ssj12 said:
Barozi said:
ssj12 said:
Barozi said:
Khuutra said:
Fair enough.
What's the problem with deviating from metacritic, though? |
Nothing. But if it deviates too much from the average of ~100 other reviewers, the review seems just less credible IMO.
While I can understand, that there can be a wider gap with "mediocre" or "only good" games, a true AAA game shouldn't get comparatively "low" scores.
Like my previous example. I wouldn't consider a review credible if they rated SMG a 8.5 out of 10.
|
why are you JUST caring about the scoring though? why dont you look at the reasoning behind a score before jumping to conclusions? Also why does a AAA title have to to have a A score? An 8.5 is damn good. The thing is that there could be facotrs keeping it from getting a score higher like game length, bugs, and other issues like camera angle during some parts.
|
Because basically the score is meant to represent a review.
Now if I can't agree with a score and I assume it does represent that review, it fails IMO. If I can can agree with the text, but not with their score, it fails. If there are reasons, why did other reviews mention them, but still gave a good score ?
A 8.5 is indeed a pretty good score, but for some games it's just blasphemy. I could never agree with someone who would rate Half-Life 2 a 8.5
|
The one thing I can guarantee is that our reviewers aren't swayed by gifts or hype so our games are based on how much the person reviewing the game enjoyed or hated a game. which is guess what? how a review is supposed to be. all about enjoyment. Even film critics base their judgments on enjoyment. If a movie sucks you will know it, if a critic enjoyed the movie you will know it.
|
Sure sure. But when 90% of reviewers have a different opinion. Why should I believe the other 10% ?
