You know, it always begs the question of how these sports games can be "done" earlier and earlier each year while the programmers having to squeeze in more and more improvements. I mean, it's clearly obvious that Madden's gameplay isn't perfect (if a real NFL simulation is the standard to be achieved) and some serious aspects need improving, but EA acts like the gameplay is near perfect enough that it wouldn't need another couple months of tweaking. Somehow, I just don't buy that.
In that Madden Challenge on G4tv, people only used 3 teams to win (Rams, Philly and Pittsburg), and one dude who used Tampa Bay was called a [censored you naughty boy] (funny since that team in real life won the Super Bowl!). That would be something that EGM would not be able to pick up as they probably don't have reviewers that are good enough to even expose any serious flaws in any sports game.
I do admit that those scores seem to coincide exactly with the perceived quality of both series by the people at large (including those "casual" gamers who don't read messageboards, but still play tons of games). That's what makes these scores suspicious as one would just have to put their wet finger in the wind to make them up.
Quote:
Why people put so much faith and or concern in any review, is beyond my comprehension. ESPECIALLY when it is about the SCORES...
How many people you know actually think for themselves or would have the gall to go against the grain? The uproar over these scores wouldn't ever happen if they didn't affect the hype of these titles. I've seen it happen where a lower than expectect score on a good game caused people to skip it on just the score alone way too many times.