therefore the blurb is justified. Nowhere is it implied that Metacritic is biased towards Sony. The Metacritic Games Editor posted an article "Don't Buy The 360" because it was written in the New York Post and it was interesting. Do you honestly think the Metacritic Games Editor would slam the 360 because he's biased? Maybe he was voicing his opinion or just getting feedback on the article to find out what other people thought. He's allowed to do that, you know. If there were articles titled "Buy the 360," I'm sure they would have been posted too. Too bad there aren't any "Buy the 360" articles or reviews, because the 360 isn't worth buying.

If you're going to accuse Metacritic of being biased towards Sony, you might want to justify it with some actual evidence.

Honestly I don't wan't to defend either side but I am going to say that about what Joji said about the games suck. I dissagree with that statement. Yes some of the games were dissapointing but you still have some games that will keep you enjoyed until some of the real beefy titles start showing the 360's power! (Gears of War, Saint's Row, Elders Scrolls, The Outfit, Final Fantasy, and ton's of other amazing titles) I do think Microsoft priced it a little high but in the coming months I think that some people who say the 360 is crap will change their mind! I can't tell the future but I think the 360 will be just fine!

Yeah, I guess I agree. Note that I said the *launch titles* suck. I didn't reference the second set of games, which, I agree, will undoubtedly be much better.

quote:

Originally posted by xXxGabexXx:
Good job. Way to show your journalistic chops. Why don't you tell me your political reviews now and post those as unbiased fact?

Well… I do agree with the "underwhelming" part of the Xbox 360 launch, but this thread isn’t about what a person thinks about the 360… it’s about whether or not this site deserves to have an opinion in what they open up for discussion.

Well… it’s called metacritic, but I’ll lay off the obviousness of that. What I didn’t realize is that journalists couldn’t voice their opinions in their own material? If you like the Xbox 360 so much… don’t go bashing the site. That is counterproductive.

Use the purpose of this site and start up a discussion about ”why we should all embrace the Xbox 360” and prove the naysayers wrong. C’mon, Gabe… chill out, dude. ;-)

No. This website doesn't present its own viewpoint. In fact, where is the metacritic review of any game, console, movie, music, or tv show? There is none. The expectation is that they will present ALL reviews from ALL available resources to allow the READER to make their own opinion.

They have a responsibility to stay unbiased and let the reviews speak for the products. They COULD provide their own reviews... in which case the rules would be different because the expectation would be ALL reviews from ALL resources PLUS THEIR opinion. They are making an opinion on this "Don't Buy The Xbox 360" and the Xbox 360 blurb, when they do not in any other areas of their website.

And this would be just as wrong if they did this to the PS3, Nintendo Revolution or any other console.

I come here because it is unbiased except for the professional reviews. Metacritic is not unbiased... which means that they may also be biased in their selection or exclusion of reviews. Or even their interpretation of reviews. They have to remain unbiased or this site can't be trusted (regardless of anyone's opinion on the 360).

Very good point Gabe!

You do make some valid points, Gabe. However… the only place I’ve ever noticed where the site administrators have voiced there opinion (other than in the forums – which is fair game) is in the “feature” spot near the top of the homepage.

The Xbox 360 is the latest feature to have an opinion expressed about it… also when the new TV section was created, it mentioned how the lineup of shows was less than stellar. I’m sure there have been other opinions expressed in the “feature” spot that many people have not agreed with.

If that’s the only place where the editors have the freedom to add a little “personal” touch… I say, let them have it.

quote:

Originally posted by xXxGabexXx:
…they may also be biased in their selection or exclusion of reviews.

Also, they are selective of the review sites and sources they choose to include. They can’t be expected to list all review scores on the internet, but they feel about 30 per item is a fair amount to work with and only choose from a selective reviewer list at that. Apparently, there may be more weight added to scores based on where the review comes from as well, but that is pure speculation fueled by the…

Q: Can you tell me how each of the different critics are weighted in your formula?

A: Absolutely not.

…question / answer in the link provided below.

http://www.metacritic.com/about/scoring.shtml

quote:

Originally posted by xXxGabexXx:
Then the forum editor actually goes out of the way to post "Don't buy the Xbox 360" as a thread.

