pixelation
Member
I mean... if they could moderate reviews and make sure that their points of view are valid and aren't obvious hate/troll reviews meant to bring down the games user rating...
Last edited:
-
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.
Metacritic should just remove the user ratings at this point and follow OpenCritic as a Critics Only Aggregate.
- Thread starter MiyazakiHatesKojima
- Start date
- Opinion
spookyfish
Member
So, straight negative reviews are “a review bomb,” but all the 5-star reviews on PS Store before it ever came out and the “10 out of 10!!” obvious shill reviews are NOT a review brigade? Sure, Jan.
I don’t know how you’d do it, but the only reviews that matter should be from those who actually played the game. Ever.
I don’t know how you’d do it, but the only reviews that matter should be from those who actually played the game. Ever.
Last edited:
RedVIper
Banned
Why?
I've watched the entire game like twice now.
The gameplay seems pretty much the same as the first one. Playing the game is not going to change my opinion on the story, which is the main focus of this type of game anyway.
Explosive Zombie
Banned
37,000 user scores... that IS the most in Metacritic history, isn't it?
mcjmetroid
Member
Here fixed it for you
sid2vicious
Banned
OP that's got to be one of your dumbest ideas ever! You want to take away the voice of the people in exchange to giving it full control to sjw critics, because you don't agree with the general consensus? Fuck that. How about we do the reverse and eliminate useless critics instead? I like that idea better. Then the rating system will be more similar to steam, a system rated by gamers for gamers who bought and played games based on their own personal experience, which I find that vastly superior than critics reviews and paid shills.
Last edited:
ZehDon
Member
37,000k? At this point, I'm just impressed at the sheer number.
thicc_girls_are_teh_best
Member
I honestly think the majority of negative reviews are from people upset over a certain incident involving a certain character at a certain point within the first couple hours of the game.
And it's not even because of the incident itself, but the logic surrounding it purposely dumbing said certain character down to force the situation. It was all for shock value and a large amount of genuine fans aren't happy with that.
And it's not even because of the incident itself, but the logic surrounding it purposely dumbing said certain character down to force the situation. It was all for shock value and a large amount of genuine fans aren't happy with that.
#Phonepunk#
Banned
If this was an actual problem then the site would fix it. It’s literally one of the only things the site exists for. So as long as metacritic is ok with it that’s the way it stays. Metacritic themselves don’t care so why should we? Are you really that invested in a score for a video game? Lol
People just neEd to get a grip. Professional reviews are meaningless. Most game critics are mediocre and any jackass could do that job. There is no special training or skills required. They have no deeper insight that the normal gamer doesn’t not have. The only difference between a professional reviewer and a gamer is the first one is paid. That’s it.
If they aren’t happy with users being able to have a say they will do something about it. Until then all your complaining about review bombing is entirely in vain. Get the fuck over it.
People just neEd to get a grip. Professional reviews are meaningless. Most game critics are mediocre and any jackass could do that job. There is no special training or skills required. They have no deeper insight that the normal gamer doesn’t not have. The only difference between a professional reviewer and a gamer is the first one is paid. That’s it.
If they aren’t happy with users being able to have a say they will do something about it. Until then all your complaining about review bombing is entirely in vain. Get the fuck over it.
Last edited:
Fbh
Member
Why? It's user reviews. If someone wants to give a game a 2/10 because they don't like the woke stuff in it, or the direction the story goes, or any other reason , it's their own opinion.
The one thing that would be useful is if they had some way to link your various accounts to your metacritic one so you could filter reviews from people that actually own or have played the game
The one thing that would be useful is if they had some way to link your various accounts to your metacritic one so you could filter reviews from people that actually own or have played the game
HighResTomato
Member
Opinion control
Codswallop_
Neophyte
I trust user reviews far more than bought and paid for "critics" at this point, there have been glaring problems with preferential treatment and nepotism in the industry for years now.
Holammer
Member
The obvious solution is a robust user rating system in the online store like Steam does, if someone downvotes for whatever reason, the vote is earned by having paid for it.
Would I trust Sony not to obfuscate statistics and manipulate the score?
... noooooope, maybe have an impartial third party do it for them.
Would I trust Sony not to obfuscate statistics and manipulate the score?
... noooooope, maybe have an impartial third party do it for them.
samporter
Banned
Dats reysis. You are literally denying poor people, college students, and "immigrants" from participating.
Explosive Zombie
Banned
Notice people only get real concerned with logic problems when it hurts their feelings, though? That said the logic is fine.
