-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Amazon now displays Metacritic Score
- Thread starter jbug617
- Start date
people are putting "experience working in games with scores over 80 on Metacritic" as requisites on job offers dude, shitty metacritic is here to stay
If a game has a 60 on Metacritic then there's a pretty good chance it's a pretty poor game.
Family Fry
Member
Looks like they have updated it to make it more present.
that user score BURN
TurkishEmperor
But how can you use your own judgment if you haven't even played the game?
Not exactly a 60, but I'm sure you'll find plenty of people on here or other boards that loved this game.
hey_it's_that_dog
benevolent sexism
How do you feel about the product reviews already in place on Amazon. They are heavily flawed as an accurate metric of quality (for many of the same reasons as MC is flawed). Should they be eliminated?
There is enough data in Amazon's internal rating system itself already. Adding the metascore doesn't really add much, if anything, when there is a system on place. Two different review systems in one area just doesn't make sense.
The Metacritic press scores don't inform consumers because major problems with games often aren't reflected in the individual scores that contribute to it.
Amazon star ratings and Metacritic user scores don't inform consumers because they're both extremely vulnerable to being bombarded by hardcore apologists and haters alike.
All forms of numerical ratings for games need to go away. They're completely unreliable and they do nothing to help people make better purchases.
Amazon star ratings and Metacritic user scores don't inform consumers because they're both extremely vulnerable to being bombarded by hardcore apologists and haters alike.
All forms of numerical ratings for games need to go away. They're completely unreliable and they do nothing to help people make better purchases.
It's not like you couldn't just google the game's name and have the metascore prominently displayed in half a second anyway.
All this does is save people the time of opening a new tab.
The Silver
Member
Time for more "oscar-bait" games.
TaroYamada
Member
I'm not a particularly big proponent of MC but if this bothers you why don't you just not bother with it? It hardly seems intrusive...
hey_it's_that_dog
benevolent sexism
Human beings are unique in their ability to learn and benefit extensively from the judgment of others. It would be dumb to waste it.
Why is Metacritic bad? I don't find anything wrong with Metacritic. There's something very wrong when publishers/developers use it as a basis for pay/bonuses, but that isn't a problem inherent with Metacritic itself but with publishers attitudes towards review scores in general. The problem seems to be with publishers, not Metacritic.
SwiftDeath
Member
Well at least Obsidian has wised up to doing deals involving metacritic so I guess maybe others might follow that example
brandonh83
Banned
I think there's more to it than just that. There are a lot of nasty under the table things going on as it is. Now that Amazon, a huge consumer outlet is posting Metacritic scores right there, who knows what may happen. Companies are going to manhandle this I fear.
If I'm wrong? Fuck yeah, awesome. I hope I am.
hey_it's_that_dog
benevolent sexism
It adds the opinions of professional reviewers to the opinions of consumers. Neither should be taken at face value, but both are potentially useful information in their own ways.
Baron von Loathsome
Member
So what, you think we're somehow going to get the publishers to change their attitude towards Metacritic? This move will just make the publishers act worse.
I'll explain one of Metacritic's biggest problems.
You have people who vote games out of 3 stars / 5 stars / 10 points / 100 points. The margin of error is horrendous.
And on top of that they have "trusted" reviewers who normally score 86% lower than the average rating and berate a game for the littlest of things. There have even been cases of false reviewing, and some "reviewers" are still listed as "reliable", who's score affects a game's Metacritic score.
You have people who vote games out of 3 stars / 5 stars / 10 points / 100 points. The margin of error is horrendous.
And on top of that they have "trusted" reviewers who normally score 86% lower than the average rating and berate a game for the littlest of things. There have even been cases of false reviewing, and some "reviewers" are still listed as "reliable", who's score affects a game's Metacritic score.
Saint Gregory
Member
Damn, I love Amazon but this is awful.
