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 scores not accurate or reliable for mmo's or other games? Evidence says otherwise.

MargulisMargulis Glendale, AZPosts: 1,614Member

So I see people bash a lot on Metacritic and how you can't trust any score on there because people post ridiculous scores all the time (10's and 0's), so forth and so on.  And I have seen this myself in the individual user reviews.  But I've got to tell you, I've yet to see a single AVERAGED USER REVIEW score for any game on that site that I didn't think was pretty much right on the money.  Sure the averaged critic review score can be bogus at times, especially when you see games like Dragon Age 2 or Sim City with super high scores, but that's not Metacritic's fault, they are just averaging the stupid professional reviewers scores.  So again, where is the incredible innacuracy with the USER REVIEWS if we look at the weighted average?  I don't see it.  Let's take a look at some examples.

 

Dragon Age 1

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-origins

Dragon Age 2

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

Simcity:

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/simcity

Star Wars the Old Republic

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

Guild Wars 2

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/guild-wars-2

The Secret World

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/the-secret-world

Mass Effect

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

Mass Effect 3

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

Defiance

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/defiance

Final Fantasy XIV

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/final-fantasy-xiv-online

Rift

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/rift

 

I could post more and more.  And the only 2 games out of those that I play are Defiance and The Secret World, and I still would say objectively I think every one of those AVERAGED USER REVIEWS are completely accurate.  So why all the metacritic hate?  Because a few fanbois and haters like to give 0's and 10's that are ridiculous?  Looks like they must balance themselves out to me, because the end result looks pretty dead on from anything I've seen.
«13

Comments

  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,708Member Uncommon
    • Dragon Age 1: (Disagree with user rating) Combat put me to sleep, so despite the fantastic game world I couldn't enjoy it and didn't finish.  
    • Dragon Age 2: (Disagree) Combat was finally fun, and the story just as enjoyable!  Much better than the original!
    • Sim City: (Disagree)  Perfect example of gamers being stupid.  Apart from a bad launch day, Sim City has kept me very addicted and is honestly probably the best city-builder game of all time.  As a fan of the genre (and someone who has made city-builders professionally in the past), I feel it's a fantastic game deserving of much better than the internet's irrational wrath.
    • SWTOR: (Agree) While the rating is a little lower than how much fun I had, the complete lack of mob variety really hurt this game.  It didn't help that grouping was a massive pain too, when all I really wanted to do was group most of the time.
    • GW2: (Agree) Yeah, 8.0 sounds about right.
    • TSW: (Agree)
    • ME1: (Agree) Fantastic game, although rough compared to later installments.
    • ME3: (Disagree) The best game of the series given a 4.7 just because of a weak ending?  Perfect example of gamers being stupid.
    • Defiance: (Agree)  While fun, it didn't really keep me playing.  Although it's also a perfect example of gamers rejecting innovation, so don't complain when the next 10 MMORPGs are WOW copies again ;)
    • RIFT: (Disagree)  This game was considerably better than a 7.3.  It's solidly the third best MMORPG ever made, behind CoH and WOW.

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

  • BrenelaelBrenelael Warren, MEPosts: 3,996Member

    While I do like Metacritic and refer to it often I don't take their reviews as gospel and neither should anyone else. Everyone has their own opinion of what makes a game good or bad. The differences between the user and critic scores are proof of that alone. Metacritic is a good resource but the scores it gives are averages and most probably won't align with anyone's personal tastes. Axehilt's post above is a perfect example. Those are his personal opinions which wildly go against the scores. In fact he's probably the only person I've heard that liked DA2 over DA:O but it's his opinion and he's entitled to it.

     

    The only way you are going to know if a game is what you personally consider good is to try it yourself. If you let Metacritic or anyone else for that matter determine your game purchases you may miss out on some games that got lower scores but you personally may like a lot. Don't let a low score anywhere deter you from trying a game you personally think looks interesting.

     

    Bren

    while(horse==dead)
    {
    beat();
    }

  • VannorVannor YorkshirePosts: 2,969Member Uncommon

    Going purely off Dragon Age 1 + 2, sure.. DA1 was better than 2 imo but is 2 really worth 'that' low a score? 4.2?.. no way. I mean, look at how many 1's and 0's there are straight away from DA2. It's just stupid. 1? Like it's the worst game ever made? Madness. It wasn't as good as people wanted it to be, fine.. but a 1...?