El Sueño
Member
I have the game and I know how Naughty Dogs works, that's closed the deal for me. I see the reviews and make no sense at all. You can´t score The Last of Us 2 objectively with a 30. I mean that's plain trolling, Nobody with a normal IQ would pay serious attention to that review (or alike).
ExpandKong
Banned
Abolish user reviews! Nevermind, that’s not far enough - abolish users! Only critics should be able to play videogames! Then they can tell us how we should have felt about them!
Grow up.
Grow up.
OutRun88
Member
You can, but then your review is marred with a "Game Refunded" tag in vivid color
bumleforce
Member
I don't think they should. I think there have been some trolling and review bombing at the start but the user score went to 3.5 or something like that when it was under 10k reviews. Its now at almost 50k user reviews and its still the same. From playing it and watching social media a lot of people just don't like it like the first one so its gonna score lower. I think the last jedi comparison is fair. It does make me wonder too if so many people dislike it why are reviewers rateing it so high? Whole thing just shows meta critic is a joke
prinz_valium
Member
I don't think so.
Why should MC should just become the same as OpenCritic?
Why should MC should just become the same as OpenCritic?
rofif
Banned
Metacritic is bullshit. Some of my fav games have low scores. Same with rotten tomatoes... pitch black is like my fav movie and it's crap according to RT.
This is something crazy as this game get's all 10s and it is clearly not a 10 game... especially as a game or story
This is something crazy as this game get's all 10s and it is clearly not a 10 game... especially as a game or story
Last edited:
It's annoying how this conversation only comes up when people won't play along with the "greatest game ever" or "most important movie of our times" narrative.
Like there's a desire to "brag" about how amazingly good the newest corporate product is but those naughty customers keep leaving troll reviews.
Personally, I loved Death Stranding. I know many other hated it.
I'm fine with getting into arguments with people about it online.
I don't really care if it gets a bunch of zero star reviews on some aggregator site.
Removing the user scores does nothing other than protecting the products and brands of these corporations.
I don't think that should be Metacritic's responsibility.
Like there's a desire to "brag" about how amazingly good the newest corporate product is but those naughty customers keep leaving troll reviews.
Personally, I loved Death Stranding. I know many other hated it.
I'm fine with getting into arguments with people about it online.
I don't really care if it gets a bunch of zero star reviews on some aggregator site.
Removing the user scores does nothing other than protecting the products and brands of these corporations.
I don't think that should be Metacritic's responsibility.
TheSHEEEP
Gold Member
There's only one important rating telling about how likely you are to like a game, and it is on the right side, with the word "user" or "player" nearby.
"Professional" reviews are nice as a player to get some information, but how someone of the access media rates a game made by someone who indirectly (or directly...) pays their bills is of no importance.
It is widely known that "professional" critics are easily wooed by a big marketing campaign, certain keywords and generally show strong favoritism to games that are "brave and stunning" or push the right agendas.
For some wild reason, actual players show a much better grasp of what a game is actually about and how well it achieves what it sets out to do. Without buying as much into bs marketing as "professional" critics do.
On average, anyway.
It should be the other way around, really, if "professionals" actually did their job but that's where we are right now.
Still, review bombing is a problem and there's no doubt that it is the case here.
Don't really know the solution to it, though. Steam's approach of not counting reviews from a certain time is BS as it eliminates valid reviews as well.
After all, though, it is very obvious to anyone looking at a game's rating if there is some kind of review bombing going on - tons of 0 or 5-start rating generally give it away.
Let's be real, only few games are so terrible as to deserve 0-1 stars.
"Professional" reviews are nice as a player to get some information, but how someone of the access media rates a game made by someone who indirectly (or directly...) pays their bills is of no importance.
It is widely known that "professional" critics are easily wooed by a big marketing campaign, certain keywords and generally show strong favoritism to games that are "brave and stunning" or push the right agendas.
For some wild reason, actual players show a much better grasp of what a game is actually about and how well it achieves what it sets out to do. Without buying as much into bs marketing as "professional" critics do.
On average, anyway.
It should be the other way around, really, if "professionals" actually did their job but that's where we are right now.
Still, review bombing is a problem and there's no doubt that it is the case here.
Don't really know the solution to it, though. Steam's approach of not counting reviews from a certain time is BS as it eliminates valid reviews as well.
After all, though, it is very obvious to anyone looking at a game's rating if there is some kind of review bombing going on - tons of 0 or 5-start rating generally give it away.