As far as your disapproval of any metacritic staff voicing their opinions in the forums… would you prefer them to use a “secret” alias instead? It doesn’t bother me if they trash a videogame system… or argue abortion rights in the forums. The forums are for discussions… and opinions are a part of every post. Just because someone is affiliated with the site, shouldn’t really matter when posting in the forums... as long as they are mindful with their words when critiquing a subject. So far, all metacritic persons that I’ve seen have expressed their opinions with much care and attention… even when I don’t agree their opinions.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Echolocating,

No, Metacritic can't be perfect in their lack of bias... but they are supposed to try. This is not an editorial site like the Drudge Report, where everything is and is allowed to be slanted. Why would I want to go to a review site that is slanted? Even if it is only once in awhile?

Let me quote Metacritic's FAQ...

Q: Why should I trust your scores?

"...Our goal is to provide completely impartial information about all of the movies, albums, and games you find on our site, so that YOU may make an informed decision when deciding what to watch, hear, or play. The way we see it, if we weren't completely impartial, you wouldn't come back to the site. So we have made objectivity our top priority."

So, how am I wrong?



Whether they do or don't, they can do what they want. I'll still visit, but I will not view their website and their collection of reviews with the same amount of respect as before. And, yes, I'm aware that I am trivial to the success of their site. I'm hoping that, maybe, the site administrator will talk to whoever wrote the blurb and caution them on being completely impartial and keeping objectivitity their top priority.

... and additionally. The forum is NOT the place for the forum administrators to state their opinion. Again, they can objectively weigh in. They cannot appear on a side.

The "Don't buy the Xbox 360" post was bad because it was obviously negative. It was an article that was pasted into the XBOX 360 forum and was inflammatory in nature.

The forum is a forum for their READER's opinions. Not their own... unless they do it objectively, so as not to hurt the integrity of their website.

To quote a Forum Editor...

"Welcome to our new discussion forums. Since so many of you have left user comments for us on our various movie, game and music pages, we realized that many of you have a lot to say. And now, you have a place to say it. "

Again, this is not a forum created so Forum Editor's can pontificate or incite arguments or prove their points. This is a forum created so READERS can do all that.

(BTW, I actually didn't care when I read that posting... it just bugged me when I thought of it in combination with the Xbox 360 system blurb.)

It will be interesting to hear if a metacritic person has something to say about what is being discussed in this thread. Of course, if we don’t hear from such a person, we could conclude that you have won this argument, Gabe. After all, they really don’t have business posting any opinions in these forums according to you, right? ;-)

Okay, I'm not going to enter into the primary debate here, but i do have a bone to pick. In a launch line-up of 18 titles, there are 7 "A" range scores, 9 "B" range scores, and only 2 "C" range scores. My question is: how is this an "underwhelming" launch line up?

I concede that there is no Halo or Super Mario 64, and that the console is expensive, but a launch line up with a total of 16/18 games getting higher then at least a B- seems pretty damn good to me.

Now the 3DO - that was an underwhelming launch line up...

The reviews and the forums are two different things! A Metacritic staff member can do their job by being unbiased in selecting and adding reviews to the site how they are supposed to, and then express their own view in the forums. What is said in the forums has nothing to do with the metascores and reviews assigned on Metacritic.

Gabe, I see where you're coming from and your points are ligit - but you should know better than to start an argument like this. Honestly, it's going absolutely nowhere.

quote:

Originally posted by Cody K.:
You do make some valid points, Gabe. However… the only place I’ve ever noticed where the site administrators have voiced there opinion (other than in the forums – which is fair game) is in the “feature” spot near the top of the homepage.

Cody hit the nail on the head here. The editors always seem to comment on the general thrust of the reviews in that featured product spot. I've never seen any Metacritic reviews or opinons in any other section. I think Gabe might be a little annoyed/surprised in this instance because Metacritic rarely puts a game or game system in that featured spot. It's usually a movie or album that goes there, and as far as I can remember, there is always an opinion or evaluation of the trend of critics reviews. In any event, words like "underwhelming" and "isn't setting the world on fire" are hardly damning.

