Support NeoGAF

[PAULINK]

Why is that ?

Don't consumers deserve to know if a game is mediocre or not ?

Certainly, it's the reason why we have user reviews. Metacritic as a whole is a flawed idea, and putting out on spotlight like this just gives game reviewers more power to influence the outcome of a purchase or not (based on a fucking number).

Amazon user reviews were nice, people are not getting paid to do these reviews, they are just amateur musings of people where you can get a good idea on the general consensus of a game. And I would be lying if I said I don't read professional reviews by the press, quite the contrary. But compressing every single review into a quantifiable number that people will interpret on several different levels, it's just nonsense.

And for those who say "but steam has had it", yes, you're right. There are several things though that i'd like to point out: steam is limited to pc games and while it is arguably one of the biggest pc game dd retailers, amazon sells more than just pc games, in fact it spans out to every platform on the market. It's impact (in my opinion) will be on a much larger scale. Second, look at steam's implementation and then Amazon, and then tell me which one catches your eye first. A common consumer is likely to see the amazon implementation sooner because it's a lot more pronounced, is right there without needing to scroll or anything.

Metacritic deserves to exist but it shouldn't overshadow user reviews, something I can see happening.

 

[chadboban]

I don't know why OP used that pic, but it's actually way more in-your-face, like this:

That's weird, it shows up exactly the way it does in the OP for me.

 

[Pain]

I dislike Metacritic but at the very least, hopefully it'll make people more conscious of their purchases.

That doesn't make sense. Reviews are just someone elses opinion.

 

[ReturnOfTheRAT]

Just when we get out of Metacritic's grasp they pull us back in!

Block it.

 

[Raptomex]

I don't see the problem if you can think for yourself.

 

[cakefoo]

And to add to this. Star reviews actually represent real people and how they felt which some people value more than a publication giving a half hearted review because business as usual. How many of you buy an expensive product (ie, Speakers, Household electronics, Car parts) reading a publication review vs the person who actually bought the item and can tell you in detail how it worked out for them. It makes a huge difference

Consumer reviews are only good in limited cases. The more complex a product is, the more I rely on expert opinions. I don't need experts to tell me how organized velcro ties will keep my loose cables- but a videogame requires a more thorough rundown. Even the most helpful review on Amazon for Infamous SS sounds like the summary on the back of the box.

After playing the game, it was 100% worth the 4 month wait. The game is super polished and plays like a dream. I am not a big fan of take cover, wait for the enemy to reload and shoot kind of guy. It was fun the first time and then too many shooters copied to death. Infamous Second Son solves it brilliantly. Your shield is the ability to move and dash. You can dash, jump, up in the air, across the enemy to escape from bullets. You move, keep moving and move fluidly all the time. You can just zip on the walls and reach heights in seconds and no need to worry about sticky platforming etc. Every single mechanic works perfectly and I am sure will copied on the future games. Absolute visual stunner, every puddle, street light is rendered meticulously.

All of the AI and NPCs are mo-caped. Every expression including sadness can simply be felt without the character saying a word. Combat elements are very well thought out. It will require you to change the powers to handle AI effectively. Even with in a group, smoke helps with close combat while neon and other powers help in shooting down enimies far apart. Makes it for a dynamic and fun fights, with lots of re-playability.

Also there is a 5+ hr extra content available for free. Sucker punch is going all out, and it is the best that has come out on PS4.

This is the 'THE' most prettiest game released so far on PS4. Best part is it's dynamic lighting. It creates a vibrant as well as moody atmosphere depending on the time of day. Now that main character has 4 powers, particle effects are crazy. Neon effects during night are un-rivaled in games. Neon reflects on every thing and trails while dashing and moving are there just to hypnotize gamers. It is a true eye candy game.

The game pace is fast, and fast I mean super fast.. After brunout 3, this is the game where every a movement is blinding fast. Climbing to the top of a building feels astonishingly fast like wise chasing AI or dashing across levels to avoid bullets are all so satisfying. Controls are silky smooth, encourages the player to move fast. Any thing and every thing is a zoom and dash. Makes it easy for any one and every one to fall in love with Seattle

 

[QP3]

I have no issue with this. If anyone feels the need then most know by know of resources to see gameplay/impressions (message boards, youtube, twitch, etc.)

