For me, the Half-Life IP (from the first game, through to EP.2) is still the king of FPS's. Just don't play the console versions!

The game i'm looking most forward to this year is Black Mesa. I would mention HL2 EP.3, but that won't happen this year.

Good post and kudos for doing the research. Anyway, to add my two cents...

I wonder if readers of VOGUE get quite so wound up by review scores issued to shampoos? No way is Head & Shoulders a 10 when Herbal Essences only got 8 - for example!

I can't understand why people get so wound up by a review score. If you read EMPIRE (a mag about films) a maximum five stars implies that a film is really good and definately worth a watch. there's no implication that it's the best film ever or even that it's better than something else in a different genre. It's merely a quick indication that it's worth your time. What more can you possibly want from a review than that?

A review is simply an opinion, you don't have to agree with it. But surely if you buy EDGE for the reviews, then you must have some faith in its opinions - otherwise, why not just get Official Playstation Magazine and just read what you want to hear?

i want to point out that i strongly disagree with the content of the Kill Zone 2 review, not the score.

i think 7/10 is a solid score and here are my reasons:
Kill Zone 2 is a FPS, therefore it's not reinventing anything, thus no way it's getting a 10 (it's off topic, but i think Halo 3 and GTA 4 don't deserve full socre for the same reason);
Kill Zone 2 is a conventional FPS, it doesn't reinvent anything within the genre, thus i don't think it deserves a 9 either;

so i think a 7 or a 8 is a fair score for the title, we just have to accept that Edge was more dissapointed by the cons than they're pleased with the pros.

however, i do have mix feelings for Edge's review. Metal Gear Solid 4 gets 8/10 and GTA 4 and Halo 3 gets 10/10? i'd like to hear the review writer say it to me face to face, that GTA 4 and Halo 3 were better than MGS 4 in every single aspect (surely, if something gets a full score, it must better all that don't). i mean, com'on, MGS 4 better any game in presentation.

PS. i'm not complaining about MGS 4 getting an 8, again, i think that's a solid score. i just can't accept it while other games, which clearly are way behind MGS 4 in certain aspects, get full scores.

In response to Midnightshade and Tycalibre (tyCalibre first) - I think it is brave because a lot games magazines/sites would fear the kind of backlash this review would generate - and if Edge honestly thought it was a 7, it was 'brave' of them to say so. Also, a lot of games journo's these days seem to have lost thier balls! For example 'Eurogamer.net (which I read quite a lot of articles on, and respect) seem to be giving everything an 8 at the moment. For me, that's a safe score. Good enough to not enrage the fanboys, yet not so good that it puts it into another realm of quality.

As for Midnightshades comments. I did say in my post, that I'm not in favour of any of the consoles in particular. To say I'm a MS Fanboy is unfair firstly.

I think you mis-understood what I was saying about the headstart. I meant that dev teams for the 360 have had an extra year of creating 'Next Gen' games, which is a significant amount of time. All developers take time to get used to the new hardware, and with a few exceptions, a lot of games released earlier in a consoles life are not as good as those released later on. That year means game devs for the 360 have a headstart over thier PS3 rivals. I'm not saying an extra 12 months guarentees better games, but it certaily helps to created technically tighter games, that exploit the new consoles extra grunt (be it in graphics, size of play area or AI). Also, there's going to be a years worth of extra games on the console (some that will be pap, but some that may be quite decent).

At the end of the day, it's down to taste and choice. I feel, as a multiplatform gamer there are more games on the xbox that I want to play (just), but that some of the PS3 exclusives are better (LBP).

SO there you have it.

It's all rubbish - people soon forget the 'Has the XBox 360 had it?' article of last year etc...
That sparked plenty of accusations of bias - but there have been plenty of people having issues with Edge's scoring system for years.. but it's only ever the single platform titles that cause this kind of stupid furore..

There sure as hell weren't as many complaining about the 5's recieved by Prince of Persia, Mirrors Edge or Saint's Row 2 (All with 80+ marks on MetaCritic) - in fact many would agree that upon time and reflection the 5's weren't that far off - (Though I'd personally disagree with the SR2 review as I had an immense amount of fun playing it)..

Who knows - maybe time will make people realise that Killzone 2 isn't the Second Coming?

The 360 has been out longer, has this made us more positive to the console? WIth the large amount of people that have a 360, and enjoy it, there are more games on 360 that are aimed at the core audience. Halo fans aren't going to turn to Killzone 2 for a better game, are they?

Firstly, as many people have stated, the game's not even out yet, so shouldn't this debate be postponed til then? (and demos don't count - they're not representative of a whole game).

