The Sony PS3 has the best games, according to a study of the average review scores given to games. The study of Metacritic.com’s averages of game site and magazine review scores found that 60 per cent of Sony PS3 games were rated as good or better (above 70 out of 100 average score), compared to 50 per cent of Microsoft Xbox 360 games and a mere 35 per cent of Nintendo Wii games.

The study, by Silicon Era, also showed that 46 per cent of Sony PSP games were rated good or better, 39 per cent of Nintendo DS games. From the last generation of consoles, 55 per cent of Microsoft Xbox games were good or better, 52 per cent of Nintendo GameCube games and 49 per cent of Sony PS2 games.

Of course, these comparisons are hardly fair. The Sony PS2 had many times more games released for it than its competitors – and as many were quick cash-ins on its popularity, it suffered in average review scores as a result.

Current generation review scores taken from videogame websites that cater to hardcore players could also easily see some bias introduced. Many games came out on Sony PS3 later, as the machine was launched later, allowing games companies time to add extra features, polish visuals and otherwise improve the game over the Microsoft Xbox 360 version. And the Sony PS3 was widely considered the worst-performing of the three current generation consoles until recently. It’s conceivable specialist writers for PS3 sites were marking up games to bolster Sony PS3 fans’ sense of having chosen the right console etc.

So, while it’s interesting that the Nintendo Wii seems to be clearly home for some of the worst games of the current generation, the other results need a pinch of salt taking with them.

  • MarkG

    If anything, the mostly American review sites give PS3 games a poor score, and favor “the American console”…

    For example, Uncharted Drakes Fortune. Clearly a 9+/10 yet dwindling in the low 80′s

    Killzone2, vastly superior in both online and offline to anything the 360 offers, yet lower score than Halo3? Come on… If anything the 360 has had the luxury of overrated scores, as for the patriotic reasons mentioned above and fact the early launch meant that tech writers were established Xbox owners before the PS3 launched mean it had an army of overzealous fans…

    I won’t even go into Microsoft dubious tactics of encouraging glowing reviews of Xbox games by holding guns to review blogs heads with Advertising budget threats…

  • http://www.gravatar.com Simon Munk

    Mark,

    Can’t agree more with you about Uncharted – a game cruelly underscored and overlooked. And for me, one of the few must-haves on the PS3.

    Can’t disagree with you more re: Killzone 2. Simply put, while it looks awesome, it plays distinctly average. I think many reviewers felt the same.

    So, while I appreciate there could well be reasons for reviewers scoring X360 games higher than they should be scored, I don’t quite buy it myself. For instance, many (particularly of the early) multi-platform releases have been criticised on the PS3 for problems – choppy framerates, online issues etc. This should presumably have factored into the scores. Plus X360 exclusives – there are very few that are out-and-out rubbish, while many are absolutely excellent.

    In all, there’s something going on here – but what exactly it is, your guess is probably as good as mine!

    Si M

  • Mornelithe

    Agreed MarkG, I’m especially tickled at how the writer infers that reviewers of Sony games have unfairly marked up their review scores, simply to appease the masses. This writer apparently hasn’t read the plethora of hate that spews forth from North American ‘analysts/reviewers’. To be perfectly honest, I don’t care if it’s a conspiracy or not, I’m just shocked that Mr Munk here, completely avoids discussing that issue.

    Seriously, take a look at how the industry has treated Sony, in this generation. Every single time a blockbuster title is about to launch…someone starts a ‘rumor’ about a price cut. Which completely bombs their hardware sales, because people are cheap. Yeah, that’s right, you’re all cheap. Get jobs, get a second job, etc… or don’t. Seriously, I don’t care what you do, but quit bitching about the PS3′s price. It’s a cheap buy for what it delivers out of the box. Period.

    So, sorry Simon, but this article is less than drivel. It’s outrageous and completely ignores what’s been occuring within the media in North America. Way to go Xbot.

    Morne

  • Toby Knight

    “I’m especially tickled at how the writer infers that reviewers of Sony games have unfairly marked up their review scores, simply to appease the masses.”

    Well, look what happens when a reviewer dares to give a AAA PS3 title a less than perfect score – fanboy faces glowing hotter than a thousand suns.

    The PS3′s price *is* a factor for many people. Yes, you get a cheap Blu-Ray player and capable media centre… but that isn’t what most people want, evidently.

  • http://www.gravatar.com Simon Munk

    Morne,

    “I’m just shocked that Mr Munk here, completely avoids discussing that issue.”

    I guess I’m not widely enough read of the specific US media you’re referring to. Most US specialist sites (the ones whose scores form the bulk of Metacritic’s averages – not small blogs) employ writers specifically to work across one hardware platform (see IGN, GameSpy etc.). These guys like the console they write for – PS3 reviewers review PS3 games on the sites because they like Sony’s console; ditto X360 reviewers.