I don't see the problem if you can think for yourself.

That's the real problem, many people out there can't!

 

[kpaadet]

Great lets give more attention to these fine reviewers. /s

When can we expect Rotten Tomatoes score on movies?

 

[MikeE21286]

Smart by Metacritic. Dumb by Amazon

 

[Ken Masters]

And we thought review scores were corrupted before.....

 

[Zia]

Really good move by Amazon. Hopefully this means that consumers that are not quite as educated as the average GAF gamer will buy less bad (84 and under Metacritic) games, and good, overlooked games (85 and above Metacritic) will rise to the top.

 

[cakefoo]

And we thought review scores were corrupted before.....

The only solution is to get rid of reviews entirely.

 

[Ken Masters]

The only solution is to get rid of reviews entirely.

Or to not have such a major emphasis placed on these gaming website review scores

 

[Arkage]

Steam does it, collective acquiescence.

Amazon does it, collective rage.

Them fanboy colors really do shine. In any case, good for them. Metacritic is a valuable consumer tool no matter how much fuss one wants to make about objectivity.

 

[JABEE]

Really good move by Amazon. Hopefully this means that consumers that are not quite as educated as the average GAF gamer will buy less bad (84 and under Metacritic) games, and good, overlooked games (85 and above Metacritic) will rise to the top.

Less risks, more familiarity, design games in a way that are best played in a quick turn-around, review environment.

Those people control whether the dev team gets part of their salary. It's best to make sure we make those folks feel special and design the game in a way that holds hands as to not frustrate someone looking to marathon through a game to meet a deadline.

 

[SniperHunter]

Baddd idea

 

[cakefoo]

Or to not have such a major emphasis placed on these gaming website review scores

I'm talking about YOUR emphasis on corrupt reviews period.

 

[weevles]

Not a big deal. Metacritic made an arrangement with Amazon and/or vice versa. It's probably good to have customer reviews juxtaposed against "professional" critics, at least on paper.

 

[tiprun]

Seems like a right move to me.

 

[Verelios]

I'm thinking that this will go horribly wrong. As in more money for your 10 10 10s wrong.

 

[axisofweevils]

Bad idea. There's plenty of games I love that have bad MC scores and plenty of games I hate with absurdly high MCs.

For example, if I relied on MC, I would have missed The Wonderful 101.

 

[Gestault]

That doesn't make sense. Reviews are just someone elses opinion.

Except that's why they're valuable. Even allowing for different tastes, the best reviews are opinion pieces. There's no such thing as a useful impartial review, from my experiences. Reviews exist to (1) expose us to things we wouldn't otherwise encounter and/or (2) present a critical reaction to an unknown.

If we're talking about reviews which are influenced by something other than an opinion (like a business relationship, for example) then I think we'd all be in agreement that it's a problem.

 

[Mozendo]

What a terrible terrible move.
Hate metacritic with a passion.

 

[farisr]

Great. More weight is now going to be given to metacritic now...

 

[Htown]

Great lets give more attention to these fine reviewers. /s

When can we expect Rotten Tomatoes score on movies?

they already put imdb ratings on their streaming videos, so movies and TV are already covered.

 

[Loxley]

Steam has done this for years. No-one cares.

Yeah, why is this a problem? Besides, you practically have to squint to even see it - it's not like it's super intrusive or anything.

 

[baxter2231]

This is an awful idea.

Metacritic should be referred to less not more, sad that amazon uses them. What a joke.

 

[orochi91]

I like it. This will probably start happening on other online retail cites. It'll give
publishers and developers incentive to create better, quality games. Or it will
stifle creativity as publishers/devs attempt to create formulaic games in hopes
of scoring higher reviews lol.

 

[Dion Blaster]

Should have used Gamerankings!

Still don't get the Metacritic hate, it's not the website's fault that some companies base bonuses and such off of it.

