Metacritic and your games

[The Final Offer]

So recently I stopped by Metacritic after playing Titanfall and a little bit of Metal gear solid ground zeroes, I took a look at the user scores for those games and shrugged as I read them. Then I remember what they posted for COD and I looked up DmC and this happened...

After what I can only describe as a Super Stupidity Sensory Overload Seizure (or SSSOS for short), I realized Metacritic users have been doing some injustice with our favorite games, no matter how good they are, if there's hype to them or a huge fanbase, they'll take it down. So, I was hoping if the lot of you could tell me which games metacritic users downvoted that you thought were great and why you think they did it.
​

 

[Dark Drakan]

A lot of users try and review 'bomb' reviews, usually fanboys of rival games or platforms who try and lower the average user score on purpose to try and 'hurt' games reputations etc. Some people dont like relying on reviews by the media so usually look to user reviews instead but most user reviews I have read are nothing but hate from fanboys who often havent even played the games. Metacritic tried to ban user review bombing but it still happens from time to time. Saw a pic the other day that sums up my views on the hate spouted by people and certain fanboys...

Bioware came in for a lot of abuse with Mass Effect 3 and Dragon Age 2 thats for sure, I mean their average user score dropped to 1/10 at one point. Some exclusives here and there suffered the same fate too as fans of other platforms/rival franchises came in to downvote every review they could or mark the positive reviews as unhelpful to get them pulled down.

There are also those who do it for less hate filled reasons and for humour on retailer websites such as Amazon...

Jokesters take to Amazon to post "bomb" reviews

Of course some people are going to leave genuine poor reviews for games you enjoy as everyones taste is different. However some of the hate filled ones I have read should be presented to psychiatrists as they would have a field day.​

 

[Angel]

Without wishing to sound moronic, I don't even know what Metacritic is. I simply do not pay attention to reviews - not since I saw rave reviews of that Chopin JRPG, bought it and then sold it two days later for being appalling. Reviews for things like games, films and music, to me, mean crap all.

 

[Sieghart]

I totally agree with you on that.
The review system is corrupted & used as a marketing tool to push whatever out the doors quicker.
Funny how game reviews are out before most games hits shelves huh.

And half the time the supposed critics are the ones giving the public a better sense of how something really is & an honest opinion.

Not to mention that when most reviewers review something they don't review it for what it is. They review it of how they wanted it to be. The best way to review something in any kind of entertainment media whether books, video games, movies, animation ETC is to review them for what they are. Not how you wanted it to be, not how it should be, but what they are.

 

[DragonMaster2010]

I remember gamespot, IGN, and I think Metacritic down played Killer Is Dead with such low scores even though it really wasn't even THAT bad.

 

[Sieghart]

Now those magazines are gone or their review system is changed to the one used today by GameSpot, IGN, sessler, AngryJoe, because a blanket score is far easier to BS the masses, & get the GameRankings/Metacritic score where publishers want it to be.

What do you mean Vamp? Sessler and Joe are the last reviewers that we(or probably just me) can really trust(I still decide on my own whether i can buy this game or not obviously) and find entertaining to listen to. Joe rarely gives a game a 9/10 unlike most big gaming magazine and he actually goes in depth to the review explaining the gaming mechanics and it's flaws that big gaming magazines rarely do now a days. Dare i say he is actually one of those critical game reviewers that is not so overly critical or snobbish. Yes, he rated some games like Skyrim a 10/10 but he always says that just because it's a 10/10 means it's a perfect game, it is not. People seems always confuse this. A 10/10 simply means that it surpassed any game in it's genre and that's it. Of course, the lasting appeal is still a matter of opinion.

 

[Rebel Dynasty]

Without wishing to sound moronic, I don't even know what Metacritic is. I simply do not pay attention to reviews - not since I saw rave reviews of that Chopin JRPG, bought it and then sold it two days later for being appalling. Reviews for things like games, films and music, to me, mean crap all.

^ This.

While I might take a review into consideration, I prefer to make up my own mind about movies, games, anime, what-have-you. I don't base my opinion on popular vote, but rather on my impression of the thing in question.

I think I've heard of Metacritic, but beyond that, I've never seen any of their reviews. Like Drakan said, people review bomb; there's very little you can actually trust on the internet, if you're looking for objective viewpoints.

 

[ReaperHunter]

I normally don't pay attention to reviews, I will take them into consideration if it is by a person that I think is credible. Example: Angry Joe, I think he does a good job at pleading his case as to why he thinks a game is good or bad.
actually I find my self looking reviews up after I've played the game to see what others think than I do before purchasing a game

 

[Sieghart]

And AngryJoe is too much of a fanboy & he's reviews are more of a reflection of his tastes.

He does that yes and so is everybody else. He still explains how this game mechanic work or how it doesn't or how it is flawed. He is not even a gaming journalist in the first place. How many reviews of his have you seen?

Surpassing any game in that genre according to who ?

Do i seriously really need to answer this?

Someone who finds Twinkie fest 2 the best action game of 2014.
When 2/3rds of the world's gaming finds Smurf Puncher 4 the best action game of 2014.

