What a coincidence-- the top games are made by Valve.
-
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
Kind of, yeah. Metacritic is serving as a repeater for bad information.
Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew
Banned
I am planning to, yes. (Thanks for remembering!) I've undertaken so much this year that I'm scratching my head on where to ask.
However, I want it to be more social than metacritic, being focus only on games, ensure people get rewarded (whether be games or DLC) for contributing, split ad-revenues, track playthrough, achievements, have a proper hub for all games where you can view all the walkthroughs or twitch streams or youtube videos by internet personalities and more. I am not in it for the money, and I think keeping it that way for a very long time will make it more than what metacritic is right now.
I don't hate metacritic, I just hate how there is no direct feedback to developers and that they lose bonus if their score isn't "90 or above". Its the industry's fault for giving them that much power and I wish it wasn't that way. Future needs to be friendlier.
What's shitty about it? What makes a metacritic score any less valid than an amazon review score that anybody can post?
Last time I check, Steam has become the defacto PC gaming source. Hell, the first question on any PC game sale thread on CAG, is if the game is steam redeemable.
Its foolish to dismiss steam, just because they're not the giant amazon is.
I agree with you completely. The power and the incentive to use numerical scoring is a conflict of interest. It serves only to further-integrate outlets into PR plans, and incentivizes the giving and receiving of favors.
This system is at best valueless from an editorial perspective and at worst a weapon for larger, more weighted outlets to wield at the expense of smaller outlets. Outlets with scoring systems more conducive to higher scores receive preferential treatment. Jeff Gerstmann mentioned this when talking about the 5 star system he uses. Sessler mentioned how G4 was encouraged to move away from the same system.
Professional salaries and futures are on the line. This system and the power it gives will lead to unethical behavior. This system isn't something that outlets should let incubate and grow.
teruterubozu
Member
I'm sure if they had a game version of IMDB they'd do it. I wouldn't be surprised if they make a deal with Consumer Reports & Pitchfork/Rolling Stones too.
Weltall Zero
Member
Because the cool thing to do is hate on Metacritic as a literal sum of everything that is wrong with videogame press, rather than addressing the root problems themselves.
Because Metacritic is a soulless site but Amazon is made of puppies and rainbows.
I knew posts would qualify this as a catastrophe before even clicking the topic title.
Seems like this is giving people a reason to back out of a purchase that they otherwise would have made.
People are going to look at reviews anyway. This just saves them some time.
I'm not sure if this is new but metacritic pages display "Buy from Amazon.com" I've only visited the site a few times but I'm pretty sure that's new.
And press outlets go along for the ride. Being on MetaCritic gives you an advantage over outlets that aren't on MetaCritic.
King Gilga
Member
This is nice.
It's always annoying when a steam game's page doesn't have the metacritic score for some reason and I have to go look it up manually.
I always check just to see the general reception of the game, I don't judge by it alone but it's always nice to have that information.
The same reason I always look at the customer reviews on amazon products. Always good for consumers to be able to see that information more conveniently.
It's always annoying when a steam game's page doesn't have the metacritic score for some reason and I have to go look it up manually.
I always check just to see the general reception of the game, I don't judge by it alone but it's always nice to have that information.
The same reason I always look at the customer reviews on amazon products. Always good for consumers to be able to see that information more conveniently.
Pinko Marx
Banned
What did you hope Amazon would do in the first place?
Does it really?
For them to buy a game based on an aggregated number based on the opinions of a bunch of random people, only for them to realize the game is not for them, despite not actually looking at why the game got the score it did, only for them to bitch and rant on forums that the game is "overrated"?
Metacritic is a cancer
crimsonheadGCN
Banned
I thought that Amazon has been doing this for a while now.
Pinko Marx
Banned
Is that a person that would have even bought said game in the first place?
Probably not.
Argument By Question is a fallacy, the problems with metacritic are well known and have been discussed in depth many times
teruterubozu
Member
This is just integrated the moneyhats that already exists.
Nothing will change - Amazon will still sell tons of GTA, Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed. Just like yesterday, today and tomorrow.
Nothing will change - Amazon will still sell tons of GTA, Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed. Just like yesterday, today and tomorrow.
No seriously, what makes metacritic scores any less valid than random user scores, many of which have never actually seen the game in question?
Developers that will be increasingly pressured into contracts with metacritic requirements in them care.
hey_it's_that_dog
benevolent sexism
How many of those problems also apply to Amazon's existing user rating system? Should they get rid of that as well? I mean, how can you assign a numerical quantity to a subject experience of any product?