 

[Schobeleth]

I'm not seeing it on any of the referenced games when I browse Amazon. Can anyone clarify if there's any prerequisite, or are they rolling it out to X amount of users at a time?

 

[Boss Mog]

The blame for this falls entirely on fanboys and whiners that flood amazon to write 1 star reviews of games that don't deserve it.

 

[farisr]

The blame for this falls entirely on fanboys and whiners that flood amazon to write 1 star reviews of games that don't deserve it.

Honestly, amazon should just only allow "amazon verified" reviews to come through. As in Amazon has confirmed you've purchased the game. That solves (most) of that problem right there.

 

[emag]

Bad idea. There's plenty of games I love that have bad MC scores and plenty of games I hate with absurdly high MCs.

For example, if I relied on MC, I would have missed The Wonderful 101.

You would draw the line above 78/100? That's W101's Metacritic score, which is a perfectly respectable score. It's even highlighted in green as a "good" game.

By and large, Metacritic does a great job separating the wheat from the chaff.

 

[AgentP]

Who cares? It saves consumers a step.

Critical thought?

 

[jcm]

How dare they offer their customers additional data?

 

[Yagharek]

I'm thinking that this will go horribly wrong. As in more money for your 10 10 10s wrong.

This. EA reviews will be particularly interesting.

 

[-Horizon-]

I personally won't look into them that much on the product page. I mean I've bought plenty of badly reviewed games and those didn't turn me off from getting them. This is just me though. I'm sure there are plenty of people who will feel differently about this.

 

[Dai Kaiju]

Definitely not helpful to the industry. Too many upstart gaming sites trying to make a name for themselves are giving really good games scores like 5 out of 10. Often times worse just for clicks. I mean, shit, people lose jobs and contracts over it when it shouldn't even be taken into consideration.

 

[TaiKH92]

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

Wow this sucks especially because there are many good games with scores lower than 80 :/

 

[Honey Bunny]

Awful news.

 

[Naminator]

OMG NOOO THE WORST THING EVER or something.

Seriously what's everyone's problem with this?

OHHHH NOOOOO the consumer will be slightly more informed about the product he's about to buy!
THE HORROR THE HORROR!

I personally don't care either way, it's not a bad thing to have Metacritic scores, but it's that great either.

I'd be happy with Amazon restricting user reviews to only verified owners!

EDIT: btw I'm not seeing any Metacritic scores on Amazon for some reason.

 

[Net_Wrecker]

This is terrible for games I love that scored low.

This is great for games I love that scored well.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

How can you explain enjoyment with a number?

I thought the first 40 hours of Bravely Default were great, i thought the last 40 hours of Bravely Default were horrendous, how do i explain this with a number? Do I give the first half a 10 and the 2nd half a 0 and then give the total game a 5? What's the scientific formula they use?

I have no problem with game reviews, i have a problem with people skipping a game review and looking at a number, and then judging that game with a number, and publishers paying developers based on that #, and people buying (or not buying) that game based on that number.

 

[SatelliteOfLove]

lol. way to cede ownership to metacritic.

This is problematic on many levels.

Metacritic is like Freddy Kreuger, if we don't believe in it, it can't harm us*, but alot of people believe.

*us here being Obsidian

 

[rdrr gnr]

Is this an April Fools joke? because if it isn't, this is a terrible decision that gives even more power to score aggregator sites like MetaCritic and RT that I've already blocked.

What do you have against RT?

 

[cakefoo]

Bad idea. There's plenty of games I love that have bad MC scores and plenty of games I hate with absurdly high MCs.

For example, if I relied on MC, I would have missed The Wonderful 101.

Considering Wonderful 101 has a 78% Metascore, I don't get how that's a good example.

 

[keisuke999]

I don't see a problem. I mean, you can check Metacritic, then you can compare it to user reviews on Amazon, right?

 

[rdrr gnr]

Considering Wonderful 101 has a 78% Metascore, I don't get how that's a good example.

90+ Great. 80+ Good. 70+ like having your fingernails ripped off with pliers.

 

[The Albatross]

Who cares? It saves consumers a step.

This. Makes perfect sense.

 

[dragonbane]

Ugh, I hate MC so much.