Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Metacritic is surprisingly spot on with this one....

FadedbombFadedbomb Aiken, SCPosts: 2,081Member

Just wanted to point this out after someone in another thread stated Metacritic wasn't a reliable source:

 

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo  [8.3]

---

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo-ii  [8.5]

---

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/diablo-iii  [3.6]

 

Pretty much my thoughts entirely.

 

Oh, and just for a bit of reference for those of you looking for stronger data =):

 

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-ii  [4.2]

--

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dead-island  [6.8]

--

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect-3  [3.9]

--

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect-2  [8.5]

--

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect  [8.4]

 

 

I'm having a hard time finding one "User Rating" I don't disagree with other than Dead Island that I believe should have been a 5.8 instead of a 6.8, but that's because I'm a BIT more critical about zombie based games than others in its genre ;)!

 

 

Don't worry about any of this If YOU enjoy the game at the end of the day. However, just realize that after everything is said and done Diablo 3 was not the game it should have been. For the fans :|....

The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity:
Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.

«1345

Comments

  • coretex666coretex666 PraguePosts: 1,934Member Uncommon

    "Don't worry about any of this If YOU enjoy the game..."

    No answers obtained seem to be a clear message

    Waiting for L2 EU Classic

  • DarkPonyDarkPony RotterdamPosts: 5,566Member

    Add this one:

    http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/tera  [7.8]

    and Swtor is a bit harsh but pretty accurate in my opinion too:

    http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/star-wars-the-old-republic [5.7]

  • jusomdudejusomdude Somewhere, KSPosts: 2,401Member

    No, just no, the rating is due to nerd ragers who couldn't log in at midnight at launch.

  • cinoscinos LondonPosts: 963Member
    Originally posted by jusomdude

    No, just no, the rating is due to nerd ragers who couldn't log in at midnight at launch.

    Not all of the reviews are like that. A lot are actually very well worded with good points raised.

    Another one for the op: http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/spore [4.7]

     

  • DarkPonyDarkPony RotterdamPosts: 5,566Member
    Originally posted by jusomdude

    No, just no, the rating is due to nerd ragers who couldn't log in at midnight at launch.

    That's probably a part of it but not the only reason I expect: there's also a lot of disgruntled D2 vets commenting on how this is not the game that they were looking forward to for over a decade.

  • WhiteLanternWhiteLantern Nevada, MOPosts: 2,732Member Common

    Metacritic ratings are full of emotion-filled nerd rage. If you are prone to emotion-filled nerd rage, then you may agree with what you find there.

    I want a mmorpg where people have gone through misery, have gone through school stuff and actually have had sex even. -sagil

  • Omb1Omb1 Quebec, QCPosts: 30Member

    Acutally i'm starting to think these are console fanboy bots, the amount if stupidity that they have written and the really generic nicknames they have is quite funny. None of them know what diablo is and i'm willing to bet they don't even own the game.

  • jusomdudejusomdude Somewhere, KSPosts: 2,401Member
    Originally posted by DarkPony
    Originally posted by jusomdude

    No, just no, the rating is due to nerd ragers who couldn't log in at midnight at launch.

    That's probably a part of it but not the only reason I expect: there's also a lot of disgruntled D2 vets commenting on how this is not the game that they were looking forward to for over a decade.

    Ok, so there are some who are nerd raging that diablo 3 ins't diablo 2.

  • Rhianni32Rhianni32 Denver, COPosts: 222Member

    The only thing I realize is that at the end of the day some people need to have their personal choices confirmed by others. For those of us that have moved on from our high school years we realize we can enjoy what we want without worry about if its cool  or not.

  • DarkPonyDarkPony RotterdamPosts: 5,566Member
    Originally posted by jusomdude
    Originally posted by DarkPony
    Originally posted by jusomdude

    No, just no, the rating is due to nerd ragers who couldn't log in at midnight at launch.

    That's probably a part of it but not the only reason I expect: there's also a lot of disgruntled D2 vets commenting on how this is not the game that they were looking forward to for over a decade.

    Ok, so there are some who are nerd raging that diablo 3 ins't diablo 2.