Let's be real, only few games are so terrible as to deserve 0-1 stars.
nikolino840
Member
Shadowstar39
Member
Hell no. How else are fans allowed to use their voice? And you want to silence them. Let me guess you are the type who likes extra moderation, anti free speech and suppression of opinion. It's as bad as when all these news publications shit off their comments section. Or how Google goes after site ad revenue based on comments. People can disagree.
I relate this to how awful the last jedi and other recent movies are. Fans need to let these companies know.
I relate this to how awful the last jedi and other recent movies are. Fans need to let these companies know.
Shadowstar39
Member
Why the need to shut down free speech. The game is still going to sell millions. Unless you are company shill I don't see the problem. People are upset, let them have a voice to express. Maybe devs won't shit on their fan bases and take them for granted.
I speak this way after countless movies and shows and some games, over the last few years getting glowing press praise but audiences hated them.
The press wants to keep their access, they also are ideological. I bring up last jedi as the movie was a shit show and had a lot of intersectional feminist Inc.. Written all over it. Those type of people praised it and if you thought otherwise they labeled you muhsyginist and were silenced.
Same thing goes the other way too. Look at a game like kingdom come deleverance. Awesome original rpg that had new fresh ides. Amazing graphics, story and fighting mechanics. Paid reviewers were mostly in lock step giving it bad to mediocre reviews not for game play but because there were no black people in 1421 Bohemia countryside. People spoke praise Jesus. It was historically accurate, can't have that as woke police its problematic/blasphemous. They also judged game on lead directors comments supporting gamer gate and how he didn't bend the knee.
Regular gamers didn't agree. Some brought up issues with save system as it made save summing hard as it relied on a potion to save the game.
User reviews in that case allowed a game to get known how good it was even when games media panned it. In today's political world where many creators have tds and they push their politics into everything we'll it makes user reviews so much more important.
When the pros are being corrupt, dishonest and many in a secular cult, user reviews shine a beacon of light down a dark tunnel.
D.Final
Banned
This is why the best review is always the personal review
JCK75
Member
Yea but I've gotten old, I don't have the time I used to have to invest in games and I do want to avoid games if there are not good, I've been bitten on a few where the major publications rave and give it high scores only to find, this is meh.. then feel a little relieved when I find other users feel the same way I do. Now I tend to never buy a game a launch unless until I've heard some feedback from a variety of sources.
scoobidoo112
Member
If it wasn't a problem when people gave a game a score you agreed with, then it shouldn't be a problem when people give a game a score you disagree with. A number on a website should have no bearing on your personal enjoyment of said product.
Censorship is never the right answer. A small group of connected and established media companies should not have a monopoly on whether a game, movie or tv-show is liked or disliked, and a discrepancy between review scores and user scores is not a valid argument for doing away with user scores all together. That takes away the only avenue regular people have right now to express themselves about a commercial product.
Censorship is never the right answer. A small group of connected and established media companies should not have a monopoly on whether a game, movie or tv-show is liked or disliked, and a discrepancy between review scores and user scores is not a valid argument for doing away with user scores all together. That takes away the only avenue regular people have right now to express themselves about a commercial product.
xDDD
"Hey guys i listened to the NBA Finale on Radio. It was boring af i don't know how anyone could follow that"
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
Fanboys use it to back up their opinion is the right ones because the media tells them it is.
RedVIper
Banned
I watched the entire story, how exactly is my opinion of the story invalid because I didn't play the game?
Your analogy should be that only people who go watch the game live can have an opinion on it. Which would be just as retarded.
No a Game should be PLAYED. You can't "watch" a game and expect to have the same result as playing it.
It's like saying that fapping to the sextape of your and your GF is the same thing as fucking her.
Beside that saying "The gameplay is the same as the first" makes your whole argument invalid and clearly shows that just "watching the game" is not enough. It's wrong on hilariously many levels.
To top that off: Watching a Playtrough of a Game that takes 25 Hrs while not liking it and doing it TWICE seems like a insanely stupid waste of time. Like really really stupid.
Last edited:
cormack12
Gold Member
My experience is that people very rarely check metacritic before deciding if they buy a game. Most people seem to use youtube, the IGN reviews are quite popular in their 8min format and there is hundreds of hours of gameplay to check if it matches what you're looking for. Being honest people will check metacritic after their purchase or during it to validate their choice which is why it's so filled of fucking hate. The problem you have with critics is that they just reflect the fan voices before release. Before the game released, the only question was how many 10's it would get. Critics and sites want to keep their traffic. Same thing with RDR2, if they sense a title is not going to be received well they get brave and edgy like Tomb Raider 2013 or AC:Syndicate. Their reviews are basically collating all the wider views, presenting the most sellable one and packaging it to say they are in 'tune'. They basically photobash reviews together, injected with the equivalent of a personal youtube video with sad music for sympathetic melodrama.
