I agree with both points.

Has anyone here ever heard of Rebelstar : Tactical Command for GBA. It's a turn-based strategy game and I think it's a pretty good game, yet from what most magazines were saying (if anything at all about it) was that it was average at best.

Secondly I can't really remember ANY perfect scores from 15 years ago. The closest I ever saw it get was 99% for Super Mario All Stars (Total magazine). For me it really spoils the experience when there's too much hype around something. I'm expecting to have a religious experience when I play such games and be closer to enlightment when I beat the last boss. I hope we all remember what happened to Turok Evolution.

I AM HEAVY DEBTS, NO WAY YOU CAN PAY ME,

I feel bad for people who won't be able to find Wii in stores this christmas but are desperately in need to play Super Mario Galaxy.
anyone here who has such a dilemma?

Personally I think it's kind of silly to expect it to even be possible to have "perfection" in any art form.  There's way too much subjectivity.  I think games need to have something like the four star movie system, or maybe just a five point system.  That way the cream of the crop can get a 4 or 5 and the worst stuff can get a 1.  Personally I don't even really put too much stock into the numbers attached to reviews - the text is a heck of a lot more important.  Even better... talk to people you actually know who understand your personal gaming tastes.

Depends on what you're reading. In 99% of cases where I question the usefulness or integrity of a review, I've found the text is as useless and mundane as the numbers (normally along the lines of "Yeah, we gave THIS game THIS score and HERE'S why...Booyah!" or "We gave this game a perfect score and you can plainly see that, so we filled this review space with stupid attempts at humor and enough words to fill the rest of the page up because this game's so effin' good, we couldn't objectively attempt to review it")

I miss Gamefan because their numbers were beyond idiotic, but the writing was just so over-the-top, it ended up being the most informative insight I had on most of the games they covered. You could tell they didn't care about pissing off the game companies (probably why they're not around anymore).

I've stopped reading all reviews and magazines since the UK official Nintendo Mag was taken over by trendies. I trust my own judgement and experience at being able to discern between the good and the crap games out there. Seems to be working at the moment. I got caught out by Far Cry Vengeance though:(

I don't really agree with you GoldfishX. Although I DO think that perfect scores are thrown about easier these days, but perhaps this is exactly because many people have come to understand that a "perfect" score doesn't necessarily stand for a perfect game (which is impossible in the first place), just for one that is extremely significant or well-made. I have learned to read it as such at least.

Also, God of War came pretty much out of nowhere, didn't it? Got nothing but 10/10s as far as I recall.
What about Ico? Scored insanely high as well.

If there is a tendency for big companies to recieve perfect scores, it's because they know what they're doing, that's why they became big. They actually have talent behind them in most cases, although most people are too jaded to admit it nowadays.

Also, Gran Turismo garbage!? Then you don't like racing games obviously. Or you like more arcade style racing games, that's possible, but noone in his right mind could call a game like GT garbage. Not liking something does not equal it to garbage. People have to learn differentiating their opinion from fact. Whether you like GT or not is up to you, there's no accounting for taste, but it cannot be considered garbage by any standards, that's insane.

So let's say a Fire Emblem would only get say 9/10 while a Mario game scores 10/10. The ratings given to games are based on the opinions of the reviewer and his/her attempt at objectively reviewing a game. ALL reviews are based on opinion, to a greater or lesser extent, through generally assumed knowledge. Knowledge which the non-gaming public does not possess. NO-ONE is able to produce a completely unbiased review yet (tainted through experience) most VG reviewers blatantly display signs of fanboyism and lack of objectivity in their articles. What makes FE a 9 and a Mario game a 10? The answer is the reviewer's understanding of gaming qualities and necessities that may, or may not, enable that game to be more enjoyable for more people.

Perfect scores are NOT given out to games that are head and shoulders above the rest, just to games that the reviewer enjoyed and how much they think others will enjoy it.

I don't see many perfect scored RTS games out there, do you?

I AM THE PAIN, AND I KNOW YOU CAN'T TAKE ME.

This thread has officially been HIJACKED!

So what? I started it, and I don't care if it goes off-topic. I like this discussion actually.

@ Ephidel: RTS's suck, I'm afraid you're going to have to live with that

As for reviewers, yes of course that is only the opinion of one person, that's why you should never stick to just one site or magazine only. Always look at multiple reviews if you're going to dig into a game. Gamerankings.com is perfect for finding out the general consensus, so I always check some reviews through there.
The Famitsu Cross-review system is also pretty good in that respect, although their reviews are far too short and, well, biased. But the system is good. Getting the opinion of 4 people is better than just one.

