Squilliam said:
shio said:
Squilliam said:
I would call "Out of the park Baseball" an outlier, it only has 5 reviews and they are not all from what you'd call good sites. I would strike it from the list if I was you.
In addition to this I would say that Falcon 4 was an outlier as well with only 7 reviews posted. The trend is generally downward and its not fair to compare games with 60 reviews to a game which has merely got 7.
Lastly, this is optional but I would consider the generation as starting in 2006 because the Xbox 360 was only released near the very tail of 2005. |
You are talking about PC games. The large majority of PC games aren't even listed on Metacritic and Gamerankings, and you still want to remove the ones that do have reviews?!
And PC Gamer, Gamespy and Gamespot (in 2005) aren't reputed reviewers?
|
There are only 5 or 7 of them. You should know if you follow any of the drama surrounding Metacritic that the scores trend downwards with time. 5 or 7 aren't enough to truely guage a game when there are others who have been scored under that 90 mark due to random newspaper reviews etc. The score may be good on its own but it isn't directly comparable with the console games which have 70 reviews+
|
That is not the rule. The downtrend is only more likely on big releases because the first reviewers have a good chance of giving inflated scores because they think they're obligated. Small, unhyped releases have as much chance of downtrending as uptrending.
Edit: ofcourse the more reviews the better, but you gotta take what you get.