    That's a wrong way to put it I think.

  • spankybusspankybus Orlando, FLPosts: 1,154Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by jusomdude


    No, just no, the rating is due to nerd ragers who couldn't log in at midnight at launch.


    Case in point, dude. You shouldn't HAVE to log in to play a single-player game...unless you want to play with other people. Go buy a 50" widescreen TV and see how happy you are if it only let you watch cable (no local devices worked, no consoles, no DVD players, etc.)


    Didnt really effect me u til last night, when I couldn't play due to the servers being busy.....yea, kind of annoying to not be able to play my new $60.00 game during the window of time were I could....and in case you are going to ask, I reserve the right to drive my car anytime I want as well, seeing as how I am paying for that as well.


    Sadly, this will probably be my last Blizzard product. I simply do not like we're the company is going.

    Frank 'Spankybus' Mignone
    www.spankybus.com
    -3d Artist & Compositor
    -Writer
    -Professional Amature

  • arrisbarrisb LondonPosts: 194Member Common

    I really enjoy the game personally.  I play it with a colleague from work and we both have fun.

  • neorandomneorandom bev hills, CAPosts: 1,681Member

    meta critic seems to have a severe bias against sequels, as if a billion fanbois cried out because the game isnt what THEY wanted

  • zymurgeistzymurgeist Pittsville, VAPosts: 5,212Member Uncommon

    Swell, you've just proven you consider opinions that agree with yours a reliable source. Except for all those people who don't always agree with the crowd. For them it's useless.  Especially if they don't immediately fly into a rage if the login servers are down. So what are you going to say when the score starts to rise? Will your opinion of metacritic or your opinion of the game change?

    Originally posted by DarkPony
    Originally posted by jusomdude

    No, just no, the rating is due to nerd ragers who couldn't log in at midnight at launch.

    That's probably a part of it but not the only reason I expect: there's also a lot of disgruntled D2 vets commenting on how this is not the game that they were looking forward to for over a decade.

    I am still displeased that Diablo 2 wasn't more like Diablo 1. However I don't confuse that with the majority opinion, or only correct opinion, as many of these "disgruntled D2 vets" seem to.

    "Strong and bitter words indicate a weak cause" ~Victor Hugo

  • dontadowdontadow Detroit, MIPosts: 1,044Member Common

    My question is what is going on with "paid" publication reviews. I remember when an average score in a game magazine was 5, about right. But I now rarely see scores below 7 and i see far too many 8 and more.  Sure u got to cypher throuhg user reviews but u get a less advertising dollar influenced opinion.

  • cinoscinos LondonPosts: 963Member
    Originally posted by neorandom

    meta critic seems to have a severe bias against sequels, as if a billion fanbois cried out because the game isnt what THEY wanted

    ME2 did fine though. Does that make it the exception to the rule?

  • RequiamerRequiamer ???Posts: 2,034Member

    When you have thousand and thousand of people voting which is enough to build a statistical base, its pretty hard to deny them their opinion, especially when they all point the same few aspects.    

    [/quote] Originally posted by jusomdude No, just no, the rating is due to nerd ragers who couldn't log in at midnight at launch.[/quote]

    And, why shouldn't it count? Everyone is telling Blizzard they don't want to have to bother with internet connection to play in solo mode, and this since months already, the whole damn internet is telling them "we don't want this", they had all the time necessary to fix and change this, but they just denied this critic and ignored it, and we all know why which doesn't help their case since its obviously related with their RMT revenues. Now they have to deal with their own choice and have to deal with people that can't play their solo game because of connectivity issues on Blizzard side, which is even worth than anyone had excepted. So in any case they put themselves in this situation for greediness, why would the reaction from consumers be otherwise? . This is very much to the point and one of the biggest reason why D3 get such a low score, and obviously it is a very good reason indeed.

  • TardcoreTardcore MinskPosts: 2,325Member
    Originally posted by jusomdude
    Originally posted by DarkPony
    Originally posted by jusomdude

    No, just no, the rating is due to nerd ragers who couldn't log in at midnight at launch.

