Eurogamer dropping review scores

[Liquid]

Numbers are everywhere in life. We use them all the time!

That's not my argument

You really are caught up in your own bubble man. I've watched hundreds of movies at the theaters...never once did I overhear a conversation between people throwing out number ratings for movies like that.

I lived in NYC as well, not some rural ass town that you see 4-5 people all the time on a friday night. You would think with the exposure I had I would have overheard a conversation like that take place.

The ONLY time I hear numbers is when comparisons are brought up and that's mostly in fanboy discussions.

 

[Ciggavelli]

That's not my argument

You really are caught up in your own bubble man. I've watched hundreds of movies at the theaters...never once did I overhear a conversation between people throwing out number ratings for movies like that.

I lived in NYC as well, not some rural ass town that you see 4-5 people all the time on a friday night. You would think with the exposure I had I would have overheard a conversation like that take place.

The ONLY time I hear numbers is when comparisons are brought up and that's mostly in fanboy discussions.

I hear people use numbers all the time. I used to live in Phoenix, Chicago, and currently live in Houston. These aren't small towns either

 

[Liquid]

Yes, of course there will be subjectivity. That's why meta-analyses and aggregates are so good. They put a bunch of numbers together to get an average. It's a way to make things less subjective.

You really believe that the current metacritic system would be better than a percentage of people voting on who liked it or disliked it?

Numbers are fun to play with, but a simple like/dislike is easier than trying to break down certain cut-off points that people make. I've seen people online say they won't buy a game if its rated less than 8.0 overall.

What kind of shyt is that

 

[Fatboi1]

You really believe that the current metacritic system would be better than a percentage of people voting on who liked it or disliked it?

Numbers are fun to play with, but a simple like/dislike is easier than trying to break down certain cut-off points that people make. I've seen people online say they won't buy a game if its rated less than 8.0 overall.

What kind of shyt is that

He's going to say such a system can be abused by trolls and fanboys simply disliking/liking as they see fit. I personally think such a system would be better as usually the good outweighs the bad. Yeah there will be trolls and fanboys but the amount of people who are legitimately putting their opinion out there would pain the picture overall.

Like for example, the latest Persona 5 trailer has over 2 million views and way more likes than dislikes. No amount of Final Fantasy fanboys or trolls could change the likes/dislike ratio.

 

[Ciggavelli]

You really believe that the current metacritic system would be better than a percentage of people voting on who liked it or disliked it?

Numbers are fun to play with, but a simple like/dislike is easier than trying to break down certain cut-off points that people make. I've seen people online say they won't buy a game if its rated less than 8.0 overall.

What kind of shyt is that

I'm fine with both systems in place. As you should know from this thread, I like data points. The more info the better. I use the steam system too when evaluating a game. I like it. I also like metacritic. Putting the 2 together is perfectly fine with me

 

[Ciggavelli]

He's going to say such a system can be abused by trolls and fanboys simply disliking/liking as they see fit.

No, that's something you would say (and have said). You specifically call me out for using user scores in arguments for this one reason.

I do think professionals are less biased than users though.

 

[Fatboi1]

You really believe that the current metacritic system would be better than a percentage of people voting on who liked it or disliked it?

Numbers are fun to play with, but a simple like/dislike is easier than trying to break down certain cut-off points that people make. I've seen people online say they won't buy a game if its rated less than 8.0 overall.

What kind of shyt is that

 

[Liquid]

I'm fine with both systems in place. As you should know from this thread, I like data points. The more info the better. I use the steam system too when evaluating a game. I like it. I also like metacritic. Putting the 2 together is perfectly fine with me

Simpler systems in place for things like this are usually better. Less is more in many cases...this being one of them.

Its a process of elimination my friend. People either like it or they don't, arguments whether a good game is a 6+ or a 7+ doesn't even need to take place.

 

[daze23]

It's been talked about at length for a while now, the numbers don't make sense.

YouTube changed the rating system a long time ago for the better, steam on top now shows a like/dislike scale rather than just the metacritic score that people were so caught up on.

those are all systems for users to rate content. and those systems still aggregate their results into 'a bunch of numbers'. it's another thing people can consider before buying a game, watching a video, or whatever content is being rated

I'm all for more information, but not less

 

[Ciggavelli]

Simpler systems in place for things like this are usually better. Less is more in many cases...this being one of them.

Its a process of elimination my friend. People either like it or they don't, arguments whether a good game is a 6+ or a 7+ doesn't even need to take place.

I disagree. Like I said before, the more you can differentiate the better

 

[Fatboi1]

those are all systems for users to rate content. and those systems still aggregate their results into 'a bunch of numbers'. it's another thing people can consider before buying a game, watching a video, or whatever content is being rated

I'm all for more information, but not less

I think the like/dislike thing is better as it's just easier on the end user to see. I prefer the amazon 5 star review system myself with people able to question reviews and such with a helpful/non helpful rating for each review. That way if there's some unscrupulous review, people can see a dialogue between the reviewer and maybe the product creator.

Though sometimes that can be a bit too much

 

[Ciggavelli]

I think the like/dislike thing is better as it's just easier on the end user to see. I prefer the amazon 5 star review system myself with people able to question reviews and such with a helpful/non helpful rating for each review. That way if there's some unscrupulous review, people can see a dialogue between the reviewer and maybe the product creator.

Though sometimes that can be a bit too much

So why not have both? Use the steam method. You get your like/dislike score and a metacritic score as well. Even metacritic does that with user reviews. The more info the better. Getting rid of a tool is not helpful. The more info the better informed the consumer will be

 

[daze23]

but I don't think the solution is to move onto a new scale where basically everything would just be "recommended". I mean if these big sites like IGN are 'scared' to give AAA games less than 70/100, they'll probably be even less likely to flat out tell people "don't buy this game"

 

[Fatboi1]

So why not have both? Use the steam method. You get your like/dislike score and a metacritic score as well. Even metacritic does that with user reviews. The more info the better. Getting rid of a tool is not helpful. The more info the better informed the consumer will be

Honestly all jokes aside, I don't really have a beef with Metacritic as like you said it's a tool that I've used myself occasionally and it has exposed some games to me here and there. My beef is with some of the extremist dependency on Metacritic and the outright refusal to even give things a try simply because of a number. That's usually what makes me go like .

but I don't think the solution is to move onto a new scale where basically everything would just be "recommended". I mean if these big sites like IGN are 'scared' to give AAA games less than 70/100, they'll probably be even less likely to flat out tell people "don't buy this game"

I think the move by some reviewers is to force some of their readers to read the review and stop just jumping down the page looking for the number in bold. Even though we may use multiple sites and aggregates overall for an assessment of a game's quality as subjective as that may be(good or bad), some people only check one or two sites. I know people that only check IGN or only look at Gamespot.com.
I think this move is targeted towards those people.

 

[Ciggavelli]

but I don't think the solution is to move onto a new scale where basically everything would just be "recommended". I mean if these big sites like IGN are 'scared' to give AAA games less than 70/100, they'll probably be even less likely to flat out tell people "don't buy this game"

Exactly. That's the problem with these qualitative ratings. There is no differentiation. Like I said in a post earlier today. Games that are 7s and games that are 8s and games that are 9s will get the same 'recommended' label. How is that helpful? There's a big difference between a 7 game and a 9 game. You can't get that with a simple like/dislike rating