Eurogamer dropping review scores

[Ciggavelli]

Yeah I don't agree with @Ciggavelli at all on this one. Review scores let's people get lazy.

Just because a game is a 9/10 average on metacritic doesn't mean everyone is going to like it. It gives people a reason to actually read the review and not just jump to the score.

So you're gonna read 100 reviews?

Putting scores next to the links helps you read the good, the bad, and the mediocre. It makes you a more informed consumer.

You know damn well that if all review sites did away with scores, nobody would read all that shyt. Come on

 

[Fatboi1]

So you're gonna read 100 reviews?

Putting scores next to the links helps you read the good, the bad, and the mediocre. It makes you a more informed consumer.

You know damn well that if all review sites did away with scores, nobody would read all that shyt. Come on

Who does all this though??

You check out a few sites you like(IGN, GT, Euro, Poly, etc.) and then you draw a conclusion from there. I can't remember the last review I sat and read. I usually don't even like watching video reviews for spoiler reasons.

I don't know why someone would bother going through all the trouble of reading and cross referencing scores and shyt just to cop a title. That sounds like something you'd do for a game you're on the fence about.

 

[Liquid]

So you're gonna read 100 reviews?

Putting scores next to the links helps you read the good, the bad, and the mediocre. It makes you a more informed consumer.

You know damn well that if all review sites did away with scores, nobody would read all that shyt. Come on

You don't need to read 100 reviews, read 2-3 reviews from sites or reviewers you trust and make your decision based off that.

And no, numbers clearly don't make people more informed consumers. Say for example GTA...I don't like the GTA franchise that much, in fact I made that same mistake when GTA 3 dropped. Everyone was losing their fukking minds when that game dropped. I bought it based off all the scores, I don't think I read a single review... I came home, played it for half an hour and looked at my PS2 like...I don't really like this game

Many people do that shyt till this very day and then get mad at their purchase because they feel burned about the metacritic average and proceed to rate it a 1 on user scores as a result.

And you are wrong, they will be FORCED to read the reviews because not everyone can just drop $60 on a whim without knowing a damn thing about the game. Metacritic can still eat, but the percentage will be based off a like/dislike instead of weighed numbers. It works even better for them IMO.

If I like UFC, wtf does an 8/10 mean exactly? Either I like or don't like the game nikka, fukk all that complicated math IGN and those sites were doing in the past. Write a review, list the positives and the negatives and say if you like it or don't.

 

[Ciggavelli]

Who does all this though??

You check out a few sites you like(IGN, GT, Euro, Poly, etc.) and then you draw a conclusion from there. I can't remember the last review I sat and read. I usually don't even like watching video reviews for spoiler reasons.

I don't know why someone would bother going through all the trouble of reading and cross referencing scores and shyt just to cop a title. That sounds like something you'd do for a game you're on the fence about.

I thought this was the whole point of this thread. Getting rid of scores makes people read the reviews.

Reading 5 reviews is substantially less useful than getting the scores from 80+ reviews. Bigger sample size and all.

I read the good, the bad, and the mediocre reviews to get a well-rounded picture. I'm on the fence about most games

 

[Ciggavelli]

You don't need to read 100 reviews, read 2-3 reviews from sites or reviewers you trust and make your decision based off that.

And no, numbers clearly don't make people more informed consumers. Say for example GTA...I don't like the GTA franchise that much, in fact I made that same mistake when GTA 3 dropped. Everyone was losing their fukking minds when that game dropped. I bought it based off all the scores, I don't think I read a single review... I came home, played it for half an hour and looked at my PS2 like...I don't really like this game

Many people do that shyt till this very day and then get mad at their purchase because they feel burned about the metacritic average and proceed to rate it a 1 on user scores as a result.

And you are wrong, they will be FORCED to read the reviews because not everyone can just drop $60 on a whim without knowing a damn thing about the game.

I'll say the same thing. Reading 2 - 3 reviews is substantially worse than getting 80+ scores. Bigger sample sizes equal more reliable results. basic stats, breh

And you're supposed to read the good, the bad, and the mediocre. That's how you metacritic breh.

 

[Liquid]

I'll say the same thing. Reading 2 - 3 reviews is substantially worse than getting 80+ scores. Bigger sample sizes equal more reliable results. basic stats, breh

Nah, you are still looking at this from a pure numbers standpoint. Games don't work that way, you either like the game or you don't for the most part. It is your job to inform the consumers if the game has bugs or issues at launch...Halo Master Chief collection has a 85 overall metacritic rating and till this very day people can't play the game online that well. MANY people bought that game because they saw that score and just said...YES, I KNEW IT WOULD BE PERFECT, IGN GAVE IT A 9 OUT OF 10. I DON'T NEED TO READ A SINGLE LINE OF TEXT! A 9.0 implies that the game is "Amazing" on their scale...which also implies that the game shouldn't have any big issues when I buy it. CLEARLY that wasn't the case. Saying Halo MCC is a 9/10 game and saying it just has MP issues is a bit disingenuous as the fukking thing shipped broken.