Those are poor examples. Neither of those things you listed are actual video games.

No game based on journalistic review should get a 10 out of 10 when it's their opinion & not fact.

First, you have to think that video games are in the entertainment medium. 2nd, reviews in the entertainment medium whether you are a normal person or a journalist are mostly based on opinions so of course it can't be fact. Are you seriously thinking all this time that when a Journalist release his/her review, he/she think of it as fact? It doesn't matter even if you are a journalist. You are still a person, you still have tastes and you can't be completely objective on entertainment. Can you be objective on the writing and the prose in books? Yes. Can you be objective on game mechanics? Probably yes. But can you be objective on the entertainment factor? No, not a chance.

Anything getting a 10 out of 10 is something i'd expect from users as it's obvious personal & not something that's in a position to be used as marketing & way to influence a mass crowd. So there's no personal gain of fame, recognition, money, etc.

Any scores used in media is a marketing tool told to the masses by media personalities which is setup for us to believe are professional when they're simply using whatever means to get it out the door.

Any recognisable iconic media personality is celebrity credibility icing on the cake used & adds that much more Influence in purchasing decisions.

I already touch most of the stuff that you said here in my 4th quote. But yes, i'm still incline to agree with some of the thing you wrote here because it does actually happen.

That's all that media influenced perfect 10 is.
A marketing strategy.

Do you know personally all the reviewers who give a 10/10 to the games that they have reviewed? Because if i'm a gaming journalist and i genuinely felt that this particular game deserves a 10/10 and explained my reasons then somebody just called it a marketing strategy, i will be really sad.

But then again i don't really use numbers to rate how i felt in a particular entertainment medium. Ratings with numbers are overrated anyway.

 

[Chaos Raiden]

One thing that I should mention about reviews on games is that reviews are opinions on games, not facts. A lot of people have trouble in differentiating facts and reviews on games lately. If you let review sites to control your desire of playing a game, then you are having serious problems.

For example, Battlefield series and Call of Duty series often have high scores for their games, but that doesn't mean I must like it because I am not a fan of many first person view games.

There are games that I really like to play that do not received favourable response by critics or gamers, like Hyperdimension Neptunia games and Final Fantasy XIII games.

For one thing, I write reviews on many games that I like. I rarely review any games that I tend to dislike after playing.

If you bought a game and thought it is bad, it is fine. Just trade-in the game for cash and share your insights with other players about the game. If you think the game is good, good for you and it would be nice if you share it with other people.

 

[Sieghart]

2. Yes.
Because whatever is said according to whomever is opinion & not fact.
As many sees something as the best in that genre, others may not.

What i am saying is it's mostly one of the reasons why people rate a game 10/10, Not because it's perfect. Because yes, in his/her opinion it surpassed any game in it's own genre.

I know that, you missed my point.
My point is unless there's a survey taken by every gamer in the world & they all say one particular game is the best in a particular genre in the same particular year, then that statement remains opinion & not fact.

Fair enough.

6. Then you're going to be sad. ALOT
Because it doesn't matter if you're going on genuine honesty or money, if you review shines a favorable light on something then it's used for this.......

​

Marketing.

I'm already sad how the industry works now a days :frown:

Personally about the rating system, i would have prefer if they will just stop using numbers or any kind of ratings. Just review it and let the reader or the viewer decide.

 

[Enigma]

You need to do some research before consulting Metacritic. For example, if you know there was great controversy around DmC, then for f*ck's sake, don't look at the user score. The guys at Metacritic allow any review, really - even if they give solid games 3/10s.
Looking at Ground Zeroes, it seems that disappointment about its length seeped into the user reviews. That's unfair: the game should be judged based on how it performs as a game; how good the story is, the gameplay and so on, NOT how much content it has. Though if games were graded based on their amount of content, I would give GZ a big fat 3/10.

Don't ignore reviews altogether. Reviewers need to make a living doing what they love, after all. What you should do is look for a reviewer who matches your opinions as much as possible. Look for someone who shares the bulk of your most important views. This way, you can easily decide whether or not to buy/rent a game. Reviews also serve as a way to send developers a message - some way to tell them what could've been done better and what people look for in games.

As for 10/10 scores: games can't be perfect. Everyone will find different minuses and pluses. The story, the gameplay, the characters, the graphics and the soundtrack are all subjective matters. Only the story and some parts of the gameplay could be analyzed to see if their quality holds up. I could see myself give a game a 10/10, I think. But only if it were somehow groundbreaking and were somehow the perfect game to me. To send out a message. But when you honestly score games based on their flaws and merits, 10/10s should be impossible anyway, because they imply your review was biased: the graphics, gameplay, story etc can't all get 10/10s. The general public is not looking for insanely biased reviews.

 

[Dark Drakan]

You need to do some research before consulting Metacritic. For example, if you know there was great controversy around DmC, then for f*ck's sake, don't look at the user score. The guys at Metacritic allow any review, really - even if they give solid games 3/10s.
Looking at Ground Zeroes, it seems that disappointment about its length seeped into the user reviews. That's unfair: the game should be judged based on how it performs as a game; how good the story is, the gameplay and so on, NOT how much content it has. Though if games were graded based on their amount of content, I would give GZ a big fat 3/10.