I read some interview a while ago where a dev said that their performance bonuses for their game was tied directly to the metacritic score and it made me just shake my head
I read some interview a while ago where a dev said that their performance bonuses for their game was tied directly to the metacritic score and it made me just shake my head
Yeah
Always use it on Steam for indies or games in general that i don't know much about, i like it
Fixed2BeBroken
Member
I'm glad it display's the meta-scores, hopefully people realize the stupidity of "user scores."
also, let's get real, the issue with reviews tends to be that most reviewers ignore the whole scale and tend to overrate the most popular releases because moneyhats involved or whatever's involved behind the scenes
but as a basis for wether a game is of good quality or not, it's generally okay for people who need others to decide for them for whatever reason (lack of time for research, etc). When was the last time that a terrific game got universally shitted on? I cant think of any since the God Hand IGN thing.
the opposite could be more accurate considering Assassin's Creed III has an 85 rating, but the internet in general has taken care of that
what I mean is, Amazon already offers images, video, and a detailed description of the game. If you don't care about reviews, look at that. If you do, look at the reviews, or look at both.
People who would look at a game on amazon, see a big metacritic score and instantly decide to spend $60 were already shitty buyers in the first place.
this is just more info, it's there to take it or leave it
but as a basis for wether a game is of good quality or not, it's generally okay for people who need others to decide for them for whatever reason (lack of time for research, etc). When was the last time that a terrific game got universally shitted on? I cant think of any since the God Hand IGN thing.
the opposite could be more accurate considering Assassin's Creed III has an 85 rating, but the internet in general has taken care of that
what I mean is, Amazon already offers images, video, and a detailed description of the game. If you don't care about reviews, look at that. If you do, look at the reviews, or look at both.
People who would look at a game on amazon, see a big metacritic score and instantly decide to spend $60 were already shitty buyers in the first place.
this is just more info, it's there to take it or leave it
MetroidPrimeRib
Banned
Because slapping together 1-5, 1-10, 1-00 into an aggregate of 1-100 as just a plain number with no written review with big reviewers and reviewers nobody has heard of trying to make a name on Metacritic by being the lowest scorer is really really dumb.
And then there's the user reviews, equally as useless and written only in black and white 0/1s or 10/9s with either massive fellating of the game or massive shitting on it
NoMoreTrolls
Banned
Good. Saves me a step when checking out the rare title I haven't been following at all. The trick is to treat any score above a 65 as something you should do more research on before writing it off. There have been several games on the lower end of that spectrum that appealed highly to my tastes, despite the "low" score. I typically use Metacritic as a barometer for whether or not a game is total shit, but an aggregate score isn't terribly useful for anything more than that.
WhiskeyKnight
Member
Metacritic, while certainly far from perfect, does have a broad correlation to game quality.
I fail to see how unobtrusively giving consumers a little extra information is a bad thing.
I fail to see how unobtrusively giving consumers a little extra information is a bad thing.
hey_it's_that_dog
benevolent sexism
If Metacritic ceased to exist tomorrow, would publishers suddenly stop caring about review scores? Would they stop doing exotic press junkets and giving out ridiculous swag to journalists who are supposed to be impartial?
Arya Stark
Neo Member
Quick! Everyone overreact while forgetting Steam has done this since like forever ago.
BurnOutBrighter
Banned
The Amazon reviews do a far better job than Metacritic anyway (when they aren't trolling, that is).
Ol No Bones
Banned
What's the problem?
Ploid 3.0
Member
I always found user reviews to be more credible than professional reviews. User reviews got me to buy GTA3. Though now with fake users it's tough to find honest user reviews, but I still think it's worth looking for user reviews over the game journalists reviews.
GAF.
brandonh83
Banned
Since when is Steam and Amazon equals in terms of consumer attention?
Baron von Loathsome
Member
Steam shouldn't be pulling this, either.
MMaRsu
Banned
Reviews are not to be trusted.
MetroidPrimeRib
Banned
If someone else does it, it's okay if others do it too!
How about the opposite? Aka GTAIV?