By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Metacritic is a poor gauge of game quality see why

d21lewis said:

Metacritic is just a one stop shop for reviews.  I look at a few of them, read a couple of the good ones to see what they like, read a couple of the bad ones to see what they didn't like (and if those things matter to me) and then I go back to watching oily gangbang porn.  Too much emphasis is placed on that final number.  I don't give a damn about that number.  It's just another tool I use to make better informed purchases.

I do admit that sometimes, I check Meta after I buy a game, too.  I like to feel vindicated about my purchases.


Pretty much this. And especially the italicized.

 

Also, Metacritic is now crap because they don't have their N64 reviews anymore. They can go fuck themselves for redesigning their site.



Around the Network

I use Gamerankings as a tool. I look at the overall score, then I look at the sources, then I read some reviews.

Usually, I do this only for games I might be on the fence about. But I do not let the score alone dictate my action.

 

Mike from Morgantown



      


I am Mario.


I like to jump around, and would lead a fairly serene and aimless existence if it weren't for my friends always getting into trouble. I love to help out, even when it puts me at risk. I seem to make friends with people who just can't stay out of trouble.

Wii Friend Code: 1624 6601 1126 1492

NNID: Mike_INTV

The only useful reviews are the ones with words, the scores are too arbitrary and inaccurate to mean anything, I read a review of FFXIII and the game sounded like shit, guess what the game got? a 9.5, better just to read 1 good and 1 bad review then look at a million scores 



hell no? i listen to the possitives about a game from other sites(cause i hate reading them) and think about the score. look at the game get the demo and wait for a friend to play it or buy before u do and watch them play and make a dession based on that.

for example: army of 2 the 40th day is in gridlock because 1 of my reveiwers Sam Lair says its not worth getting while the other reveiwer (my brother) says its a must buy and then my brother inlaws brother says its not worth getting but then theres the reveiw scores.

our top3 sites

Game informer 6-10

Xplay 4-5

Game Spy 4-5 i think

based on those scores its worth a buy or rent, but that reminds me of some Halo Reach scores. who in there right mind would give Reach a 7 out of 10? i'd personaly give the first 4 a 4 out of 10 if not lower but not Reach. its the best hands down.

long story short do your own research.



I think the inclusion of 100's and 0's really throws off the balance of the whole system. Especially when companies barely distingish between scores for example companies with a 5 point rating system.



Around the Network

Nothing is perfect so there is no need to whine.

Also review averages have been an incredible guide on the quality of games I buy. The low rated games become rentals and I the rating system rarely fails me. (Except for a few examples like Zelda: Twilight Princess and Fable 2. thoose games are overated, but got good ratings).



MARCUSDJACKSON said:

hell no? i listen to the possitives about a game from other sites(cause i hate reading them) and think about the score. look at the game get the demo and wait for a friend to play it or buy before u do and watch them play and make a dession based on that.

for example: army of 2 the 40th day is in gridlock because 1 of my reveiwers Sam Lair says its not worth getting while the other reveiwer (my brother) says its a must buy and then my brother inlaws brother says its not worth getting but then theres the reveiw scores.

our top3 sites

Game informer 6-10

Xplay 4-5

Game Spy 4-5 i think

based on those scores its worth a buy or rent, but that reminds me of some Halo Reach scores. who in there right mind would give Reach a 7 out of 10? i'd personaly give the first 4 a 4 out of 10 if not lower but not Reach. its the best hands down.

long story short do your own research.

Who in their right mind would give reach a 7 out of 10? EVERYONE in their right mind, reach is just the same shit again, nothing new, nothing groundbreaking, and nothing great, nothing bad either, halo is like pokemon, gameplay is solid but just the same thing over and over again 



theonewhoisme said:
MARCUSDJACKSON said:

hell no? i listen to the possitives about a game from other sites(cause i hate reading them) and think about the score. look at the game get the demo and wait for a friend to play it or buy before u do and watch them play and make a dession based on that.

for example: army of 2 the 40th day is in gridlock because 1 of my reveiwers Sam Lair says its not worth getting while the other reveiwer (my brother) says its a must buy and then my brother inlaws brother says its not worth getting but then theres the reveiw scores.

our top3 sites

Game informer 6-10

Xplay 4-5

Game Spy 4-5 i think

based on those scores its worth a buy or rent, but that reminds me of some Halo Reach scores. who in there right mind would give Reach a 7 out of 10? i'd personaly give the first 4 a 4 out of 10 if not lower but not Reach. its the best hands down.

long story short do your own research.

Who in their right mind would give reach a 7 out of 10? EVERYONE in their right mind, reach is just the same shit again, nothing new, nothing groundbreaking, and nothing great, nothing bad either, halo is like pokemon, gameplay is solid but just the same thing over and over again 


considering i hate every HALO ever made other then REACH and HALO WARS i'm not sure if i agree, but thats the case with most games beatting a horse with a dead stick!



MARCUSDJACKSON said:
theonewhoisme said:
MARCUSDJACKSON said:

hell no? i listen to the possitives about a game from other sites(cause i hate reading them) and think about the score. look at the game get the demo and wait for a friend to play it or buy before u do and watch them play and make a dession based on that.

for example: army of 2 the 40th day is in gridlock because 1 of my reveiwers Sam Lair says its not worth getting while the other reveiwer (my brother) says its a must buy and then my brother inlaws brother says its not worth getting but then theres the reveiw scores.

our top3 sites

Game informer 6-10

Xplay 4-5

Game Spy 4-5 i think

based on those scores its worth a buy or rent, but that reminds me of some Halo Reach scores. who in there right mind would give Reach a 7 out of 10? i'd personaly give the first 4 a 4 out of 10 if not lower but not Reach. its the best hands down.

long story short do your own research.

Who in their right mind would give reach a 7 out of 10? EVERYONE in their right mind, reach is just the same shit again, nothing new, nothing groundbreaking, and nothing great, nothing bad either, halo is like pokemon, gameplay is solid but just the same thing over and over again 


considering i hate every HALO ever made other then REACH and HALO WARS i'm not sure if i agree, but thats the case with most games beatting a horse with a dead stick!

dead horse not dead stick



theonewhoisme said:
MARCUSDJACKSON said:
theonewhoisme said:
MARCUSDJACKSON said:

hell no? i listen to the possitives about a game from other sites(cause i hate reading them) and think about the score. look at the game get the demo and wait for a friend to play it or buy before u do and watch them play and make a dession based on that.

for example: army of 2 the 40th day is in gridlock because 1 of my reveiwers Sam Lair says its not worth getting while the other reveiwer (my brother) says its a must buy and then my brother inlaws brother says its not worth getting but then theres the reveiw scores.

our top3 sites

Game informer 6-10

Xplay 4-5

Game Spy 4-5 i think

based on those scores its worth a buy or rent, but that reminds me of some Halo Reach scores. who in there right mind would give Reach a 7 out of 10? i'd personaly give the first 4 a 4 out of 10 if not lower but not Reach. its the best hands down.

long story short do your own research.

Who in their right mind would give reach a 7 out of 10? EVERYONE in their right mind, reach is just the same shit again, nothing new, nothing groundbreaking, and nothing great, nothing bad either, halo is like pokemon, gameplay is solid but just the same thing over and over again 


considering i hate every HALO ever made other then REACH and HALO WARS i'm not sure if i agree, but thats the case with most games beatting a horse with a dead stick!

dead horse not dead stick

my bad

(sitts with egg on face)

that would be funny to see someone beatting a stick witha dead horse.
 or horse with a dead stick. its ass backwards so its funny right?