You don't need to agree with Metacritic scores to make it useful. I almost always check Metacritic to find some range of reviews to read after checking gameplay. Besides, it's not like there's a massive branded banner around it. I'd say it's pretty well done.
You could argue that those user reviews aren't an accurate reflection of the game either.
What Amazon is lacking now is the ability for users to submit/link to their gameplay footage. They allow pictures after all.
You could argue that those user reviews aren't an accurate reflection of the game either.
What Amazon is lacking now is the ability for users to submit/link to their gameplay footage. They allow pictures after all.
the end is nigh
Hah. I know you're joking, but this is probably what some folks here are envisioning.
Damn right. Metacritic is toxic. (Read: http://kotaku.com/metacritic-matters-how-review-scores-hurt-video-games-472462218)
sixteen-bit
Member
how long until publishers push back, lol
VaultBoy101
Member
Yep.
Those massive, AAA well scoring titles aren't the ones that will suffer. The mid tier games, the ones that are already dying are the ones that will suffer, because those games are the impulse buys...not gonna happen if there is a constant reminder that it's only a 6/7 out of 10 scoring title.
I would have honestly preferred if amazon had teamed up with a non score based singular reviewer, and then people can actually READ the pro's and cons of the title. Too much emphasis is on scores as it is, and this is just making things worse.
The system can't overcome deliberate widespread fraud, malfeasance, and corruption, but that may be setting an unreasonably high bar. That is a weakness in any sort of professional review, and is not unique to Metacritic or to games. Moreover, if anything the averaging effect in Metacritic helps to mitigate such problems, as not all of the reviewers would be subject to the controlled environment. If you take an attitude of utter skepticism toward any review...well, that's fine, but you are not going to find any alternative system that serves you better in that case.
The prevalence of the idea on GAF that a Metacritic score is less valid than a random sample from an individual outlet alarms me. The concept that increasing your sample size reduces the error in the estimated average is not exactly rocket science; it's one of the most elementary principles of statistical sampling.
If you dislike some of the policies of people who use Metacritic scores - like tying compensation to the Metacritic average - that's fine, but it's a totally separate issue from the validity of the scores. The whole situation reminds me a lot of the rage directed toward standardized tests in schools. NCLB and the policy decisions based on it created all the problems, but it was the concept of test standardization itself that became the scapegoat for the mindless echo chamber.
Last I checked that didn't change anything I said. Publishers will care a lot more about a fat MC score next to Amazon's add to cart button than they ever did about it being on Steam. There is no comparison. Like someone said on the first page, publishers can just barely bring themselves to be concerned about the PC market in general.
There's already an aggregated number based on the opinions of a bunch of random people on Amazon pages. It's called the Amazon review score.
Not sure why this is so much worse.
the fact that anyone can write an amazon review is BETTER than having a clique of connected outlets with vested interests given exclusive rights to review
and on amazon every review is equal, no one review is given 20 times the weight of another
so that's two reasons why for a start
that's not to say amazon reviews are good, they're stupid shit, but its at least evenly layered shit
I think people are putting way to much stock into this. I don't think its going to deter people by the masses from buying a game they were already pumped for, really.
Yup, I love how its integrated in Steam already. Helps consumers make good purchasing decisions.
endresults
Member
Yeah, I shouldn't look at Consumer Reports or specialty resources before I buy my next car either, right? I like the idea. Good games get good ratings and lone wolves can't drive the scores up or down more than a few points.
Naked Snake
Member
While I don't necessarily support having metacritic scores on Amazon, I sincerely don't understand the strong hate for metacritic on GAF. It seems irrational to me, especially when "review threads" are usually all the rage for every game here.
It's an aggregate score of a large number independent reviews, what's the big deal? I mostly use metacritic to glance at review scores (and read the blurbs) from individual sites that I care about; it's a convenient way of accessing them all in one place. But I still find the overall "metascore" useful; not in the sense that it would convince me that a game scoring 85 is "better than" one scoring an 80... But surely there's some merit behind it.
It's an aggregate score of a large number independent reviews, what's the big deal? I mostly use metacritic to glance at review scores (and read the blurbs) from individual sites that I care about; it's a convenient way of accessing them all in one place. But I still find the overall "metascore" useful; not in the sense that it would convince me that a game scoring 85 is "better than" one scoring an 80... But surely there's some merit behind it.
nailbombxx
Member
If I'm not mistaken, Journalist reviews on Metacritic have greater influence on the overall score than the common user. Even certain journalist sites don't have the same amount of weight or importance. It is not a level playing field like Amazon's own rating system.