Also, scores are weighted for most individuals. What pushed average gameplay up into the stratosphere for TLOU was the story, the world, the characters and how it was pinned together with this genuine raw strand of emotion through it all. I haven't played TLOU II yet so not going to offer an opinion, but most of the negative reviews focus on the complete bastardising of that, some retcon and some elements that just don't make sense and therefore stick out, as the first game was so carefully prepared and believable. So it's likely that a game weighted more favourably because its story appeal was good, will be weighted negatively, if the element which drew people in is poorly delivered.
Of course, there will be no reflection on this and people will just see sales. If your attitude is that you just want the freedom to do whatever you want in a story with no respect for the fanbase, or you can't be bothered doing the legwork to earn the big plot 'twists' then you should probably focus on telling different stories in the same world.
Also, scores are weighted for most individuals. What pushed average gameplay up into the stratosphere for TLOU was the story, the world, the characters and how it was pinned together with this genuine raw strand of emotion through it all. I haven't played TLOU II yet so not going to offer an opinion, but most of the negative reviews focus on the complete bastardising of that, some retcon and some elements that just don't make sense and therefore stick out, as the first game was so carefully prepared and believable. So it's likely that a game weighted more favourably because its story appeal was good, will be weighted negatively, if the element which drew people in is poorly delivered.
Of course, there will be no reflection on this and people will just see sales. If your attitude is that you just want the freedom to do whatever you want in a story with no respect for the fanbase, or you can't be bothered doing the legwork to earn the big plot 'twists' then you should probably focus on telling different stories in the same world.
anab0lic36
Member
Nope, user reviews, whether it be MEtacritic, steam or browsing forums, is the best way for me to gauge if a game is worth my time and money. Generally though, you want to be looking at the wordier reviews that give good detailed reasoning as to why they did or didnt enjoy the experience... and see if the criticism or praise aligns with your standards....not just a quick glance at some scores.
RedVIper
Banned
For the story? How exactly does playing the game change the story.
Your analogies are trash.
The gameplay is essentially the same as the first with minor improvements, this isn't just my opinion, people who have played the game seem to agree.
I watched the first cause I wanted to see the story.
I watched the second because it's Internet Historian and the guy is funny. Not sure what your problem is, you haven't really explained how my opinion of the games story is invalid.
fermcr
Member
Yes, lets trust paid reviews from gaming sites more then user reviews... /s
We need a site that confirms you actually own the game, played it for at least a couple of hours and only then you can review the game with a score of 1 to 10.
It would be something similar to Steam reviews, but better. Not fond of those Recomended/NotRecomended from Steam reviews (a game that's worth a 5-6 review can be Recommend as well as a game that's worth a 8-9).
We need a site that confirms you actually own the game, played it for at least a couple of hours and only then you can review the game with a score of 1 to 10.
It would be something similar to Steam reviews, but better. Not fond of those Recomended/NotRecomended from Steam reviews (a game that's worth a 5-6 review can be Recommend as well as a game that's worth a 8-9).
D.Final
Banned
Look some YouTube gameplay video, from different channels, can give you a more than complete perspective about what game you are interested to play.
(even spoiler free, of course)
All the reviews, even the journalists review, can be pilotate in some form or in some way. This is why I don't let anyone decide for me what I'm going to purchase with my money.
And in this way I give my personal opinion about all the things that gives me some interest or curiosity.
(because it's my hobby, after all)
Explosive Zombie
Banned
Because it's easier to empathize with a character if you play as them.
Gaming Discussion
Video game news, industry analysis, sales figures, deals, impressions, reviews, and discussions of everything in the medium, covering all platforms, genres, and territories.
Last edited:
Explosive Zombie
Banned
no one's stopping you from doing anything we're just explaining to you why we take your ideas less seriously.
ZywyPL
Banned
It's more like "I downloaded the movie instead of going to the cinema". The only games where the story is different depending on who and how plays it is Quantic Dreams games, but other than that, especially games that are heavily depending on scripts, cut-scenes and QTE are always the same, it's always the same thing, no matter who holds the controller. No one needs to blow 60$ just to be able to talk about the exact same plot available on YT, Twitch etc.