Currently Online 
| binary solo said: Hyperbolic crap. Last gen was the gen most gamers started complaining about reviewers inflating scores. I'd love for you to find examples of where "a lot of gamers" espoused that sort of reverence towards reviewers. Reviews and metacritic are useful for broadly comparative purposes. But no sane person would say one review is proof positive of the quality of a game, nor would a sane person cite just a few points difference in metascore as proof that one game is better than another. The only time people take a review as gospel is when it's their personal favourite reviewer based on the fact that their gaming tastes closely align with yours. If you can find such a reviewer then they are like gold because they really are an excellent basis for making buying deicisions, for you. But probably not many other people. |
People were holding up "oh x game got a 95, I'm so getting it" or "I'm skipping this one, it got a 79" left right and centre. Arguments on game quality constantly devolved into Metacritic/Gamerankings list wars. Oh sure, people bitched if their favourite game got slammed, but Metacritic was still largely held up as a measuring stick of quality. Still is to a degree, just thankfully less so. Maybe this year's low scores will teach people to think for themselves.