I think my explanation makes more sense. There's simply more advertising revenue to be made nowadays than back in the 80's/early 90's when perfect scores were extraordinarily rare, so what's a little .5 or 1 boost? If anything, I think reviewers have gotten lazier while the games have gotten longer, resulting in sort of a double-whammy as far as gaming journalism goes (especially in regards to deadlines).

Um, I don't really get the tone of this...I'm not saying they don't have talent or the games suck because they're high-profile, I'm just saying reviewers devote more time and energy to high profile games and are already expecting to give them a higher score, somewhat resulting in a very noticably double standard in both the text/information given and the numerical value (an unwritten reviewer's tilt, if you will). Case in point: High profile games normally get a full 1-page review on Game Informer, while the lower profile games get these cute little say-nothing mini-reviews, which fit 5-6 on a page. They've just been hyped up enough for the higher-profile stuff (and have more stuff easily written, due to cover stories and such), then they just kind of do some of the rest very half-assed, which isn't an exception among gaming publications I'm afraid.

You're in Europe, right (or Japan...sorry, I forget)? God of War was pretty heavily hyped over here in the US, IIRC. I know Game Informer did a massive cover story on it and there was a long-running commercial for it and it was one of the most talked-about games when it came out. Ico was more of a sleeper hit, but I don't recall too many perfect scores for it (I thought its' reception was lukewarm, actually...It was mentioned in nearly every review I read how short it was and that was kind of the focus that it was a great rental than anything).

Do a back search for posts about it and you'll see what I mean. Most people here consider them garbage. I love arcade racers, but I consider the GT games nearly unplayable, from the retarded licenses tests (which reviewers magically flock to as a great idea, while they'd be torn apart for stupidity in a lesser game) to the actual racing. Hence = garbage. I notice you're not shy about saying the same about RTS games. So, uh, yeah...

Reviewers have definitely gotten lazier and the VG industry is getting more lucrative by the day. Here's another insignificant yet great game, Freedom Fighters, a cross platform last gen release. I admit I thought I was gonna vomit (freedom and democracy and all that), but the game turned out to be great (Russia invades NYC WHOOOAAAHH!!!).

I live in Europe but, like I said in a different thread, I'll never sleep with a non-nintendo console. As for RTS games, are you trying to say BWii is crap? Hmmmm... a big, therefore great (according to amazingu anyway), company releases A CRAP GAME!!?!? Kinda smashes your logic doesn't it.

LOOK OVER YOUR SHOULDER, READY TO RUN,
LIKE A CLEVELAND BITCH FROM A SMOKING GUN!

(No offence intended to people from Cleveland. I didn't write the lyrics).

HIJACKED! I say COMMANDEERED!

then why are you posting this?
kind of out of context to our discussion.

You may not have noticed but it's a stream of consiousness in my posts in this thread. Can't get this outta my head.

I AM THE GAME AND I MAKE THE RULES,
SO MOVE ON OUTTA HERE AND DIE LIKE A FOOL,

that's exactly why it seems unnecessary but if you can't help it's ok.

moving right along,

2 days untill mario hits store shelves,

I'm finishing Super Paper Mario (terrific game) right now so timing couldn't be better.

When I wasn't paying attention did this forum implement a thing where you only gain access to some feature after you've posted a whole bunch of times or something?  O.o

(ephidel ponders the possibility he has tourette's)

5 days 'till SMG lands here. I get an adrenaline rush whenever I think about this gaming christmas. This should've happened last year.

Like I've said before, O'Chunks definitely needs to be an Assist Trophy in SSBB. There has always be something very appealing about the Paper Mario games. Anyone remember the master from Paper Mario on the N64?

TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT MY MOVE'S GONNA BE,
COME ON OVER, SUCKER, WHY DON'T YOU ASK ME?

I don't care much for racing games, so I don't know about GT, but I really liked Wind Waker. It wasn't quite on the same level as Ocarina and Majora's Mask, but that's an absurdly high standard. I'd call it a 9/10.

Majora's Mask was better for me, the underlying, dark atmosphere was very immersive. The morbid became the intriguing. As for Wind Waker I would have given it an 8, BUT Ganondorf DIES and Hyrule is basically DESTROYED. Because of this I'd give it a 5. Miyamoto still hasn't straightened out the Zelda timeline or story. Not that I care nor that it actually matters.

DON'T YOU FORGET THERE'S A PRICE YOU CAN PAY,
'CAUSE I AM THE GAME AND I WANT TO PLAY.

Please stop that. It's distracting and is not helping the discussion.

I didn't know it was so annoying. Lemmy Kilmister ROCKS! Nuff said.

