Tom Nook Sawyer
Member
Opencritic only uses english reviews, they need to work on that.
Even with their limitations, they still are vastly surprise to the vat of trash that is Metacritic
Opencritic only uses english reviews, they need to work on that.
I just think is always better to try and sound these things out in private and see if there isn't some kind of solution that can be found, rather than splashing it in public in the first instance.Why? The situation seems extremely clear-cut.
Ahh thats the word I was looking for instead of webcrawler - scraping. Lazy as fuck if it is...Digital plagiarism. OpenCritic has APIs that you can license and use to get the data you want from them, essentially paying them for their work in aggregating this data. Instead, Metacritic is scraping their data for free.
Ahh thats the word I was looking for instead of webcrawler - scraping. Lazy as fuck if it is...
Reminds me of that IT bloke that got a number of Chinese IT guys to do his job for him - at least he paid them
ps3ud0 8)
You don't have to sign your posts, you know. Friendly advice
Review threads here on gaf should link to opencritic rather than metacritic tbh
That's an admission of guilt if ever I've seen one.They were fast over at Metacritic. Those links have been changed.
You don't have to sign your posts, you know. Friendly advice
I once thought you could be fake Kaz, but today I think youre bettermaybe he does it to track whether people are stealing them
You don't have to sign your posts, you know. Friendly advice
He always has and always will
They were fast over at Metacritic. Those links have been changed.
Oh. Nevermind then. Just thought it was odd.
Oh. Nevermind then. Just thought it was odd.
gimmick posters don't last that long. Just be glad it's not cat gifs like that other guy.
If it really bothers you, you could always just put him on your ignore list.Oh. Nevermind then. Just thought it was odd.
That's cool. I honestly didn't really differentiate one vs the other before, but now if I were to look at a review aggregator, I'd go to OpenCritic.Recently I've been seeing a lot of the review threads linking to them both. I thought it was cool to see the thread creators start including Opencritic as well.
Alcoholikaust has been here for a long time. The fact that you only see cat gifs, says more about you than him.
To save them looking for reviews?Why would metacritic be pulling from opencritic anyway? It's not like they weren't getting PCGamer reviews before opencritic existed.
Why would metacritic be pulling from opencritic anyway? It's not like they weren't getting PCGamer reviews before opencritic existed.
Now I'm curious how metacritic and opencritic work. how much is automated how much is manual entry?
You do now!I have no idea how Metacritic works.
For OpenCritic, all of the reviews are gathered automatically by loading/parsing review listing pages of each publication. In most cases, the review data can be automatically extracted from the page.
If (for whatever reason) it can't extract all the data, it flags it for admin review. Each of us have apps on our phones that lets us manage reviews very quickly with round-the-clock coverage. The most common reason for failing to auto-add are reviews-in-progress, as we don't post a review for scoring publications if we can't extract the score. Every review gets posted in a chat river so that we can quickly scan for errors (though our error rate is very low).
We also have a few other small edge cases. Critics have our email and if they email any review URL, we'll automatically load it for admin review in advance of the email.
I have no idea how Metacritic works.
Impressive, and I don't even see ads on the site. Is the only thing supporting your site atm is referral purchase links?
What defines an error? Can you give an exact error rate?For OpenCritic, all of the reviews are gathered automatically by loading/parsing review listing pages of each publication. In most cases, the review data can be automatically extracted from the page.
If (for whatever reason) it can't extract all the data, it flags it for admin review. Each of us have apps on our phones that lets us manage reviews very quickly with round-the-clock coverage. The most common reason for failing to auto-add are reviews-in-progress, as we don't post a review for scoring publications if we can't extract the score. Every review gets posted in a chat river so that we can quickly scan for errors (though our error rate is very low).
We also have a few other small edge cases. Critics have our email and if they email any review URL, we'll automatically load it for admin review in advance of the email.
I have no idea how Metacritic works.
For OpenCritic, all of the reviews are gathered automatically by loading/parsing review listing pages of each publication. In most cases, the review data can be automatically extracted from the page.
If (for whatever reason) it can't extract all the data, it flags it for admin review. Each of us have apps on our phones that lets us manage reviews very quickly with round-the-clock coverage. The most common reason for failing to auto-add are reviews-in-progress, as we don't post a review for scoring publications if we can't extract the score. Every review gets posted in a chat river so that we can quickly scan for errors (though our error rate is very low).
We also have a few other small edge cases. Critics have our email and if they email any review URL, we'll automatically load it for admin review in advance of the email.
I have no idea how Metacritic works.
What defines an error? Can you give your exact error rate?
Edit: Decided to go ahead and sign up for an account and I can't just sign up with an email address? Am I missing the option?
So an error (admin review requests) seems to typically be something missed by the algorithm running what appears to be language-learning software to scan for keyphrases.Good question that I unfortunately can't answer. We don't define them as "errors," we just flag for admin review. These range everywhere from "there's a terrible, terrible quote" to "we couldn't figure out what platform they reviewed the game on" to "searching for the game resulted in 2 similar results so we didn't auto-add." Some aren't actually "errors"
As an example, GamesRadar+'s DOOM review was flagged for review because our system couldn't automatically extract what platform the review was conducted on. There's no clear mention of "this review was done on X." So even though it's flagged for review on our end, it's not actually an error.
You are as smart as you look. I like you guysStoring passwords = inviting hackers :-\ We're still just 2 developers so we put our effort where it matters. We don't think the incremental gains of signing up with email are worth it over multiple other options.
Indeed, quite endearing.You are as smart as you look. I like you guys
So open crit is not open? I assumed by name that it was open and free for anyone to use like opengl.
Couldn't Metacritic just reformat all their links on the fly in the future and thus make it impossible to tell now that it's been pointed out? I wouldn't think it'd be overly difficult to sanitize the links to a point where no one can tell anymore.
Couldn't Metacritic just reformat all their links on the fly in the future and thus make it impossible to tell now that it's been pointed out? I wouldn't think it'd be overly difficult to sanitize the links to a point where no one can tell anymore.