[Conciliator]

It does feel like the game journo community evaluates production values as opposed to their personal experience with a game more often than not(as in, more Consumer Reports than New York Times Book Review), and Metacritic really paints a picture of that. The scores of stuff like Mass Effect 3, GTA IV and even Skyrim feel inevitable, like they would just have to be complete bumbling disasters to not have 90+ scores across the board. Dragon Age II was a complete bumbling disaster and it still got an 80+(though in our industry 80+ is 'average').

I like keeping up with reviews, metacritic scores, etc., just to follow the narrative of the industry, but it's not a good system for choosing what to play/buy, or at least it should only be a fraction of how you decide that.

EDIT: That GTA IV stuff is still unreal. How did that happen? You couldn't make a parody of that that you could differentiate from the actual reviews.

[shinkansen.3000]

Absolutely not. Sometimes I go there just to see what other people thought of the game, but most of the time I find out that I disagree with them. I consider the user score much more reliable. But ultimately when it comes to judging if I liked a game or not other people's opinion don't count, and especially I wouldn't question my tastes in videogames because of it.

[RiccochetJ]

I wonder what the general reviewer/critic consensus is of the game on metacritic, but I usually only pay attention to certain reviewers who I believe share the same tastes as me.

[MightyHedgehog]

Why would anyone ever question their tastes compared to a mostly worthless score average that tends to favor terrible big budget retreads and visually-polished tripe? Most of the bigger site reviews seem far more concerned about getting a score into the system early or on-time rather than producing a review worth reading and paying attention to. No, Metacritic and the rest of the review aggregation sites are fucking shitstains that have further primed the path to overpriced, homogenous retail trash that the publishers use to define success.

[Limanima]

No, I question Metacritic.
Motorstorm 1 & 2 are good examples of Metacritic fail. Pacific Rift is such an awsome game and it sure deserves higher scores compared to others in the 90s category.
Edit: Actually, it shows reviewers fail, not Metacritic. Metacritic scores are just averages from the reviews.

[toastyToast]

While I wouldn't say that I do, the games I enjoy tend to review fairly well.

It's only when comparisons come into play that I start to raise an eyebrow

[CaptainAhab]

mass effect 3, diablo 3 and skyrim.

3 mediocre games that were well reviewed because of enormous marketing budgets and production values.

[GhaleonQ]

What do you guys do when your gaming tastes are openly questioned by your friends or relatives? It gets to me when someone I know starts spewing BS about how can I like "games for retards" like Batman: Arkham City or Virtua Fighter 5 Final Showdown. How do you deal with situations like that? Anger takes over and I can't think of a good counter-argument because I'm using all of my willpower to hold back my urge to punch him in the face.

I...I don't even think that he could understand how Virtua Fighter 5 works. Have you tried barraging him with information until he submits?







I question it when people, professional or otherwise, whom I respect disagree. Infer what you must about Gamerankings.

[GhaleonQ]

Edit: no!

[Margalis]

It does feel like the game journo community evaluates production values as opposed to their personal experience with a game more often than not(as in, more Consumer Reports than New York Times Book Review), and Metacritic really paints a picture of that.

It "feels" like that because that's exactly how it works - something that is trivially obvious.

[ghibli99]

It doesn't make me question my taste, but it makes me curious about what other people didn't like about it. It can sometimes give me insight into things I didn't notice or explore as much, but it rarely changes my opinion on something... it will just give me better and more varied perspective, which is generally quite helpful and educational, games or otherwise.

[Incendiary]

I don't ever go to metacritic, so no. I don't need arbitrary rating aggregates to validate my taste. I've been gaming for nearly 20 years now, I know my own taste so if I see a new game advertised, I know whether I'll like it or not. Could care less what the metacritic score is.

[Conciliator]

It "feels" like that because that's exactly how it works - something that is trivially obvious.

Well, I don't know that it's entirely that straightforward. I think a lot of reviewers don't even understand themselves well enough to really be able to tell the difference.

[Copenap]

I think I have visited Metacritics like twice thus far and that was only because I got curious of all the hype it gets.

So no, I really couldn't care less.

[BobTheFork]

You would have to be horribly insecure with yourself.
"oh no one else likes this... I must suck and be wrong"

I never go to metacritic for any reason and I hardly read reviews anymore. Digital age: check out some gameplay or other videos and see what you think. I love tons of unpopular stuff, my gain : )

[Zwei]

Hell no. I question everyone else's taste.

[Deadstar]

Metacritic is a joke.

Agreed. Mass Effect is an 80/B at BEST. They stripped out everything that made Mass Effect 1 great.

[Canis lupus]

I think we should use Gamerankings for games just like we use IMDB for movies.

[jkanownik]

There is a difference between objective and subjective quality. I find that the Metacritic average does an adequate job of measuring objective quality. It's not perfect, but it is the best metric that exists (thanks to punitive and biased user reviews on Amazon). For subjective quality looking at the score distribution and reading the high and low reviews works for me. There is a difference between a game that gets straight 8's and one that gets 6's and 10's that average out to an 8. It is not at all surprising when people say they love a game that has a wide review score distribution.

For books I rely on Amazon reviews over external scores because they don't have the same issue with ridiculous user reviews.

[Shai-Tan]

The scores on gamerankings and metacritic are averages. A higher score is evidence that a game is more liked than other games not necessarily that a higher score is evidence it's a better game. Statistically those games which are higher rated are more likely to be better games but there are a lot of other reasons games can get higher and lower scores. There are also reasons why we might value lower scoring games more like having a wider range of gameplay that might not appeal to a broader audience which is why you can find some gems in the mid to upper 70 scoring games. Ive loved some games which other people don't seem to get.

