It's only 1 point but.

How do console versions of this game score higher than the PC version?

PC already has an awesome map mod that single handedly destroys the console version. 'Map in full 3d'
So how is it possible?

I choose not to use that mod as it destroys the need to explore the land on foot. But still, choices.

The nvde patch should be enough to put PC version at least 5 points ahead of any console version.




So, What are you going to do about it? You going to let a console laugh at your PC like that and just take it?

This will get locked.

i play on console, so not sure of this... but i heard the interface on the p.c. is kind of.. meh

wish i had a rig to run this on the pc however

They score higher because there are many PC players plagued by performance issues, and some are unhappy that the game doesn't look vastly better on ultra settings.

In a month, they should re-review the game once mods start rolling in. I bet the PC version of Skyrim will jump up to atleast a 9.5 on all sites, if not 10.

People WILL mod the UI and make it nice...I promise you.

I think it's because there was bigger expectation on PC then on console.

This.

Skyrim is hands-down the best console game on the market. There are arguably better PC games out there, like Dwarf Fortress, Minecraft, and Dungeon Crawl: Stone Soup.

The PC version only has 11 reviews directly attributed to it. Whereas the Xbox 360 version has 69 reviews. And the PS3 version only has 19 specific reviews.

And the 360 is at 96, the PC at 95, and the PS3 at 94.

I would suggest this adequately reflects the fact that the game was designed for console and the PC port is actually poorly done.

INB4 flame war starts between PC and Console users.

Reviews don't cover "mods," if you aren't aware of this obvious fact, maybe you should take the time to learn it, before posting something as nonsensical as this crap. Get over your PC elitist attitude, it's very clearly affecting your common sense and sound judgement.

Besides, its just a review, does it really even matter? Certainly it doesn't affect your in-game experience, right?

And why would that deserve a re-review? Those modders won't be getting paid for that work. The modders won't be getting the "higher score" you think it would deserve after they fix the game.

Want a re-review? When bethesda themselves fix all the issues, then it deserves a re-review. But the game does NOT deserve a higher score simply because customers who paid for the game fixed it themselves.

I'd say the interface wasn't ported hugely well to PC.

Don't get me wrong, I love the game, but I've had to resort to using the arrow keys to navigate menus from time to time - as well as having to deal with the cognitive dissonance from the right and left mouse keys corresponding to opposite hands (I remapped it at one point, but couldn't deal with firing arrows with the right mouse button)

This is probably the reason why it scores slightly higher on console reviews, on a console it's polished but on a PC there are some interface porting issues. I'm happy to live with these, but perhaps the critics aren't.

It could also be that PC gamers are slightly more discerning? With the wider range of good games and mods the PC can be considered a broader spectrum containing a lot of games that appeal to a target group appreciating something more cerebral than certain mindless gimmicked FPS series'.

It's sad how the industry neglects us so.

I'll always have pcgamer, at least

First, the reviewers were reviewing the raw game; mods don't matter. Second, far less people reviewed the PC, which means it only takes one reviewer deciding to go against the pattern of high-scores and acclaim to tank the average. More reviews just means a more accurate final score.

The fact that metacritic averages all critical opinions is what makes it so much more reliable than anything else. I use it almost exclusively when gauging games I'm not sure of.

Because of the horrible UI and the fact that it is a console port.

Nothing wrong with Metacritic, the wrong lies with the people who take the information out of context. On topic: The simple answer is because more casual people (or just people in general) play console games and thus the results are more stable and the hype is more successful (because people are ignorant).

PC reviews have the potential to be all over the place depending on technical issues, consoles have no such difficulty typically (RROD notwithstanding).

I think maybe reviewers should start taking the modability of the game into account.

If they are willing to dish out bad reviews due to developing a game to more effectively use a 360 controller instead of a mouse....then I think modding should also be included in that review.

There is nothing wrong with the UI.
Skyrim is not a bad console port.
If it was a bad console port, it'd be short, ugly, stupid, and what you buy is what you get.
There will be no improvements to the game other than paying for overpriced DLC somewhere down the line..

Skyrim is not a console port. It uses a gamepad. That is all.

Oh, you're being serious? Err... oookay

Why do you care? Just play the game.

stop embarrassing your self "baww! baww! baww! stupid consoles baww! daddy!"

They rate the game, not what mods are available for it.

There are far more reviewers for the Xbox version...
I think in all of the reviews they try to see the game without bugs and score it as is.

Kinda. Sort-of.

Some people believe Dwarf Fortress to be the best game ever. Personally, I can't figure out how to assign skills to my dwarves at the start of the game.