引用:

原帖由 xiaoyang 于 2006-11-16 07:17 发表
我想，那是因为毕竟是第一个登台的新世代主机的首发作品，带来的感官刺激也会比较强烈，
然后一年过去了，类似的作品也不少了，那种激动和感受就会弱了很多了。
评分的起点就会稍有不同了。

9分意味着什么？意味着GamePlay和Tilt都是9分。Tilt基本上拿钱就可以买，但是Game Play要给PDZ 9分的话也就没有天理了。
游戏中AI糟糕到不行，画面特效滥用，干扰射击，战斗单调。
说没拿钱买，我是绝对不信。

抵抗的Review还没开始看，但是看到The bad的第一句我就崩溃了。Derivative visual style and gameplay is well crafted but mostly unoriginal，意思就是：视觉风格和游戏性都做到位了，但是绝大多数不是原创。现在什么年代了？哪个游戏不都是四处借鉴？我还要说GOW的视觉风格借鉴Unreal Tournamant和Doom3，GamePlay借鉴GR3呢。

http://www.gamespot.com/ps3/acti ... 1971&pid=928399

233max，Gamespot上的读者也不能忍这个SB Reviewer了。说起来Greg还是一个有点名气的Reviewer，所以丫的肯定收了微软的钱。

引用:

Their reviews are supposed to rate the game compared to all other games on that CONSOLE/SYSTEM unless it is a multiplatform game.  So if Greg is comparing Gears to a PS3 launch title then the whole rating system is complete crap.

"We rate games on a scale of 1 (the absolute worst) to 10 (the absolute best). The rating we assign to each game is intended to give you an at-a-glance sense of the overall quality of the game relative to other games on the same platform. However, we encourage you to read our full reviews to give context to our ratings. Our ratings are generated from the component scores that our reviewers assign. That means the overall rating is not a pure average of five component scores--some components are weighted more heavily than others. GameSpot has consistently applied this same rating formula since we started. "

O RLY!!!!

See for yourself http://www.gamespot.com/misc/reviewguidelines.html

Gamespot loses all credibility after this review.

这个是其中的一个回帖，甚至搬出了GameSpot网站上的Review Rule。说是Greg给抵抗的分数公然抵触了GameSpot的Review Rule。

[ 本帖最后由 暴走男 于 2006-11-16 10:23 编辑 ]

引用:

原帖由 slowsonic 于 2006-11-16 10:46 发表

只是Cows damage controls罢了，Ign得AAA 然后到Gamespot 就Flop的游戏多了去了，当初的Fable，Prey，360的Fear，MGS3，分裂3，吉他英雄，哪次不是一堆人闹？

当初Jade Empire在Ign 9.9，到了gamespot不一 ...

不过也有一些游戏只在GameSpot得到垂青，比如PDZ。IGN给了8.4，就连OXM也只给了8分，到了Greg大神的嘴里，就变成了9分

引用:

原帖由 slowsonic 于 2006-11-16 11:00 发表

神之手在GS就有8分多，在IGN才3分，Kingdom Hearts 2也是Gs高很多，这些只是Review--based on one editor，不能保证绝对公正，但分数一不合心意要说Reviewer Sb了，不公平了，那为何还要去看这篇Review at fi ...

GS早就在自己的Review Rule里面定下了

"We rate games on a scale of 1 (the absolute worst) to 10 (the absolute best). The rating we assign to each game is intended to give you an at-a-glance sense of the overall quality of the game relative to other games on the same platform. However, we encourage you to read our full reviews to give context to our ratings. Our ratings are generated from the component scores that our reviewers assign. That means the overall rating is not a pure average of five component scores--some components are weighted more heavily than others. GameSpot has consistently applied this same rating formula since we started. "

所以什么PDZ因为发售的早所以得9分，抵抗发售晚所以得8.6的理论，你想可以。Greg想就是抽GameSpot自己的耳光。
如果PDZ是和抵抗素质差不多的游戏，这样或许还是可以理解。问题是事实就是是怎样呢？Greg实在在抵抗中挑不出毛病了，才给了“Underdeveloped characters", "Unoriginal"的借口。而PDZ如此低劣的制作，敌人白痴一样AI，毫无新异的武器设定，也能拿9分。这个Reviewer不***是什么？

引用:

原帖由 slowsonic 于 2006-11-16 11:19 发表

这一大段哪里说时间对游戏水平没影响了？

Review的时候只参照该平台上的游戏。所以抵抗评分时候只能和PS3同期游戏做比较。