    I have personally yet to see a *serious* journalist or analyst spout the kind of bias you seem to be accusing them of. Many fanboys and bloggers do – on both sides of the console war. But that’s a whole different issue – and not relevant to how Metacritic scores play out.

    I’m not personally sure where and how bias does work in US games sites. I’m just saying it personally surprised me that PS3 games are outstripping X360 games – and I’m looking for an answer.

    As a player, reviewer and commentator on both consoles and with no axe to grind about either, it strikes me as surprising – considering the widely-reported problems with many multi-platform games on the PS3 and some of the key exclusives being reviewed as disappointing – that PS3 games are scoring higher.

    As to the PS3′s price: “It’s a cheap buy for what it delivers out of the box.” I cannot agree. The PS3 is a massive bargain if you want a Blu-ray movie player and a videogame console. But if you just want to play games, it’s a very over-the-top price. I’m not surprised people are “bitching” about it at all.

    Finally, I’d ask both of you, Morne and MarkG – which console do you own? Or do you own both? Calling me an “Xbot” certainly nails your fanboy flag to the mast, Morne. The whole X360 v PS3 debate desperately needs greater objectivity and clarity. Calling people names just because they own a different console from you (reminder: I own both) is absolutely idiotic.

    Si M

  • DirtyDubs

    I must say that I agree with Simon Munk here. Although I dont know the motives behind the scores, the way the pole is conducted is obviously flawed. The majority of my best games would be on the 360 and I dont turn on the PS3 much.

    @MarkG – I haven’t played Drakes F. yet but I honestly cant agree with you in relation to Killzone. I’ve only played KZ2 for about 4 hours but it is simply not as good as Halo(online)/Gears etc. It is good, very good but not great.

    @Mornelithe – Are you for real? Get a second job? In a time when getting one job is hard enough for people, you expect them to somehow fund getting an overpriced recreation tool. I can only presume (hope) that you are being sarcastic and that your childish, unobjective verbal diahoria is an attempt at being humourous.

  • http://www.drudgereport.com Jonathan

    Seeing as how the Xbox 360 has 585 games reviewed, and the PS3 only has 302 games reviewed. . .

    That means that even with Xbox’s lower Percentage, they still have 123 MORE games rated higher than 70 than the PS3 has.

    So this process of comparing is just completely stupid and the only way to view this so that Sony is a winner.

  • Kristian

    Edge and Eurogamer to name a few who mark PS3 exclusives lower yet xbox 360 ones higher. And get real with the “I own both consoles” talk, its obvious you were subtly hinting that you felt it was unfair that the PS3 had higher rated games than your beloved Xbox. Look at how they both rated MGS4

  • PS3Owner

    Exactly, it’s fashionable to hate the PlayStation this gen, especially in America! Maybe it’s because of the recession and people thinking keeping money within their borders is somehow better than giving it to a Japanese company (although obviously the Wii is the big exception to that rule!)?

    If anything PS3 game ratings are marked down for nothing more than not being an Xbox game, and despite what features get added to ex-360 games they are often marked down anyway just because the reviewer played it already on their 360!

    I find it amazing, given the circumstances and media hatred, that these figures are so good. I also saw in a different piece of analysis that the PS3 has more 85-100 rated games than the 360 (number of titles, not % of titles available).

    To Simon, I disagree about KillZone 2, yes it doesn’t re-invent the wheel (it was never meant too) and you won’t be playing the single player campaign for it’s excellent story, but it’s a quality shooter. There can be no denying that the 32-player online with extensive clan support, match making, tournament support, class/rank support and online website interfacing and playback facilities make it one of the best online FPS games available on any platform.

    It’s what makes me laugh about die-hard LIVE supporters – they love paying MS $50 a year but in return get no dedicated servers, get no innovation in the online space, limited user-created content support, download caps, and a 24-player cap. PSN meanwhile gets no caps and limits, embraces user content, innovates with things like KZ2′s website replay feature that stores data for every game you play, and offer online games supporting 32-60 players, and later this year we’ll see the first console MMO’s and a game supporting 256 players on a map! It’s typical Sony style innovating and taking risks to move the industy forward, whereas MS are happy to sit back and rake in the subscription and licence fees, doing as little as possible as and when necessary to refresh their revenue streams – they’ve been doing this in the software and OS space for years.

    If you want to talk about average FPS games talk about Halo 3 – here is how it’s 10/10 score breaks down: 7 for the game, 2 for being called Halo, 1 for the $40 Million advertising campaign MS paid for. The amount of money MS paid over the last two gens to make HALO what it is could support a small Country for a year! This is why the US seem to struggle with PS3 exclusives and continue with the myth that it has none – it seems to me that Americans think if it doesn’t have a $40 Million advertising campaign behind it it can’t be worth owning! Halo isn’t a bad game, but it is overrated – take away it’s marketing and it’s Halo branding and it’s a decent shooting with a couple of neat features, but it is by no stretch of the imagination a perfect 10/10 game (I often wonder what 360 fanboy reactions to games like Halo 3 would be like if they were hypnotised into thinking it is a PS3 exclusive – I bet their opinions of it would be somewhat different!).