    That's probably a part of it but not the only reason I expect: there's also a lot of disgruntled D2 vets commenting on how this is not the game that they were looking forward to for over a decade.

    Ok, so there are some who are nerd raging that diablo 3 ins't diablo 2.

    Pretty much. When a company decides to corpse rape a long time established IP instead of moving into new territory they have to expect this kind of behavior. In other words if they don't want vetran fans bitching about how this game doesn't stack up against its predecessors, instead of judging it by its own merrits, they shouldn't have named it Diablo 3.

    To me releasing a third installment of a game series twelve years on, after the majority of the people that made the earlier games great have f*cked off elsewhere, isn't a sequel. Its just a vain attempt to retain market place relevence.

    In my not so humble opinion, D3 as its own game is just fine for a clicky walky dungeon crawler. (Not fine enough for me to shell out my own dosh to the frankenstein's monster that is modern day Blizzard mind you. But I will still play it a bit on one of my house mates accounts.) As a Diablo sequel however I find it to be the redheaded step-child of the Diablo legacy. Just one of those siblings doomed to hear "Why can't you be more like your older brother Ralph" for eternity.

    image

    "Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "

  • fundayzfundayz Chatown, ONPosts: 463Member
    Originally posted by zymurgeist

    Swell, you've just proven you consider opinions that agree with yours a reliable source. Except for all those people who don't always agree with the crowd. For them it's useless.  Especially if they don't immediately fly into a rage if the login servers are down. So what are you going to say when the score starts to rise? Will your opinion of metacritic or your opinion of the game change?

     

    By your logic ANY average rating for anything is meaningless. That is obviously not true.

    Now, the game IS rated too low and it WILL rise but it will never reach the 9/10 or 10/10 that the latest installment of one the most popular video game franchises of all time should have been.

    The point many hardcore fans make is that D3 simply does not FEEL or LOOK like a Diablo game. It plays like generic A-RPG; D3 doesnt have the gritty atmosphere or character planning features that made the first two games so memorable. Factor in the online-only play and lack of PvP and you get a product that is simply not true to it's predecessors.
    Originally posted by Tardcore
    When a company decides to corpse rape a long time established IP instead of moving into new territory they have to expect this kind of behavior. In other words if they don't want vetran fans bitching about how this game doesn't stack up against its predecessors, instead of judging it by its own merrits, they shouldn't have named it Diablo 3.

    To me releasing a third installment of a game series twelve years on, after the majority of the people that made the earlier games great have f*cked off elsewhere, isn't a sequel. Its just a vain attempt to retain market place relevence.

    In my not so humble opinion, D3 as its own game is just fine for a clicky walky dungeon crawler. (Not fine enough for me to shell out my own dosh to the frankenstein's monster that is modern day Blizzard mind you. But I will still play it a bit on one of my house mates accounts.) As a Diablo sequel however I find it to be the redheaded step-child of the Diablo legacy. Just one of those siblings doomed to hear "Why can't you be more like your older brother Ralph" for eternity.

     

    Nail head, meet hammer
  • Arathir86Arathir86 CanberraPosts: 442Member Uncommon

    Think of the worst MMO Launch youve experienced...

     

    Yup, D3's Launch was (and still is) worse.

     

    And that's saying something....

    "The problem with quotes from the Internet is that it's almost impossible to validate their authenticity." - Abraham Lincoln

  • zymurgeistzymurgeist Pittsville, VAPosts: 5,212Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Tardcore
    Originally posted by jusomdude
    Originally posted by DarkPony
    Originally posted by jusomdude

    No, just no, the rating is due to nerd ragers who couldn't log in at midnight at launch.

    That's probably a part of it but not the only reason I expect: there's also a lot of disgruntled D2 vets commenting on how this is not the game that they were looking forward to for over a decade.

    Ok, so there are some who are nerd raging that diablo 3 ins't diablo 2.

    Pretty much. When a company decides to corpse rape a long time established IP instead of moving into new territory they have to expect this kind of behavior. In other words if they don't want vetran fans bitching about how this game doesn't stack up against its predecessors, instead of judging it by its own merrits, they shouldn't have named it Diablo 3.