Actually I'll only stop if someone gives me a good answer to my new thread. Fair trade I think.

TIME TO PLAY THE GAME!

Honestly you guys are like kids, eyes drawn towards big letters and pretty pictures. You could just ignore it. Hardly crime of the century is it?

Dude, WTF!?  That comment wasn't meant for you to take it any kinda way.  Just a rhetorical statement.  Chill.

Like has been said in brandonk's open topic thread, we all take ourselves too seriously from time to time.

This and several others of your comments make you sound awfully trollish. I don't want to create a "we don't like strangers around these parts" kinda atmosphere, but you're very much being 'The New Guy' aren't you?

Hmmm... I don't use the internet very often and this, in fact, is the first forum I've ever joined. Most of my contributions have helped progress the discussion in a very untrollish way. The random rants are not done for malicious purposes so lighten up and stop being a child.

I hated Mario 64 and never got into Sunshine, yet I'm eagerly awaiting getting to play Galaxy. I'm still not completely sold on it, but from everything about the game, it really seems like it has fixed all of the mistakes of previous 3D Marios. This is even mentioned in the official Super Mario Galaxy interview series, which also has a very interesting section on the sound and music of the game. It really seems like the development team has learned from their mistakes on those earlier games, and while there is still a chance that Galaxy will end up a disappointment for some, it's definitely looking very promising in a way that SM64 and Sunshine never did.

I fully agree about sunshine being a flop. It was searching for the blue coins that really got to me, and the overall feel of the game that felt like it lacked substance and depth. However SM64 is a completely different story, though I guess the worlds did feel pretty barren, especially when compared with games nowadays. Still, it was a revolution in it's time, and I think the mario platformer franchise survived the transition from 2D to 3D gaming very well.

I've completely censored myself from any info about SMG so as not to spoil any bit of the game for myself.

I'm having a ridiculously great time with Galaxy.  The game is consistently making me go "wow!" on several occasions.  The sheer variety of planetoids guarantees that there's always something new to explore, and even the most simplest things, like waving the Wiimote around to collect Star Bits, is handled with maximum enjoyment. 

It's the graphics that's making the biggest impression on me, though. My eyes are melting from the incredible visuals and silky smooth framerate.  The gradual introduction of Mario staples, from environments to enemies alike, rendered in this gorgeous 3D is simply a treat.

I'm hating the Loopdeswoop Galaxy race, though.  I'm hating it so very much.

Does it play more like SM64 or Sunshine? How are the controls, do they react accurately? Is Chomp in the game because I think he/she/it missed out on Sunshine? I CANNOT WAIT UNTIL FRIDAY!! I hear FE : RD might not get an EU release, please Nintendo just confirm it IS getting an EU release! I personally would take Radiant Dawn over Galaxy any day of the week.

Seconded.  So glad I'm taking off next week to play it seriously.  I got the first four or five stars tonight and I love it so far.

Thirded.  I'm having such a blast with this damn game right now.  Like Angela mentioned, I can't get over how beautiful this game is... 60fps goes a LOOOOONG way.  The controls are super tight and the gravity physics are really trippin' me out.  I gotta get some sleep, but I'm gonna be back at it first thing in the morning before I have to leave the house.

*cries*

I'm begging for a Wii for Christmas. I recently got a 32" HDTV so I'm all ready for this generation of consoles.

(And I actually kinda liked Sunshine. It's no Mario 64 but what is?)

I hated that too... and I fear that won't be the last of those too.

I started playing this as soon as I got it today and didn't put it down until I had 26 stars.  I knew it would be good, but I'm kind of stunned as to HOW good it is.  One of my friends who hasn't played it yet asked "Evolutionary or revolutionary?" and I think the game is kind of both.  There are things going on in it that I've never experienced before, and yet the nostalgia (especially Mario 3 stuff) is in overdrive.  My biggest disappointment right now is that I only have 94 stars left to go, and that's not nearly enough for as much as I'm loving the experience.

Fourth...eded? I only played for a half hour, but it's amazing. It was a little disorienting at first, but the game is ridiculously good already. I'm taking my sweet time with this one. I heard that savoring a game and playing it slowly was the new playing-obsessively-for-ten-hours-a-day.

Hey, I thought you didn't want to be spoiled? ;)  Ah well.  Amazingu already described the controls in the very first post, and ol' Chomp is indeed in the game.

You're right, it's not apparently; I should correct myself in stating that "Loopdeswoop" is a later galaxy of the same mold, while "Loopdeloop" is the first race.  Yeah, I looked ahead in the guide.   

This is! ^_^