    That's why metacritic isn't in any way accurate... because once a lot of people see something they don't like they automatically disregard the rest of whats on offer. They immediately become biased and lower their scores for every aspect of the game because they didn't enjoy one part of the experience. ME3 is a perfect example of this.. the game got slammed for the last 10 minutes of gameplay. The rest of the game was pretty much the same thing as ME2. Then there's the issue off basing reviews on their opinion of the company that made it instead of the actual game itself. Then there's people who hate just because others are doing it. Some people rate games low because they 'say' there are bugs and stuff but really they either have a shitty system or don't know how to maintain their system (for PC games).

    There are loads more examples of the ways any review you read can be influenced by other factors. It is all pretty much a pointless waste of time unless you know the person personally, even reviews from popular news sites.. yeh they are a little more reliable because they have set rules and guidelines they have to follow when reviewing something but at the end of the day it comes down the opinion of someone you know nothing about.

  • BrucyBonusBrucyBonus londonPosts: 220Member
    Best to ignore user scores, most people are not objective, and the people who can be bothered to score usually have an agenda.  So many people hit 1 or 10, and ignore the numbers in between.  
  • YaevinduskYaevindusk Ul''dah, CAPosts: 1,537Member Uncommon

     

    As a general rule it's safe to say that Metacritic is unreliable when it comes to user ratings.  This is because a variety of factors including trolls, haters, fanboys and companies hiring/using their employees to artificially increase the user rating in the first couple of days.  It's up to the individual to read the posts that go along with the rating to see if they provide ample reasoning as to why they came to such a rating.  I won't go into the claims as to why critic ratings would be unreliable aside from a few lesser known sites just wanting their name to displayed on the highest rated slots.

    Let's take a look at the latest example of the above with this.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZB7r9m9vYNA&list=UUsgv2QHkT2ljEixyulzOnUQ&index=1

     

    When faced with strife or discontent, the true nature of a man is brought forth. It is then when we see the character of the individual. It is then we are able to tell if he is mature enough to grin and bare it, or subject his fellow man to his complaints and woes.

  • AlotAlot BredaPosts: 1,948Member


    Originally posted by Axehilt
    snippy

    Wow, I have actually found someone who seems to have the same opinions regarding ME3, Dragon Age 1(I experienced a similar level of enjoyment in DA:O, but in my case I found the world to be extremely lacking, and after having played NWN2 several times, the combat wasn't that much of a problem for me) + 2 and Sim City.

  • FusionFusion VaasaPosts: 1,391Member Uncommon

    The only score that counts to me is my own opinion.

    So yeah, they're not accurate nor reliable, except maybe in a case or two.

    Currently playing: -

    Waiting for: Class4.

    Dead and Buried: ESO, NWO, GW2, SWTOR, Darkfall, AO, AC2, Vanguard, CoH/V, EnB, EVE, Neocron, FE, EQ, EQ2, DAoC, FFXI, FFXIV, SWG, WoW, and billions of eastern junks!

  • JimmyYOJimmyYO Columbus, OHPosts: 520Member
    At first I thought OP was trolling when he posted the Dragon Age 2 score but the rest are pretty much dead on. The problem is you're cherry picking the accurate ones and claiming it's legit based off the few that are correct. The broken clock argument basically.
  • WylfWylf Brentwood, CAPosts: 159Member
    I agree with the OP, generally the results are very close to how I would rate the games. There are of course some exceptions, but those occur rarely.  I have found that Metacritic is a useful tool in deciding what games to play.
  • HedeonHedeon GraestedPosts: 954Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Fusion

    The only score that counts to me is my own opinion.

    So yeah, they're not accurate nor reliable, except maybe in a case or two.

    that is the whole point, maybe metacritic´s work as an average user opinion, but never will a survey fit everyone...personally I never use metacritics for anything, so cant comment much on them, but as any other survey they will be accurate for the average user...so for most they would be useful...maybe not for hardcores who roam these forums.

  • fivorothfivoroth LondonPosts: 3,657Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Margulis

     

    I could post more and more.  And the only 2 games out of those that I play are Defiance and The Secret World, and I still would say objectively I think every one of those AVERAGED USER REVIEWS are completely accurate.  So why all the metacritic hate?  Because a few fanbois and haters like to give 0's and 10's that are ridiculous?  Looks like they must balance themselves out to me, because the end result looks pretty dead on from anything I've seen.