    To me releasing a third installment of a game series twelve years on, after the majority of the people that made the earlier games great have f*cked off elsewhere, isn't a sequel. Its just a vain attempt to retain market place relevence.

    In my not so humble opinion, D3 as its own game is just fine for a clicky walky dungeon crawler. (Not fine enough for me to shell out my own dosh to the frankenstein's monster that is modern day Blizzard mind you. But I will still play it a bit on one of my house mates accounts.) As a Diablo sequel however I find it to be the redheaded step-child of the Diablo legacy. Just one of those siblings doomed to hear "Why can't you be more like your older brother Ralph" for eternity.

     Time and again it's happened that if you don't change things you get excoriated for not bringing anythng new or crucified for not staying true to a game's roots if you changing the littlest thing. Often at the same time for the same sequel. Is it any wonder developers don't listen to us?

    "Strong and bitter words indicate a weak cause" ~Victor Hugo

  • RavenRaven LondonPosts: 1,974Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Requiamer

    When you have thousand and thousand of people voting which is enough to build a statistical base, its pretty hard to deny them their opinion, especially when they all point the same few aspects.    

     

    This would only be true if everyone was objective on their reviews and not biased, which isnt the case, we know for a FACT that people will give low reviews on only one aspect such as "I couldnt login at 12:00 when it launched ill give it a 0 or 1 or 2", now I look at games like Big Rigs which were essentially unplayable joke ( literally, if you havent seen big rigs, you need to go on youtube, it has been voted the worst game of all time many times ) has a 4.1 user rating and Diablo 3 has 3.6 hehe, that to me says the whole thing is worthless.

    By your logic you should be playing Big Rigs cause its better than Diablo 3.

    Here is your game that is better than Diablo 3, enjoy! :D

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mB1zWEhgrLs

    image

  • GrailerGrailer HamiltonPosts: 876Member Uncommon

    Man its annoying when they take the server down to fix . I just finished a 8 hour play session on D3 .  Im in act 4 and my Barbarian is a killing machine .

    It's is the greatest game Ive ever played !

  • dubyahitedubyahite Lincoln, NEPosts: 2,483Member
    This game is not a 3 by any stretch of the imagination.

    Absolutely ludicrous.

    Normally I don't believe what I'm about to say, but in this case I think it's valid: the people that enjoy this game are playing the crap out of it. Seriously. It's very addictive. They are not posting reviews on metacritic.

    People are still playin very heavily.

    People always say that about games and posting, but I think it's true in this case.

    Even if you don't believe that, it still doesn't deserve a 3 or 4 score. The game is very good. Soooooo many of the people that have issues with thegame put a zero for the score. That's just plain stupid.


    WTF is a zero in a game review? It would have to be the worst game of all time to be a zero. It is far from that.

    Also, there are a LOT of stupid reviews on there. One guy simply said that there were no factions, it should have alliance and horde, and that it was just a Diablo clone. That is useless information that doesn't even make sense. He's a troll. There are a lot of trolls posting reviews right now.


    Bottom line, Duke Nukem forever is a 3. This game is an 8.

    Shadow's Hand Guild
    Open recruitment for

    The Secret World - Dragons

    Planetside 2 - Terran Republic

    Tera - Dragonfall Server

    http://www.shadowshand.com

  • kellian1kellian1 Phillipsburg, NJPosts: 233Member Uncommon

    Between the server issues and the lack of PvP at release, I'm sure people lost their collective minds the first day this was out.

    Both things were made clear though before the game was out. #1 you would have to be online to play and #2 PvP wouldn't be there at release.

    We can argue all we want the vailidity of either one, but if you knew that was going to be the case and still purchased the game and are now complaining about it...who's fault is that?

    I personally think the you shouldn't have to be logged in for a single player, but blizzard stated this was going to be the case before the game came out. So you have to go in knowing that and knowing that there may be issues with connectivity especially on a release date for such a big game.

    That's why I waited till Friday to take the day off from work! Let them get the kinks out first.

    I personally am having a great time with the game, people who thinks it's a "3" are certainly entitled to their opinion.

«1345
Sign In or Register to comment.