I've posted the blurb on several message boards, and many people have been surprised by the misinformed, biased opinions expressed on this seemingly unbiased website. To call the launch titles "underwhelming," then link to a list of reviews that shows no fewer than six titles with scores of 80 or higher is just ridiculous.

And what about the Revolution? Is it not a next-gen console all of a sudden?

The Games Editor has also added comments to reader reviews on this site. From those comments, it's clear that there is a strong pro-Sony bias behind these comments, if not the review calculations on this site.

quote:

Originally posted by jslithy:
I've posted the blurb on several message boards, and many people have been surprised by the misinformed, biased opinions expressed on this seemingly unbiased website. To call the launch titles "underwhelming," then link to a list of reviews that shows no fewer than six titles with scores of 80 or higher is just ridiculous.

Well… let’s take the top achievers (80% or higher) for the day one launch.

• Call of Duty 2 – 91% – Shooter
• Project Gotham Racing 3 – 88% – Racing
• Perfect Dark Zero – 87% – Shooter
• Need for Speed Most Wanted – 84% – Racing
• Peter Jackson’s King Kong – 81% – Action
• Condemned: Criminal Origins – 80% – Action

Looks like if you like shooters and racing games, you’ll be in 360 heaven. The bottom rung contains a couple of noteworthy action games. It’s unfortunate that the top 6 cover only 3 genres.

Call of Duty 2 was also released for the PC. As well, King Kong and Need For Speed were released across all current platforms… so you didn’t “need” to buy a 360 to play those games. That leaves 3 exclusives that make the system “worth” buying... which is why a lot of people are holding off on buying an Xbox 360 this year, myself included.

EDIT:

quote:

Originally posted by RayRay:
In any event, words like "underwhelming" and "isn't setting the world on fire" are hardly damning.

Oh, but they are RayRay… those words are insult to injury to those who are still waiting for their pre-orders to come in and to the thousands of 14 year-olds still frequenting their local EB Games asking… “is it in yet?” ;-)

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Echolocating,

quote:

Looks like if you like shooters and racing games, you’ll be in 360 heaven.

Do you realize that sports, racing and first person shooters were the most popular genres on the original Xbox? Of course they're going to load the launch lineup with those genres. And it's amazingly strong in those areas, too.

If you liked the types of games available for the Xbox, then there's no way you'll find the launch titles for the 360 "underwhelming."

Dollars to donuts that jslithy and Gabe are the same bitter dude. Making a mountain out of a molehile? BIAS!! pffft!

quote:

Originally posted by RayRay:
Dollars to donuts that jslithy and Gabe are the same bitter dude. Making a mountain out of a molehile? BIAS!! pffft!

You're real smart aren't you? DOLT!! pfft!

Because I'm sure there's no way that TWO people could have a similar opinion, right? I might as well say that RayRay and joji are the same person. But that would be foolish and irrelevant to even bring up, right?

How do you know I'm not Cody K and Gabe??? Pose a question and then prove myself to myself? Ooh wait... I could be Bill Gates himself and jslithy and Cody... in fact, I could own the site and actually be Paris Hilton. Oh, wait... that would be foolish and irrelevant too.

Way to really argue jslithy into the ground.

quote:

Oh, but they are RayRay… those words are insult to injury to those who are still waiting for their pre-orders to come in and to the thousands of 14 year-olds still frequenting their local EB Games asking… “is it in yet?” ;-)

And Cody K went from normal arguments to the insults of a full-on jerk. Congrats.

I step out for a day or two and the thread turns into fanboy arguments. Good job. You do the website proud.

<I'm out... permanently>

quote:

Originally posted by xXxGabexXx:
And Cody K went from normal arguments to the insults of a full-on jerk.

Hey! I resemble that remark! ;-)

-----

“isn't setting the world on fire"

Well… it ain’t setting the world on fire, but it’s trying to melt its own circuitry by occasionally overheating. Perhaps another reason to let the 360 frenzy cool down a little and wait until Microsoft offers an official statement as to the percentages of defective 360s.

http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&ta...iew&id=1712&Itemid=2