fukk Metacritic and corny gamers who abide by those ratings

[Mr. Manhattan]

Embarrassing that you let other peoples opinion determine your outlook of a games enjoyment, corny ass shyt

The Evil Within has 74-75... and its one of the best games i've played this year

and last i checked a 70 and above is considered good

stop embarrassing yourselves

 

[Ciggavelli]

When you don't have a demo, it's a good tool to use. It's part of the decision algorithm
- Resident Metacritic aficionado .

Spoiler

*ducks to dodge thrown tomatoes*

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Using metacritic to compare games and determine a finite quality of a game is stupid in my opinion. There's too many variable to consider.

But metacritic is a very useful tool for educating yourself before a potential purchase. The congregate score is only a fraction of the info you should consider. The actual text in the reviews is most important. The evil within lost points for clunky controls and techincal shortcomings. Those are very valid criticisms, but maybe those things don't matter as much to you as they did some reviewers.

Your best bet is to follow a couple reviewers that share your taste in games, and use their advice the most.

 

[XII]

I don't get it either. It's been proven time and time again that game journalists are some of the corniest human beings on the planet.

But every day you see people bring their scores and opinions up when it supports what they're saying

 

[Ciggavelli]

Metacritic is an aggregator. I don't think people get what that means. It's reviews from literally dozens, sometimes 50 or 60 reviewers. It's not just one opinion. You can look at whatever review you want. It's a great tool. When 20 or 30 people are saying the exact same thing, that says something.

Then you can also look at user scores. If similar complaints are being said there, there is even more evidence that something might be up.

People love metacritic when their games score high, but when a game they like scores low they get pissed the fukk off.

Using metacritic as one of the tools in my toolbox has helped me find a lot of great games I never would have touched before (for example I'll really look into a game if it scores over an 85, just because it scored so high). I found a lot of great indies that way. If it wasn't for metacritic I would have missed out on a lot, because forums and shyt don't really talk about small-time games that much.

You're missing out if you don't at least look at metacritic.

I also use metacritic for music. I literally download every album (except country) that scored above an 80. I found so much good shyt that way.

At some point you need reviewers to help you out. There is just so much out there that it's impossible to listen to every album or play every game.

 

[MidniteJay]

This wouldn't be a problem if there were legit demos out for all games or at least a timed trial for people to try out games before buying but instead folks gotta rely on gameplay videos (which can trick people) and reviews.

$60 is a lot to throw on faith, brehs. So I don't blame folks that look to reviews before buying a game.

 

[Fatboi1]

Battlefield 4 had a mid 80 metacritic for a year now and that game failed to work properly for months.

Shadow of Mordor has an 85 but I think quite frankly it's boring.

I think the issue is last gen and since the start of this gen games were grossly overrated and scores were inflated. Games that would be 7/10 or 8/10's years ago were suddenly 9/10, 10/10,11/10 games within the last few years.

A game like this blew my mind because I'd think it'd be a 90 metacritic.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/nintendo-64/super-smash-bros 79 metacritic
Now granted it only has 11 critic reviews and the user reviews are MUCH higher, today this game would be considered a "flop" if you may by forum goers and those just browsing the site.

 

[Kingshango]

Demo's are all but extinct for AAA games and $60 don't fall out of the sky, so I gotta use Metacritic to know what the consensus is about a game before I make a purchase.

 

[Loose]

Why the fukk should I pay for a game with low average reviews due to gameplay or controls ? I mean I'll rent or either get it for free if it's below 75 . If I like it enough I'll keep it

 

[Zebruh]

This whole "It got a __ on metacritic" shyt nikkas been spewing is pure garbage. If you're gonna use metacritic, use it for the proper means, which is to read reviews and determine the pros and cons of a game through collected reviews.

nikkas will sit and argue numbers and not gameplay, and that's why metacritic gets so ridiculous. Not to mention people flip-flopping on when they wanna credit metacritic and when they wanna disregard it.

 

[Ciggavelli]

This all started with Destiny too by the way. Nobody seemed to have a problem with metacritic until Destiny. The fact that reviewers didn't like that game pissed way too many people off

 

[Fatboi1]

Metacritic is an aggregator. I don't think people get what that means. It's reviews from literally dozens, sometimes 50 or 60 reviewers. It's not just one opinion. You can look at whatever review you want. It's a great tool. When 20 or 30 people are saying the exact same thing, that says something.

Then you can also look at user scores. If similar complaints are being said there, there is even more evidence that something might be up.

People love metacritic when their games score high, but when a game they like scores low they get pissed the fukk off.

Using metacritic as one of the tools in my toolbox has helped me find a lot of great games I never would have touched before (for example I'll really look into a game if it scores over an 85, just because it scored so high). I found a lot of great indies that way. If it wasn't for metacritic I would have missed out on a lot, because forums and shyt don't really talk about small-time games that much.

You're missing out if you don't at least look at metacritic.

I also use metacritic for music. I literally download every album (except country) that scored above an 80. I found so much good shyt that way.

At some point you need reviewers to help you out. There is just so much out there that it's impossible to listen to every album or play every game.

I understand it's an aggregator and what not but even then that isn't usually reflective of the general user opinion. At the end of the day a reviewer isn't more "credible" than any one else dropping reviews. It's like what makes an employee at IGN or Giantbombs opinion more authoritative and substantial than an opinion from a regular Joe Schmoe who's been gaming for years?? At the end of the day, it's basically someones opinion and quite frankly I don't think it's possible to be objective at reviewing certain elements of video games.

For example there was a review for Driveclub in which the reviewer said the game lacked romance and had no soul... ???
What does that even mean??
I feel like the numbers should be done away with. It's arbitrary in my opinion. They should adopt a qualitative system whereby the aggregate review would be for example "bad, average, good, great, amazing, masterpiece" and on. That would force people to read. Folks don't read reviews, they just scroll down and see a number and run online and post it like "MY GAME GOT A 11/10!!!!", OR "I don't understand the 5/10 ".

 

[Fatboi1]

This whole "It got a __ on metacritic" shyt nikkas been spewing is pure garbage. If you're gonna use metacritic, use it for the proper means, which is to read reviews and determine the pros and cons of a game through collected reviews.

nikkas will sit and argue numbers and not gameplay, and that's why metacritic gets so ridiculous. Not to mention people flip-flopping on when they wanna credit metacritic and when they wanna disregard it.

But bayonetta 2 got a 91 metacritic dog.

Nah but seriously the whole flip flopping thing is partly fanboy ammo too breh you gotta recognize when people are just having fun.

 

[Fatboi1]

This all started with Destiny too by the way. Nobody seemed to have a problem with metacritic until Destiny. The fact that reviewers didn't like that game pissed way too many people off

Please elaborate. What makes you think reviewers didn't like it?? See what I mean?? it's semantics now. Is a game in the 70-79 range a game that is not liked by reviewers?? It contradicts the whole aggregate score point you made and at the same time turns this into a subjective argument over what is "good" or "bad". After putting in about a day in hours on Destiny I can completely understand some reviews and respect them. It doesn't mean it's not "liked". I like Destiny and at the same time agree with a review like Angry Joe's review which he gave it a 6/10. You can like something even while recognizing its flaws.

 

[Jax]

If they had imdb for gaming>metashyt.