Jump to content

77 on Metacritic????


linkdevivo

Recommended Posts

I've played a few low rated games and loved them. Some reviewers just aren't into certain genres of games and so give them a bad review.  There are games I don't really care for that are 9/10. 

 

I just play what I like.  I have stopped preordering games as I find actual game play that is posted after the release gives me a better idea on if the game is a good fit or not.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, linkdevivo said:

Will this affect your purchase decision?

 

Not in the slightest.
I've never once used a reviewer aggregator site like Metacritic or Rotten Tomatoes to determine whether or not I should play a game or watch a movie.  People nowadays rely too much on sites like these - you shouldn't allow anyone else to make your decisions for you.

 

I've yet to even play Rise, but once I do play it, I'll subsequently buy Shadow without caring a jot what anyone else thinks about it.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, linkdevivo said:

Will this affect your purchase decision?

NO

 

Reviews are the least thing I care about. Yes I read them, sometimes to get to know a game sometimes to compare my opinion of a game with others. And by review I mean not just these so called professional ones. I actually enjoy reading reviews on this site a lot more, because they are honest.

 

Regarding Tomb Raider well I didn't expect it to be very different from the previous one anyway and I am a fan of the series since the first game. But I am still on the fence if I should buy it now or wait a few month. Oh and I really don't give a rats ass about metacritic. The most overrated site on the internet, probably, well right after facebook ...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The game is EASILY a 8,5-9/10 and I can say it already after the first few hours. The average score of 77 adds up thanks to the idiots from british daily newspapers lol

Guardian and Telegraph have NO IDEA of reviewing video games, but they scores are still being viewed as serious reviewers work.

Guardian gave both SoTR and SpiderMan a 6/10, Telegraph gave SoTR only a 4/10. A FOUR? A four, in the world of gaming reviews actually stands for barely playable, piece of crap.

But yeah... add the reviews from a newspaper for the audience of 50+ years old to the overall score on metacritics/gamerakings and have people believe a game is worse than it actually is.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spec Ops the line is one of my favorite games of all-time and that had a lowish metacritic. 

Read the reviews and dissect them. Every reviewer is different and what one person dislikes, another person will enjoy. Enjoying reviews is all about being able to read them right and not just look at the score. Understand WHY someone liked something so you can better understand if it applies for yourself. 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, SnowNinjaRaccoon said:

The game is EASILY a 8,5-9/10 and I can say it already after the first few hours. The average score of 77 adds up thanks to the idiots from british daily newspapers lol

Guardian and Telegraph have NO IDEA of reviewing video games, but they scores are still being viewed as serious reviewers work.

Guardian gave both SoTR and SpiderMan a 6/10, Telegraph gave SoTR only a 4/10. A FOUR? A four, in the world of gaming reviews actually stands for barely playable, piece of crap.

But yeah... add the reviews from a newspaper for the audience of 50+ years old to the overall score on metacritics/gamerakings and have people believe a game is worse than it actually is.

I'm assuming it plays very similar to rise?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PooPooBlast said:

And I mean 77 isn't that bad on Metacritic considering that anyone can really post their reviews. You'll likely run into those with binary scales ( voting 0 for not liking and 10 for liking it) and so yea that'll probably affect the scores. 

 

The score of 77 he's referring to is derived from critic reviews. User reviews aren't even available yet (the game hasn't officially released), and even then they have their own separate score so it doesn't affect the main one.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Orange Heart said:

A 77 isn't mixed. That's average. Pretty sad that you think a game needs a 9 to be good.

Average score for a good game, caused by clickbaity super low scores. Yup... that's what those bad scores are - Clickbait.

There is a difference between opinion and obvious critique for a game in order to get some attention.

 

Come on, even a complete idiot would know, giving this game a 4/10 like Telegraph did, would cause people to talk about their incompetence.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SnowNinjaRaccoon said:

The game is EASILY a 8,5-9/10 and I can say it already after the first few hours. The average score of 77 adds up thanks to the idiots from british daily newspapers lol

Guardian and Telegraph have NO IDEA of reviewing video games, but they scores are still being viewed as serious reviewers work.

Guardian gave both SoTR and SpiderMan a 6/10, Telegraph gave SoTR only a 4/10. A FOUR? A four, in the world of gaming reviews actually stands for barely playable, piece of crap.

But yeah... add the reviews from a newspaper for the audience of 50+ years old to the overall score on metacritics/gamerakings and have people believe a game is worse than it actually is.

 

I knew a site who made retro/modern gaming reviews and the gave the lowest score possible to Horizon for the PS4. They did the same years before with a GTA game, because it was a site made by losers, for losers. Thank goodness it's not one of those sites you would find listed on Metacritic.

Edited by Lance_87
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, linkdevivo said:

I mean yeah reviews shouldn't matter but they do and anyone who says otherwise is kidding themselves. The normal gamer looks at reviews before spending money on a game so bad reviews lead to weaker sales, leads to less probability of the publisher paying a developer for another game.

 

Will this affect your purchase decision?

 

 

You do realize what you call "Normal Gamer" doesn't look at reviews right? 

 

So let me get this straight, you rather wager your OWN opinion based on SOMEONE ELSE'S? That is sadly the most idiotic thing I have ever seen. Honestly if you do go based on that, no wonder the gaming industry sucks. People go based on others instead of THEMSELVES.

 

LOL. Thank you for the laugh, I honestly needed one. Also buddy, your opinion is always better than others cause obviously it's YOUR OPINION. Have a great day. xD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I never look at metacritic and I don't know anyone who does. The only people who genuinely care about reviews are investors, so yeah they're important, but as gamers ourselves, we should know how much faith to put in the reviews of 'journalists' and other people. Mostly because people's perception of how good a game is, is often reflective of how good they are at it. If someone sucks at a game, they're quicker to blame the game for being bad than them just being bad at playing it. Not always true, but what I'm saying is take everything with a massive pile of salt.

 

I'll read a few reviews myself if I'm buying on GoG or Steam, but I'll always check out gameplay via youtube and decide if it's something I want to play or not. The metacritic score won't change my buying decisions at all. Hell, today I bought a game and I didn't even know what it was. Cause I'm dumb and it was impulse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s a 77 that bad? I remember PlayStation Magazine gave 6/7 (out of 10) to some games and I really enjoy them a lot.

Nowaday, 80+ are so frequent that games under 79 is mediocre, when this should happen to games under 30/40 out of 100 :(

 

77 is still a very good score, even though I wasn’t expecting too much from this last trilogy game.

Edited by TurtlePM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally didn't care for ROTR, but I loved the first game. The setting looks pretty cool in this game though, but I'm guessing the scores are reflective probably of a bit of burnout on the formula this series uses. The writing is hardly top tier either (for games anyway), and pretty much every reviewer who gave this a mixed review complained about the familiarity of what they were given and lack of surprises. TBH, that shouldn't really bother people who were big fans of the second game, but it's pretty much killed my interest in getting this (for now).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, linkdevivo said:

Pretty sad this is the case. IGN gave it a 9/10 and said it was amazing, though. I pre-ordered so i'm playing anyway, but it sucks that it had mixed reviews. I mean yeah reviews shouldn't matter but they do and anyone who says otherwise is kidding themselves. The normal gamer looks at reviews before spending money on a game so bad reviews lead to weaker sales, leads to less probability of the publisher paying a developer for another game. Developers even get bonuses based on their game's metacritic number.

 

Will this affect your purchase decision?

 

 

Nope. I don't care what reviews say. I liked the first two games, so I'll definitely like this one.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...