Icyedge said:
slowmo said:
Icyedge said:
slowmo said:
Icyedge said:
slowmo said:
Did anybody post about the inflated scores this game got and complain about them by any chance? Given the game is sub 90 on meta I guess all those 100's are just fanboy reviewers too trying to bring the score up for site views too.
The hypocrsy of some fans is really sad. Its one review, EVERY big exclusive gets spoilers, deal with it. Its another reason why metacritic is flawed.
BTW epic fail by those people in here quoting Metacritic figures as some method to prove how good a game is. Perhaps when you do that, you don't do it in a thread created to cast doubt on the validity of those figures. |
Average of lets say 85 compare to 100, is 15 points difference. Average of 85 to 40 is 45 point difference. Very strange argument you were trying to bring there.
|
Not strange its called common sense. If you're willing to insult someones opinion for rating this game below the average thn do the same for those going above too. It's quite clear if we take Meta as gospel this game is in no way worth any 10/10 reviews. The difference is that I can appreciate some people may subjectively enjoy the game more than others hence the variance in review scores.
Why is it I wonder, its mainly only PS3 fans who ever cry about review scores. Anyone care to answer why this happens as its getting really old now. Deadly Premonition got blasted and people didn't whinge, same with Halo Wars, Ninja Blade, etc, etc.
|
Its not common sense, I mean how can you compare the reaction instigate by a review that is 12 points to the average compare to 45 points. Sure it itsnt going to make the same reaction for the gamer one way or another. Higher or lower, whatever the tool use (in this case meta) if a reviewer give a score 45 points different to the average than sure it is going to make people talk. Does this mean this review or reviewer is shit? surely not, its an opinion. But its only very normal that people comments on those type of review. You know that half of your post is not even related to what I was saying right? Where did you read the insult towards the reviewer or that meta is some kind of god?
|
The part not relevant to you is in a different paragraph, seems fine by my understanding of the English language. The point is that you're not comparing like for like. Some reviewers deal with a 5 point scale for their reviews where they rarely ever give less than 5/10, this artificially inflates scores above where they should be. If you're then comparing people reviewing on 2 different scales and weighting each as the same then your analysis is flawed. I really cannot be bothered explaining to you how the 15 points between 85 and 100 are more heavily weighted than the 45 below 85. All of this boils down to one simple fact that you believe its ok to use Metacritic as a metric, I say its hopelessly flawed and pointless on so many levels its unreal. I've still not seen you say those 10/10 reviews are wrong by the way, if you believe in Meta so much then admit some people have "overrated" the game in your opinion too.
|
Well, this argument is about the same tool (meta) and also the same scale (on 100). Also, im not saying meta is a better metric than something else. My point is simply that a review that is 45 points difference than an average (using the same tool and scale like in this case) will make people talk and comment. Its normal. Maybe the game is overrated but this doesnt have anything to do with our argument.
|
I don't think the game is overrated because I cannot make that judgement having not played it.
My original point was that if you take issue with reviews below the average then you should do the same to those above, you cannot get any higher than 15 above in this case...
100 isn't the same scale when it comes to reviews on meta at all by the way. Some sites deal in grades, others stars, some percentages, others single digit scales out of 10 and 20. These scores are then "converted" to a 100 scale. You're using a tool that by its inherrent design is flawed as a basis of averages.
It would seem you took issue with my point regarding games above and below Meta's average, I think I've answered that point several times already. If the standard for most of the reviewers on Meta for a average game is 6 or 7/10 and this site rate a average game at 5/10 then that is instantly a 10 or 20 point swing upwards for the average on meta that this review cannot account for. My point is IF you must use Meta as some basis to make a comparison to criticize a review then at least be unbiased enough to do so for inflated scores too!
Essay Pro