[maverick40]

I used metacritic for about 3 years and then i found gaf...

[Wonko_C]

I...I don't even think that he could understand how Virtua Fighter 5 works. Have you tried barraging him with information until he submits?

Hahaha, I'll try that.

[Dog Problems]

I question other people's taste.

Pretty much. I've never once questioned my own taste, at any time, whether it has to do with metacritic or on a message board.

[Orayn]

Metacritic is generally a decent metric for whether a game has good production values (80+), has some major flaws or divisive design elements (60-80), or may indeed be a trainwreck. (<60) Beyond my begrudging acceptance of these aspects of the 7-10 review scale, the site is useless.

[Jomjom]

Never question yourself because your opinion doesn't fall in line with the majority opinion. That kind of thinking is what leads to dumb trends like jeans so skinny they cut off circulation to the lower half of your body.

[Raptomex]

I only check out certain sites for reviews. And no I don't question my taste. I question their reviews if anything.

[Green Wiggly]

Review scores used to have a huge influence on my purchases, but somewhere along the way my tastes diverged into more niche areas (or what I liked in the mainstream became niche as the market evolved). These days if Metacritic doesn't agree with me, I just kind of shrug and go back to doing my own thing.

[MR BLACKMAGIK]

I never look at reviews, metacritic or otherwise. Every huge game never gets rated below 80% because every site is afraid of the negative feedback they will get if they give the game a bad score. I'm not saying all big games are bad, just saying they are not all 9/10.

[Myyke]

Nope. Dynasty warriors FTW!

HHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNGHGHHGHGHHG

[DoctorBanjo]

HHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNGHGHHGHGHHG

ALL HAIL DYNASTY WARRIORS!

[SMT]

Lollipop Chainsaw is a blast; everybody was roasting it because of the hypersexualization of its main character.

Game deserves an 8.5 to 9.0.

It's satire, god-damned prudes can't tell the difference.

[jbueno]

For titles I hold in high regard, I haven't cared for review scores since I was a teenager. I used to use it recently as a barometer when hunting for cheap games, but after nearly missing Nier because of a low metascore not anymore.

[Guevara]

I think Metacritic is usually right on :-x

I pretty much only play high-rated games

[fastkilr]

It's usually a good indicator of what I won't like. Games designed to be swallowed whole by the masses. But there's some exceptions where a great game's just a great game and deserves its reviews.

[kitzkozan]

Nearly everyone is saying that they don't care about Metacritic, but I'm curious to see the GOTY result at the end of the year. :] Most game in the top 10 will be games who scored high on metacritic/gamerankings while Binary Domains will be somewhere between 11-20 despite the GAF praise (look at some GAF GOTY thread in the last few years and count the number of game in the top 10 which scored under 80). :P The AAA games have the most people playing them so that include GAF thus the top 10 will be similar to most game critics top 10.

[animlboogy]

Game reviews by nature have very little credibility as a whole. The medium is too broad, with too many tiers of budget and too many conflicting interests. And the reviews themselves aren't mature enough; the idea of the same person reviewing Halo, Armored Core, Railworks, and Crusader Kings 2 is the equivalent of getting your cricket coverage from a football fan. Average scores will always include people who are alienated by some basic features of a certain type of game, or who are by job description forced to compare games that do very different things to each other. It just isn't valuable to me.

And then there's the long history of any hyped game getting high scores, and multiple publications not even hinting at the problems that within a day of release would define the game to fans. See: GTA4 (a massive step down in freedom and gameplay options that seemed to go unnoticed), MGS2 (which I loved, but still, no real hint of what was to come), every Halo game (how 'bout them flood? How 'bout that Halo 2 story?).

Like with music writing, you're better off following writers you enjoy wherever they work. Unless you just play mainstream AAA shooters, which I guess is the equivalent of just liking whatever Pitchfork covers. It's why I really enjoy the sites that are more personal and openly biased about the individual reviewer's tastes, like Giant Bomb (they can be ignorant, but they wear it on their sleeve at least) and Rock Paper Shotgun (much smarter crowd but they can be flagrantly obnoxious about what the console children are playing).

[Tain]

Lollipop Chainsaw is a blast; everybody was roasting it because of the hypersexualization of its main character. Game deserves an 8.5 to 9.0. It's satire, god-damned prudes can't tell the difference.

I've heard more mechanical complaints from those that have played it than I have about the cast.

[Greenhowse]

Nope. Dynasty warriors FTW!

Yeah, I fucking love Dynasty Warriors, got 4-6 and I love the soundtrack in 3. Those games usually just have awesome music.

didn't get DW7 =3

I'm so stubborn about my taste in games that bad scores (or even good scores) don't affect me much. As a Megaman fan, this is a trait that has served me well. But I do tend to pay attention to reviews when I'm about to buy or am otherwise following a game that I'm worried about the sales performance for. Not that it...directly affects sales, I would think, but positive reviews would at least generate some excitement.

Tales of Graces is a recent example. And with Rhythm Thief upcoming it's the same situation. I've got the latter on preorder, but Rhythm Thief needs anything it can get to do well.

Guys ples buy Rhythm Thief

[HyperCubed4]

I don't go into a room full of people with different tastes and ask them for opinions on movies. I would go to my friend who is well informed and/or whose opinion I trust the most and ask them for their opinion. If I don't trust them, I may go ask a whole bunch of other people, but I don't walk into a group of people who all share movies as a common interest and ask them if they liked The Wrestler. Some of them like it because of its symbolism and juxtaposition, some of them like it because it involves Mickey Rourke getting shot with a staple gun.

Apply that to video games and there's my answer.