| CommonMan said: I'm so confused, I thought metacritic was garbage? Is it okay to use Metacritic when proving a pro-PS3 point? I remember a thread that said somthing like "360 has 50% more AAA exclusives than PS3!" and used metacritic as justification. There were like 2 pages of "LOL Meta is garbage" replies and then it was locked. I don't like moving the goalposts like this. |
Actually, even though I don't think the linked article proves a malicious bias, there's no goalpost moving because the two cases are very different
1) "360 has more games with 90+ metacritic score than PS3 ..." is factual data, nobody can say it isn't true. But "... thus its library is the best one" is the part that makes little sense (Metacritic does not cover all games, Metacritic covers games that can be irrelevant today or for a given user, etc...) What is refused is the significance of mechanically counting metascores to assess the quality of a library.
2) If I want to compare a single review source -say Edge- with an average of many other reviews, Metacritic provides that average instead of having to track down another 30 reviews per game, and that's all that concerns a purely statistical argument. Nowhere in this we're taking Metacritic scores at face value as "the right ones" to assess game quality.