    It will also be interesting to see how the above statistics change after 2009, Sony have an amazing lineup of exclusives in the pipeline, MS meanwhile are being unusually quiet about what they have to offer, aside from the Halo 3 Expansion.

  • harry coch

    The fact that you see ads for the same game on the reviews should be an indication of bias. IGN, Eurogame and many others are supported by ms.

  • PS3Owner

    @ Toby

    “The PS3’s price *is* a factor for many people. Yes, you get a cheap Blu-Ray player and capable media centre… but that isn’t what most people want, evidently.”

    Actually it is what over 21M people want, far more people than owned a 360 at the same point in it’s lifecycle. I love how Xbox fanboys account for time – this is especially evident in Europe where the 360 had an 18 month head start but now sales are virtually neck and neck.

    You don’t get a ‘cheap’ Blu-ray player you get what most critics still call the best Blu-ray player on the market, you also get a few more things like…

    FREE Online
    FREE Wi-Fi Connectivity
    FREE Rechargable Controllers
    FREE 80GB Harddrive
    OPEN SOURCE Connectivity without proprietary restrictions
    RELIABLE Hardware

    The fact is most ‘hardcore’ 360 fanboys have already spent far more on their 360 than they would buying a PS3 – be it for online, for their over priced addons and peripherals, for their HD-DVD drive, for repairs to their dodgy hardware quality, and in a few cases a completely new console when MS turned round and said ‘you know what maybe we will include a HDMI port and big HDD afterall’.

    Only MS could get away with knowingly launching FAULTY hardware before it was ready for no other purpose than to get market share over Sony from their headstart and dine out on the ‘statistics’ in press releases every month. And then launch an improved version later on and get the Xbots to willingly pay for another one.

    It amazes me how many Americans are blinded by their spin…

  • StonyK

    Is this article serious?
    Stating that the PS3 is high because of bias, then saying that it’s interesting that Wii games are so low.
    Am I missing something here?
    My mate thinks the PS3 is best and hates the Wii, but thats cos he owns a PS3 so is biased. It interesting how he doesn’t like the wii though!

  • Caboose

    PS3 games might have the highest average but there is still no good reason to get PS3. All of the PS3′s really good games (scored 85 and up) can be bought for the Xbox360 except for very few exceptions (MGS4, little big planet). Plus the Xbox360 pretty much has all of PS3′s good games and a bunch of exclusives of its own. So really the way to get the best the video game industry has to offer while saving as much as possible would be to get a XBox360 and a Wii while hoping your friend has a PS3 so u can play MGS4, otherwise u ignore the PS3.

  • http://www.getthings4free.co.uk Nursey86

    It’s hardly surprising that PS3 games are rated the best games around, and Wii games the worst.

    The Wii isn’t capable of delivering the same type of graphics and they’re aimed at making gaming fun amongst the entire family.

    I’ve owned both and the gaming experience is completely different – hardcore gamers will go for the PS3 / Xbox 360 and for family fun the Wii will be the ideal choice.

    Personally, I loved the Wii for it’s family interaction, but the PS3′s graphics were superb.

    Jury is still out on this review.

  • http://www.drudgereport.com Jonathan

    % of games guys . . . not total # . .

    go to Metacritic and add it up yourself, Xbox has 123 more games rated 70-100 than the PS3 does.

    This is a stupid article with a stupid comparison process.

  • http://www.gravatar.com Simon Munk

    Right – you lot have been busy over the weekend. So, to play catch-up…

    Kristian: “get real with the “I own both consoles” talk, its obvious you were subtly hinting that you felt it was unfair that the PS3 had higher rated games than your beloved Xbox.”

    I do own and like both consoles. I have liked more of the exclusives on Xbox 360 so far than on the PS3. Only Uncharted and LBP on PS3 really have set my hair on fire. Both Metal Gear and Killzone I found a bit meh to be honest. Comparatively, Mass Effect, Crackdown, Gears Of War 1 and 2, GTA IV DLC. Plus loads of stuff that the only alternative is PC or waiting for ages – eg Left4Dead, Bioshock, Elder Scrolls IV. That doesn’t make my Xbox 360 “beloved”. Both, IMHO, are simply plastic boxes that play games. I owe neither allegiance. It just happens that so far, IMHO, the 360 is home to the better games overall. And this appears not just to be my opinion, but of many other mainstream commentators I happen to know and trust. Plus there’s been loads of stuff about problems with multi-platform releases on the PS3. Given that, I’m surprised PS3 games are scoring better.