Don't ignore reviews altogether. Reviewers need to make a living doing what they love, after all. What you should do is look for a reviewer who matches your opinions as much as possible. Look for someone who shares the bulk of your most important views. This way, you can easily decide whether or not to buy/rent a game. Reviews also serve as a way to send developers a message - some way to tell them what could've been done better and what people look for in games.

As for 10/10 scores: games can't be perfect. Everyone will find different minuses and pluses. The story, the gameplay, the characters, the graphics and the soundtrack are all subjective matters. Only the story and some parts of the gameplay could be analyzed to see if their quality holds up. I could see myself give a game a 10/10, I think. But only if it were somehow groundbreaking and were somehow the perfect game to me. To send out a message. But when you honestly score games based on their flaws and merits, 10/10s should be impossible anyway, because they imply your review was biased: the graphics, gameplay, story etc can't all get 10/10s. The general public is not looking for insanely biased reviews.

Think this post summed up my views perfectly.

ALL reviews are nothing more than opinion & just because someone gave a game you hated a good review or vice versa it doesn't make them a bad reviewer. People who are easily swayed by the opinion of others shouldn't blame the reviewers.

 

[Chancey289]

@Angel
I totally agree with you on that.
The review system is corrupted & used as a marketing tool to push whatever out the doors quicker.
Funny how game reviews are out before most games hits shelves huh.

And half the time the supposed critics are the ones giving the public a better sense of how something really is & an honest opinion.

Review scores are out before they hit shelves to help gather up a little hype and hoping people will anticipate it IF they give a good word. Same thing goes with films as critics get screenings days before they are released to the public so, not funny or strange at all.

 

[Chancey289]

Again man, the most important opinion to me is from moi. People are bombing Ground Zeroes for its length and stuff and well, I don't give a sh!t. I'm still having fun and is satisfied with this super demo. Plus, exploring I noticed there really is a lot more than I thought packed in to this package. Other people might feel differently but, I'm in to trying to find all the secret cassette tapes to hear more about the mysterious Skull Face and other things in the Metal Gear lore. And just doing stupid sh!t like toss around prisoners in to walls like their ragdolls is dumb stuff I can do for hours basically.

When I'm looking up reviews, there's only a few people I actually care to hear from because I just like hearing what they have to say for one reason or another. Even if I may or may not agree with them.

I'm never going to take something like Metacritic seriously. I never even go on that site. I mean, it makes up an average on whatever some idiot on the internet says. Like, I can post the dumbest and most ignorant review on something just for sh!ts and giggles if I wanted to. Do you really want to go looking there for their some insight on the product? And DmC was just bombed with negative reviews from all the fandumb that was just looking to hate it every chance they get and didn't even play the thing. It's not even relevant to anything.

 

[Angel]

Perfect example of how people need to take reviews with a pinch of salt sometimes - I watched a film last night, thought it was one of the best action films I've seen in a while and then for lulz I checked out metacritic.

49%.

Like, wut? If I had based my viewing choices on what metacritic said, I wouldn't have bothered picking that film at all. And would have missed out on an awesome movie.

 

[Sieghart]

People are bombing Ground Zeroes for its length and stuff and well,

Good for you Chancey. I'm happy for you, i really do. But i still feel sorry for some people in other countries like Denmark where the game cost for like 324 DKK which is equivalent to being $60 and here in the Philippines it costs ₱1700 which is equivalent to $40 and it's just frustrating.

I don't give a sh!t.

Yeah, sure i'd like for you to say that again if and when other companies would follow and start charging for ploughing demos.

 

[Chancey289]

Good for you Chancey. I'm happy for you, i really do. But i still feel sorry for some people in other countries like Denmark where the game cost for like 324 DKK which is equivalent to being $60 and here in the Philippines it costs ₱1700 which is equivalent to $40 and it's just frustrating.



Yeah, sure i'd like for you to say that again if and when other companies would follow and start charging for ploughing demos.

Don't get me wrong, I don't really agree much with this particular business practice but, I'm a huge Metal Gear fan and still somebody bought it for me so....cut me some slack :'(

I was just making the point that as long as I'm satisfied, who cares what the rest think.

 

[Chancey289]

Perfect example of how people need to take reviews with a pinch of salt sometimes - I watched a film last night, thought it was one of the best action films I've seen in a while and then for lulz I checked out metacritic.

49%.

Like, wut? If I had based my viewing choices on what metacritic said, I wouldn't have bothered picking that film at all. And would have missed out on an awesome movie.

I'm just curious, what movie was it?

 

[Sieghart]

Don't get me wrong, I don't really agree much with this particular business practice but, I'm a huge Metal Gear fan and still somebody bought it for me so....cut me some slack :'(

I was just making the point that as long as I'm satisfied, who cares what the rest think.

Somebody bought it for you? You're a lucky one! But yeah i still see your point don't get me wrong.