EGM Review Scores - Jan 2006 Issue

[Hetz]

Here are the latest review scores from the brand new EGM that has the first 360 reviews.

360:

Madden 06- 8,7.5,8
Condemned - 7,6,8.5
Call of Duty 2 - 8.5,9,9
Kameo - 6,6,7
Amped 3 - 7.5,8.5,8.0
Need for Speed: MW - 7,7.5,7.5
NBA Live 06 - 8,7.5,7
NBA2K6 - 6,7,5
Ridge Racer 6 - 6,6,7.5

PS2/Xbox

King Kong - 8.5,8.5,9
The Matrix Path of Neo - 7,8,4.5
007 : From Russia With Love - 6.5,6,6
Shadow the Hedgehog - 6.5,5,4
GUN - 8,7.5,6
Need for Speed: MW - 8,7.5,7
True Crime NY - 3.5,6,5.5
Magna Carta - 7.5,6,5.5
WWE Smackdown vs Raw 2006 - 6.5,8,7

Xbox :

Half Life 2 - *Game of the Month* - 9,9,9.5
Operation Flashpoinit:Elite - 8.5,7,8.5
Stubbs the Zombie - 8.5,8.5,9

Next Month is Issue 200, which will have a story on the 200 greatest games of all time in it.

[Captain Caveman]

How the hell does NBA Live outscore NBA2k6? All reports I hear indicate the former is one of the worst launch titles, and the latter is one of the best. Also, why the mediocre scores for Kameo?

[Dante Rising]

Those scores for kameo and Condemned are simply absurd. I don't even really enjoy the genre in which Kameo resides, but I'm willing to admit that it is a fantastic game. Both titles deserve a rating in the 8-9 neighborhood.

[Canuck]

Everyone knows EGM is a piece of garbage magazine.  I wouldn't read one even if someone gave it to me.

[JayG]

Very harsh on the 360 games. They can't be that bad.;

[Arkon]

In no way should Kameo be rated that low.  Does it deserve 9's?  No, but it does deserve 8's for sure.  Same with NBA2k6.... how they rated it that low is just plain absurd.  Condemned I would agree with the 7-8 range, but not a 6.  The NBA Live review is way too high.

[Tebunker]

EGM seems to be harsh just to be harsh on a lot of games, and then when something like GTA comes around they bend over and forgive all of it's shortcomings because it has the "killar stories and ausome sandbox gameplayz".

They are incredibly inconsistent in their reviews, with some scores going from 5 to 9 and each reviewer giving a completely different experience. I wish they'd drop the whole three score crap, and let one or two people devote some serious time to a game and give me a better write-up with more useful info.

As it is, aren't all reviews pretty much crap? Aren't you just going to find the few people that you have similar tastes to and listen to their reviews? See, reviews are all subjective and nearly impossible to be objective. I just use them as a reference tool, because I've played many a game that's gotten a 5 review, which is generally accepted as Average on a ten point scale, and had a lot of fun with them.

That brings up my last point, look at the scale and understand that on a ten point scale in EGM, IGN etc. a 5 is an average game with a 6 or 7 being ABOVE Average. We are all condition for some reason to think that a game that scores under an 8 sucks. It's a shame, like I said I've gotten hours and hours of enjoyment out of so called average games, and usually gotten them for less money than the "triple A" titles.