    It only took me to search ONE game on metacritic to prove this wrong. The original World of Warcraft has a User Review average of 6.8. Critic score is 93 out of 100. WoW definitely doesn't deserve a 6.8 out of 10. Definitely. The game was super fun and it has so much going on about it. A very simple example of how stupid user reviews can be. I am sure that had I spent more than 1 minute, I would have been able to find tons of games which are being bashed by users unnecessarily. But yeah, mad scrub haters are mad.

    Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.

  • DrakynnDrakynn The Pas, MBPosts: 2,030Member

    I agree that in general metacritic is a pretty accurate measure myself but not until after a few weeks when the fanbois,haters,kneejerkers and rushed reviews have been marginalized by numbers of ordinary people and more indepth critical review.

     

     

  • jesteralwaysjesteralways ChittagongPosts: 1,007Member Uncommon
    Agree with most of the ratings, there are a few games in the list i did not play but the ones i played i mostly agree. the one i completely agree with is ME3, not only the ending was bad but trying to nickle-dime the most important part of ME history(the last prothean) saying "it is just side story" was horrible. i am sure that review has something to do with people starting to hate EAWare for their moneysucking business.

    i want an open world, no phasing, no instancing.i want meaningful owpvp.i want player driven economy.i want meaningful crafting.i want awesome exploration, a sense of thrill.i want ow housing with a meaningful effect on my entire gameplay experience, not just some instanced crap.i want all of these free of cost, i don't wanna pay you a cent, game devs can eat grass and continue developing game for me.
    Seems like that is the current consensus of western mmo players.

  • wordizwordiz Eugene, ORPosts: 464Member
    Some things get fluffed by them, but the user scores rarely lie. I think DA2 and ME3 got better scores than they deserve. The Secret World and SWTOR were a little overrated as well, but for the most part pretty accurate, better than most gaming sites that give good ratings to anyone that pays.
  • ScalplessScalpless SnowballvillePosts: 1,395Member Uncommon

    Metacritic can give you a good idea of what a game/movie is like. If the critic score or the user score is very low, it's better to find the reason for that low score before you buy.

    It's bogus in many cases, but reading SOME reviews is better than reading nothing. Buying TOR because of its high score is a better idea than buying a POS like Aliens: Colonial Marines because Aliens.

  • bcbullybcbully Westland, MIPosts: 8,268Member Uncommon

    In general pretty good. You need to give time to shake out the fans and haters. Then sometimes you get this

    http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/world-of-warcraft-mists-of-pandaria

    WoW 4.4 User score.

  • ZedTheRockZedTheRock Florence, KYPosts: 172Member
    Until theres a site that parses scores of all ZedTheRock clones then I will never trust a critic site.  No one else has my tastes and that is a crying shame because I think the world would be a helluva lot of fun and more enjoyable if everyone was like me.

    SUP

  • WW4BWWW4BW KoldingPosts: 493Member

    I never bought a game based on metacritics score.. 

    But when I bought my current computer I read the reviews of the retailer..

    Well I read the really negative ones.. Just to see if they screwed people over in any way.. And it seemed they didnt.

    So I might look at the low scoring user reviews to see if they are just sour grapes written by idiots. If they have legitimate gripes.. Then Im warned not to buy it.

  • TheScavengerTheScavenger Matrix, NYPosts: 911Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Margulis

    So I see people bash a lot on Metacritic and how you can't trust any score on there because people post ridiculous scores all the time (10's and 0's), so forth and so on.  And I have seen this myself in the individual user reviews.  But I've got to tell you, I've yet to see a single AVERAGED USER REVIEW score for any game on that site that I didn't think was pretty much right on the money.  Sure the averaged critic review score can be bogus at times, especially when you see games like Dragon Age 2 or Sim City with super high scores, but that's not Metacritic's fault, they are just averaging the stupid professional reviewers scores.  So again, where is the incredible innacuracy with the USER REVIEWS if we look at the weighted average?  I don't see it.  Let's take a look at some examples.

     

    Dragon Age 1

    http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/dragon-age-origins

    Agree, this was rather good. I loved it.

    Dragon Age 2

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

    Agreed again. This was one of the worst games I've played from Bioware. It was so lame compared to the first.

    Simcity:

    http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/simcity

    Disagree, I love the new Sim City. I actually bought 8 copies of it, for some of my friends/family.

    Star Wars the Old Republic

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

    Agree, this MMO is so boring and the world is the most static game world I've ever seen.

    Guild Wars 2

    http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/guild-wars-2

    Agree again. Best MMO I've played in modern times. Still play it.