    PS3owner: “If anything PS3 game ratings are marked down for nothing more than not being an Xbox game”

    Several people on here have made assertions that the media “hate” the PS3. I would honestly ask any of them to produce links to mainstream media or large videogame sites that show clear and sustained bias against the PS3. This smacks, IMHO, of fanboy rumour-mongering – rather than any serious analysis of the media.

    “There can be no denying that the 32-player online with extensive clan support, match making, tournament support, class/rank support and online website interfacing and playback facilities make it one of the best online FPS games available on any platform.”

    Yup, it’s nice multi-player. You’ll get no argument from me here.

    “If you want to talk about average FPS games talk about Halo 3″

    Again, IMHO, Halo 1 wasn’t worth a 10/10 and none of its sequels have been either. You’ll notice Halo 3 is not in my list of must-haves for the 360 above.

    Harry Coch: “The fact that you see ads for the same game on the reviews should be an indication of bias. IGN, Eurogame and many others are supported by ms.”

    What a load of bs. The fact you see ads for the same game on the reviews indicates the sites are good at targetting ads to the readership. Where do you want an ad for Halo 3? Next to a review of the game. Same for Killzone 2. And again, while I’m sure all the sites you name and more take money from MS, they take from Sony too. Absolute rubbish.

    Jonathan: “Xbox has 123 more games rated 70-100 than the PS3 does.” Yes it does. But it also has many more games rated at the lower end than PS3. Because it has many more games rated overall. That’s why I picked the percentage of games rather than raw numbers. Both are available on the link-through.

  • http://www.drudgereport.com Jonathan

    But the comparison is stupid. It’s the only way you could show PS3 as a winner.

    Who cares if there are many more stinkers on the xbox as a percentage? Hell, by that logic the game system I just made in my garage is the best ever cause the 1 game released on it got a 100% . . . So everyone go buy my system, it’s the best because it has a higher percentage of good games.

    Dumb comparison in order to mislead the public that there are A GREATER NUMBER of good PS3 games.

  • http://www.drudgereport.com Jonathan

    The fact remains that the only reason the Xbox has more stinker games is because the Xbox has been made more accessible to the average programmer (BRAID), therefore anyone can put a game together and release it on XBLA.
    .
    Unlike PS3 where you have to have a team of 50 programmers who all have 4 years of programming experiance on PS2 and PS1, and 2 years on PS3 before they can create something for you that doesn’t suck and doesn’t cost 2,000,000 in development hours.

  • MarkG

    @Simon Munk

    You don’t need proof that most sites are pro-Xbox anti-PS3, you only have to read the tripe they post.

    As previously mentioned, the suspicious price drop rumours at exclusive PS3 game launches, the recent tripe about a peodophile that used a PS3 to send dodgy images, the FUD about nobody will be releasing on PSN because of the 16c/GB charge and so on.

    The list really is endless. It’s almost always total garbage, and almost certainly always starts out of a little office in Redmond/WA..

  • http://www.gravatar.com Simon Munk

    Jonathan: “Who cares if there are many more stinkers on the xbox as a percentage?” A lot of people I’m guessing. Anyone who, for instance, wants to buy a games console for their kids, but doesn’t know a lot about videogames. But, sure, hardcore gamers don’t need to care.

    Mark: “You don’t need proof that most sites are pro-Xbox anti-PS3, you only have to read the tripe they post.” Yes, yes you do need some form of proof – or at least a hell of a lot better than the vague waffle you put forward. For every price drop rumour about the PS3 (it *is* expensive – hence the rumours), there’s one about the Xbox 360 E74 issues or RRoD or whatever. The list is endless on both sides and if you’re telling me that Microsoft plays dirty PR while Sony is squeaky clean then you, sir, are deluded.

    Si M

  • http://www.drudgereport.com Jonathan

    But Simon . . . % says NOTHING.

    IF xbox had 8000 games and only 10% of them were good, that’s still 800 good games.

    total number is all that matters . . . and Xbox has 123 MORE games rated 70-100 . . . you don’t mention that in your article. Please update this.

    So someone buying an Xbox has 123 MORE options to get a good game.

    Not 5 . . not 6 . . 123.

    so nice try – please update your flamming PS3 fanbois post you suxxor.

  • http://www.r4-ds-karte.ch/ r4 revolution ds

    Good for those of us who have unwillingly sided with Microsoft until Sony gets cheaper. Lets hope it makes it’s way to the US, then to us in Europe. Ands lets hope the price stays down during that time…
    Otherwise, I look forward to a chaper PS3 to play the console specific games, like MGS4. Slow and steady wins the race, Sony.

Hot chat, right here!


Our most commented stories right now...