The following is a list of five games and their corresponding average review score found at GameRankings.com. Simply select from the following list for each:

1 Strongly Disagree
2 Disagree
3 Neutral
4 Agree
5 Strongly Agree

Need for Speed: Underground: 84%

Halo: 96%

Prince of Persia: 93%

Final Fantasy X-2: 87%

Deathrow: 80%

Need for Speed: Underground: 84%

Halo: 96%

Prince of Persia: 93%

Final Fantasy X-2: 87%

Deathrow: 80%

I don' t think you can really use that system. For example, does strongly disagree mean you think it should have been lower or higher?

Anyway:

Need For Speed Underground - spot on review score (great game, but not spectacular enough to hit the 90s)

Halo - should be slightly lower IMO. Again, a great game (can' t wait for the sequel) but I feel there were and are far better FPS games already available on PC. The repetitive indoor sections with endless corridors, the flood and the poor enemy variety mean this should have been about 80% IMO.

Prince of Persia - never played

Final Fantasy X-2 - never played

Deathrow - a horrendously overlooked game, but the 80% is probably about right. This deserved more " mainstream" recognition than it got, but the score here is pretty much on the money

Damnit, I forgot to add that part:

For future reference to other posters, in addition to your number score for disagree/agree, please indicate whether you believe the game should' ve scored higher or lower.

Prince of Persia - never played

And THAT is a tragedy of mythic proportions, IMO.

Hmm let' s see
NFS: Haven' t played this one but from previous ones I guess that score is about right.

Halo: I haven' t played enough of Halo to know how good it is but I think it probably should be a little less than 96% (maybe 90 or something)

PoP: Definatly deserves the high rating

FFX-2: I' m actually playing it right now and as of right now the 87 seems about right. After I play it some more we will see whether my opinion changes or not.

Deathrow: Never heard or played it

looking back on this thread I realise my mistake. I just saw Prince of Persia and assumed you meant the new PoP: Sands of Time game (which I haven' t played, but is meant to be ace). However, if you mean the original Prince of Persia (very old school, 2D platformer where you had to tip-toe through loads of spikes all the time) which I now believe you mean, then I have played it. The score of 93% for that game I would " strongly agree" with. The controls are just spot on and the graphics were great for the time.

The game also saw release on just about every machine/console under the sun. For the record I played the Atari ST version of the original 2D PoP

Need for Speed: Underground: 84%
5-Strongly Agree
This game is great fun but isn' t the end all be all. Why can I only race just AFTER it rains?

Halo: 96%
2 - Disagree
I liked Halo a lot but I didn' t think it was THAT great. It is best in LAN mode, and one player is good, but just not 96% good.

Prince of Persia: 93%
4 - Agree
Insert lame commentary here.

Final Fantasy X-2: 87%
1 - Strongly disagree
This game sucks ass. Sorry Fathom(s)! :)

Deathrow: 80%
3 - Neutral.
Never even heard of this game. I probably haven' t played it, either. Sounds like a Rockstar game. How predictable if I can guess the publisher without ever even hearing of the game.

I don' t trust Gamerankings simply because not every review comes from an credible source -- even if it' s from a credible company. Kinda like the time an EGM editor said he' d *never* rate ESPN over Madden. By default the system is screwed up due to bias in the media. Not every game is judged upon its own merits (i.e. an unbias review), thus not every game is given a fair shake. And lets not get into reviewers being paid off, reviewers with agendas, and reviewers who flat out suck at reviewing. Maxium Online have given out some of the crappiest, unprofessional reviews out there, but their reviews are factored in nonetheless. Gamerankings.com isn' t a flawed idea. But with so many different factors going into why a game got the score it did, a game' s overall average can *sometimes* become to distorted to trust.

In order to trust Gamerankings.com I' d have to trust every review score on the site. In turn, I' d have to trust every reviewer who score was posted as well. But reviewers are people too. And not everyone can be trusted.

Surely the point is that you' re trusting the concensus... surely Gamerankings is in fact the most trustworthy " review" available? It would take a lot of " paid for" review scores to influence one game' s final score. I think the media is pretty fair *in general*... I think Gamerankings is sound.

lotusson: I realize that, but there is an option at GR to only show reviews from " major publications," and I generally only take GameSpot, IGN, EGM, and maybe a few other well-known publications into account. I checked the review scores in full for these games in question, and there are no severe outliers. But I do know what you mean.

And I do mean the new PoP: Sands of Time. The game is a true gem, and at one of the most meaningful award ceremonies (IMO); the Developer Peer Awards, PoP cleaned up. It is one of the most beautifully designed and engaging games I' ve ever seen, and I' m not even into those games. Do yourself a favor and give it at least a rent.

I see a few people who have never even heard of Deathrow, which is expected, but still a shame. I think those of you that haven' t gotten a chance to see this game could be VERY pleasantly surprised. I stumbled upon it way back when, in about September of 2002, and I thought it was fantastic. It' s crass, brutal, and extremely original.

Just to add, for the people who haven' t heard of Deathrow.

Its a future sports title. The nearest game to it is the old skool game Speedball 2.

Need for Speed: Underground: 84% - Haven' t played it. I played a demo for it and wasn' t blown away though, the frame rate especially was a bit poor.

Halo: 96% - Disagree. I think the score should be lower. Though it is actually one of the better FPS I' ve played (and I' m by no means a massive FPS fan) the way the game was layed out was a bit poor. I found there was too much backtracking through samey looking environments (at one bit even the same environment, but going backwards) and a bit of general laziness. Actually I know Bungee were pushed for time and needed the game out with the launch of the X-box, but the game does suffer for it.

Prince of Persia: 93% - Agree. I bought Manhunt the same time as this but ended up being distracted by this so much Manhunt got forgotten about. The game looked beautiful and played almost more beautifully. Can' t wait for number 2

Final Fantasy X-2: 87% - Agree. Maybe the score should have been a bit lower though. I loved FFX and was looking forward to this but was let down by the poor story and odd mission system.

Deathrow: 80% - Never even heard of before.