IMO reviews should drop all the numbers and then at the end of the review put it up against popular titles that fit a similar genre. For example, if you loved Splinter Cell, Batman Arkham Asylum, and Hitman Absolution...then you might want to check out THIEF, but taking note of all the negatives of the game. Thief has a 6.8 from IGN, but I actually like that game quite a bit. Should I have just dismissed it because HItman Absolution has a substantially higher metacritic score? I like Thief better...wtf is a 6.8 out of 10 anyway? Why not just drop the fukking score and say it's "Okay"? That's much better IMO.

 

[daze23]

Mention me again and your name will be stickied at the top with a time and date for a fight.

Spoiler

Real-Time combat.

I live in the sticks breh. bus don't come out here

 

[Ciggavelli]

Nah, you are still looking at this from a pure numbers standpoint. Games don't work that way, you either like the game or you don't for the most part. It is your job to inform the consumers if the game has bugs or issues at launch...Halo Master Chief collection has a 85 overall metacritic rating and till this very day people can't play the game online that well. MANY people bought that game because they saw that score and just said...YES, I KNEW IT WOULD BE PERFECT, IGN GAVE IT A 9 OUT OF 10. I DON'T NEED TO READ A SINGLE LINE OF TEXT! A 9.0 implies that the game is "Amazing" on their scale...which also implies that the game shouldn't have any big issues when I buy it. CLEARLY that wasn't the case. Saying Halo MCC is a 9/10 game and saying it just has MP issues is a bit disingenuous as the fukking thing shipped broken.

IMO reviews should drop all the numbers and then at the end of the review put it up against popular titles that fit a similar genre. For example, if you loved Splinter Cell, Batman Arkham Asylum, and Hitman Absolution...then you might want to check out THIEF, but taking note of all the negatives of the game. Thief has a 6.8 from IGN, but I actually like that game quite a bit. Should I have just dismissed it because HItman Absolution has a substantially higher metacritic score? I like Thief better...wtf is a 6.8 out of 10 anyway? Why not just drop the fukking score and say it's "Okay"? That's much better IMO.

just saying "okay" is not good enough for me. Most games are "okay." We need more of a differential. Scores give you that. The more you can distinguish between games, the better.

80+ reviewers giving their opinions on a game is always gonna be better than 2-3. Always. Numbers help quantify things, and quantifying things is what I think should be done.

You all want qualitative opinions, but that's not helpful in my opinion. We need scores too, to compare across games

 

[Liquid]

just saying "okay" is not good enough for me. Most games are "okay." We need more of a differential. Scores give you that. The more you can distinguish between games, the better.

They get away with "okay" because of the numbers. That's EXACTLY why I brought it up and you fell for the bait

If you can't accept "OKAY" then you shouldn't be able to accept 6.8

 

[Ciggavelli]

They get away with "okay" because of the numbers. That's EXACTLY why I brought it up and you fell for the bait

If you can't accept "OKAY" then you shouldn't be able to accept 6.8

When have I ever accepted 6.8? It's well known what I think is a good score on metacritic

You're not making any sense here

What bait did I fall for?

My stance is very clear. I made it time and time again.

 

[NZA]

couldn't payola influence pretty much any system?

it's harder and not nearly as effective as a score

 

[NZA]

Yeah, I don't believe in the conspiracy theory at all. Having three categories is worthless to me when it comes from one source. Plus, it just leads to lazy reviewing. Is this a 7-9 game? Well, yeah, so let's stamp 'recommended' on it.

When you have to break down each component and assign a number rating, you have to think. These 2 sites are just being p*ssy and scared to make an opinion. Broad categories don't help out that much. The difference between a 70 and a 90 is big. But nah, that's just put them all under the 'recommended' category.

And I don't give a shyt about one man's 3,000 word essay on a game. i need more than one opinion. Metacritic gives you that.

If joystiq and eurogamer are too scared to put their opinions next to the 50 other reviewers, fukk em.

a 7 should be in a different category than a 9. a 7 should pretty much be a recommend with caveats in the summary, a 9 is must have as long as you like this genre of game.

i really dont think the reviews will get any worse than they already are, plus with so many sites having to create a new policy for reviewing games that have a heavy online component, the score changes or is delayed until the game is at a level where the site feels it is delivering a true representation of itself. to me, this is just further eroding the value of scores.

also, metacritic can start behaving like rotten tomatoes which takes into account non-numerically scored movie reviews and makes a binary "fresh or rotten" system into an aggregate.

 

[daze23]

Jagged Alliance: Back In Action has a 62 on metacritic, but I really enjoyed that game. I also think metacritic is a valuable tool for consumers, even though I don't always agree with the results

 

[itsyoung!!]

didnt a site already do this like a month ago

 

[Ciggavelli]

didnt a site already do this like a month ago

joystiq did