    The Secret World

    http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/the-secret-world

    Disagree. I found it rather boring and not solo friendly at all. Also, the character models look horrible and the main character has no voice...pet peeve of mine in games.

    Mass Effect

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

    Agree. Best bioware game I've played

    Mass Effect 3

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

    Agree. Least favorite Bioware game I've played. ME1 was what they should have kept. Driving vehicles, exploring planets...ME1 was just so amazing and full of lore.

    Defiance

    http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/defiance

    I have tons of fun with Defiance, but I agree again with the score. It isn't the greatest thing, but is (again) a lot of fun.

    Final Fantasy XIV

    http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/final-fantasy-xiv-online

    Agree. Worst solo MMO out there, its so boring.

    Rift

    http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/rift

    Never played it

     

    I could post more and more.  And the only 2 games out of those that I play are Defiance and The Secret World, and I still would say objectively I think every one of those AVERAGED USER REVIEWS are completely accurate.  So why all the metacritic hate?  Because a few fanbois and haters like to give 0's and 10's that are ridiculous?  Looks like they must balance themselves out to me, because the end result looks pretty dead on from anything I've seen.

     

    image
  • dotdotdashdotdotdash Llandrindod WellsPosts: 364Member

    The problem with this discussion is that it eventually boils down to an opinion, one that you invariably had even before you attempted to justify it.

    If you believe that Metacritic works, then you will use examples of it working to demonstrate why it works. You will also omit the ones that do not help demonstrate the point (ala the OP).

    If you believe that Metacritic does not work, then you will demonstrate the point via the precise same process with differing variables.

    My opinion is this:

    Metacritic is not consensus, and it does not try to be. It is not attempting to reflect YOUR opinion, but the opinions - as influenced by the precise same factors (eg. money) as the individual's opinion - of the largest subsection of humanity that it can.

    Ergo, It is not Metacritic that is wrong, but.... us....

    *has an existential crisis and puffs into a cloud of smoke*

  • evilastroevilastro EdinburghPosts: 4,270Member
    Originally posted by Vannor

    Going purely off Dragon Age 1 + 2, sure.. DA1 was better than 2 imo but is 2 really worth 'that' low a score? 4.2?.. no way. I mean, look at how many 1's and 0's there are straight away from DA2. It's just stupid. 1? Like it's the worst game ever made? Madness. It wasn't as good as people wanted it to be, fine.. but a 1...?

     Yep and thats where the problem lies. People who are annoyed at a game that didnt live up to expectations give stupidly low scores, or fans give overly high scores to counter that. It doesnt work. Anyone could objectively look at DA2 and see that it doesnt deserve 4.2. Its a better than average game. Does it live up to DA1? No not to me, but that doesnt make it sub par in general.

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,195Member Uncommon
    I don't care if metacritic (which I never read anyway) or any other site is completely accurate.  I don't base my opinions and interests on what everyone else likes.  This is especially true since I seem to be out of touch with the rest of the gamer community and their interests.  I don't want to parrot the interests of others.  I want to experience, think, and decide for myself what I like.
  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member

    Meta Scores aren't 'accurate'. They can give a relative measure of how well a game will sell though. Higher meta scores means more sales. Lower meta scores means lower sales. It's not something that's measurable though. A game with a meta score of 32 won't sell a particular number of copies...it'll just sell at the lower end of what it could possibly sell.

    ** ** **

    I think you also need to look at meta scores and player scores separately. A game like TSW has a low meta score, but a high player score. It was a commercial flop, but the players who bought it tended to like it. The opposite would be SWToR where it got a high meta score, but a low player score. It was still a commercial flop, but it sold a LOT of copies and made a LOT more money than TSW, even though TSW is arguably a better game according to players.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • AerowynAerowyn BUZZARDS BAY, MAPosts: 7,928Member
    overall user score on metacritic is pretty accurate(within a point or 2 out of 10) on how I would rate about 90% of the games i check on there so for me its usefull obviously others mileage will vary on this

    I angered the clerk in a clothing shop today. She asked me what size I was and I said actual, because I am not to scale. I like vending machines 'cause snacks are better when they fall. If I buy a candy bar at a store, oftentimes, I will drop it... so that it achieves its maximum flavor potential. --Mitch Hedberg

  • GolelornGolelorn Hiding From Social Media Peeping Toms, ALPosts: 1,099Member Uncommon
    I find myself normally agreeing with the senitment, if not the score. DA2 was a huge letdown for me, but hard to agree it was a 4.2. More like a 7.
«13
Sign In or Register to comment.