It's blowing my mind there are so many people that don't get this.
-
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
It's blowing my mind there are so many people that don't get this.
Typographenia
Member
It's not screaming out at you from the page, and it should likely be a useful asset for people looking to make gift purchases.
While I don't especially like metacritic, this seems like an overall decent thing for amazon to do for giftgivers.
While I don't especially like metacritic, this seems like an overall decent thing for amazon to do for giftgivers.
7DollarHagane
Banned
Dont feel good about anything that increases the visibility or importance of metacritic
it's bad for the good games that should have been media darlings. TW101 at 78. Ugh. Games like that.
No doubt pubs will raise their money flow to review sites. Amazon is fucking huge. Seeing MC scores dead center will sway customers no problem.
7DollarHagane
Banned
It discourages trying varied products because it squashes outlier positive reviews for niche products.
It also encourages the questionable review score practice and paying for those higher review scores
Guns, torrents-- things get used for the wrong reasons, and that doesn't make them inherently shitty.
dragonbane
Member
Implementation looks hideous too:
LightofRohan
Member
Just what we need. That number to have more validity.
This isn't the 90's anymore... we don't need to know if a game is playable start to finish. And if there is an issue, it is usually after the fact and deals with server problems -- so reviewers don't even touch it.
If it was actually used that way then there would be no-harm in it at all. As it stands now, there is WAY too much weight given to the score and it affects developers way too negatively.
If it was more like rotten-tomatoes, nobody would really care.
This isn't the 90's anymore... we don't need to know if a game is playable start to finish. And if there is an issue, it is usually after the fact and deals with server problems -- so reviewers don't even touch it.
If it was actually used that way then there would be no-harm in it at all. As it stands now, there is WAY too much weight given to the score and it affects developers way too negatively.
If it was more like rotten-tomatoes, nobody would really care.
IcyRhythms
Member
Not sure why people feel Metacritic is a bad thing. In the end, the only opinion that matters of game y or x is that of your own. Nobody can tell you to like a game or that it's better than something you already enjoy.
It's just more fuel for mind fucked fanboy wars. If the fuel wasn't Metacritic, it would be something else.
It's just more fuel for mind fucked fanboy wars. If the fuel wasn't Metacritic, it would be something else.
nah it's the colors. The number placing is fine. Red and yellow hit me harder than green does.
Shouldn't Publishers be blamed for that and not Metacritic?
It's when people confuse critical reception with a game's quality where it becomes a problem. It's not inherently Metacritic's fault, in my opinion. A game's reception by the enthusiast press is not an absolute marker for the quality of the game, and I feel that some people forget that. Forming one's own opinion and criticisms is a good thing. Some of my favorite games are in the 60s.I don't personally use it, but I agree that Metacritic could be used as one of many guidelines, and nothing more.
Cloud Strife
Member
So you're saying I should buy a game like Final Fantasy All The Bravest because I like Final Fantasy and fuck reviews because they are someone else's opinion?
People deserve to know if the game they are purchasing has been critically panned. If they still choose to get it then fine, that's their choice. If they have fun with it then fine, reviews ARE someone else's opinion.
But like I said, at the very least, people should know what others think of the game they are purchasing. Metacritic isn't the best, but it can be a gateway to consumer awareness. IMO you should never blindly buy a game you know next to nothing about save for official information (look at the downgrade from Dark Souls II) What if they purchase a critically panned game and surprise! It sucks!
You act like all reviews are different and there is never a consensus for any game.
fine with me. one less website I have to visit before buying a game. honestly though, metacritic scores don't mean much to me. Many of my favorite games are in the 60-80 range, and I have downright despised games that are in the 90s. I mostly look at the score to get a general idea of what the critical reaction to a game has been.
RyanPierre
Member
The implementation of it appears to have been updated (it's off to the right of the stars now). Wondering if people find this more palatable...
It still boggles my mind that none of us have started something to counter the shitty aggregate scores that are starting to be all pervasive.
I figure we at GAF should come up with some solution- how to evaluate these scores, to put them in perspective of the reviewer/site that publishes them and not to end up on Amazon of all places.
That 0.1 vs Angry Joe debate was horribly stupid on both sides, but there's got to be some better system to evaluate games :/
I figure we at GAF should come up with some solution- how to evaluate these scores, to put them in perspective of the reviewer/site that publishes them and not to end up on Amazon of all places.
That 0.1 vs Angry Joe debate was horribly stupid on both sides, but there's got to be some better system to evaluate games :/