Secondly, Edge have stated before that there scoring system reflects originality, technical polish and over-all gameplay. Chances are Killzone 2 is a very polished, but thoroughly standard FPS, launched at a time when there are many, many other great FPS's already on the market (most with an original feature or hook). Killzones hype was around the amazing graphics (mostly), but when the novelty of those have worn off, will the gameplay stand up?

Thirdly, as for bias, has anyone thought that the PS3 just might not have the range and depth of quality games yet? A year head start is a big deal, particularly at this stage of the development cycle. The PS3 may or may not get there, but ATM the 360 just edges it on overall range of games (the PS3 has some outstanding games, but on average the 360 probably has more good games)...

Lastly, none of this will probably be read properly as there's no way to fight the fanboys! Nothing wrong with it, but reader bias will always taint this debate (just so you all know, I have all the consoles and have had phases of 'loving' each of them).

Personally I respect Edge and always have. It's a brave thing to give a game like this a 7, whether it's right or wrong!

I find it kind of odd that Edge skewers criticism of their KZ2 review in their columns, and then publishes a reader article that defends them. Seriously, if you're going to defend yourself, just publish an article/editorial explaining your views or or add an update to the KZ2 review. This indirect defense of yourself makes it seem like you're either: (a) embarassed, (b) just trying to get more hits; or (c) all of the above.

That said, I don't actually think Edge is biased against the PS3. I think the site, as a whole, is decent, but their reviews stink in general. There is a complete lack of consistency in their reviews. The KZ2 review just happens to be a glaring example of that inconsistency.

Hello Alex,

First time poster on here. I just thought I'd weigh in on the debate.

I completely trust Edge on their judgement with regards to the score, I have no complaints about that and I can fully understand that everyone has an opinion, including the reviewer. Most people whining about the review will only look at the score and take that relative to other publications, but I have always read the actual writing behind the score to understand it. However, I do think that Edge have been rather bad with their review content as of late. The Killzone 2 review is a very good example of where Edge need to improve. I've been a long time reader of the magazine (first issue I bought must've been back in 96 or something) and I can't help but feel that Edge seem to forget that the reader has not played the game, or at least fully.

Reading the K2 review, the writer has focused on so many aspects of the game but completely fails to mention key elements. It's only because I've played the demo that I know that Killzone 2 is unique with regards to its weighty feel and cover based gameplay. These are either not mentioned, or skimmed over. Considering the developers have put so much effort into the development of these features, it seems strange for a review to focus on storyline. Of course, it's very hard for me to counter any point that Edge makes, as I have not played more than the demo and for all I know, there is no gameplay after the first chapter and so it makes sense to focus on other aspects, but this still needs to be mentioned.

To me, that is the real reason for the outcry. We've all played Gears, we've all played Halo 3 and we've all played Call of Duty. None of these games are starlets at imagination or storyline, yet because the review has failed to differentiate what brings the score down for Killzone 2 compared to the other games, people accuse the magazine of bias.

This is the reason why Edge is now a supplement review, usually an anchor score so I don't bite the hype, rather than my sole information supply. We are not informed enough, the justifications behind the scores (which regardless of what people say, are important to me as it will effect where my money goes) are not clear.

Cheers,
Benny

Bottom line; you can't argue numbers. Unless the numbers that were posted in this blog were inaccurate (I don't think edge would have highlighted this blog if they weren't) they proof is right there. A difference of a mere 3 points is not biased and if the games that happen to have a gross difference between the Edge and Metacritic scores that also happen to be games you feel strongly about (whether you've played them or not ^^) that's just you getting your feelings hurt, not clear and blatant bias on Edge's part.

Edge is a piece of crap. Look...... they gave DOAX2 a five. That game really deserved half a point 1/2 . I find that personally offensive. IMO killzone 2 looks pretty bland

fanboys of any hardware really start to make me feel ashamed to be interested in the same hobby sometimes (and a hobby is all it is people!), I can positively feel my IQ dropping the more replies to the review I read, so I’ve decided to stop and leave a final comment of my own to part with.

is it worse than it used to be or does the power of the internet just make it all clearer to see?

If you have found yourself incensed by the 7/10 KZ2 score then it's time to ask yourself this question:
What difference does it really make to your life/enjoyment of the game/the future of the PS3?*

If you're still mad then forget the score and take from the review the message it clearly put forth (to me at least, a literate and unbiased reader):
"if you like FPS games then KZ2 is a very polished example "
do you really need any more of a recommendation?
do you really need somebody else to tell you that what you enjoy is "the best thing ever" before you can appreciate it fully?

*the answer of course is none
if you didn't arrive at this conclusion may I suggest you either have a screw loose or warped perspective of the real priorities in your life