LuckyTrouble said:
On one hand, the meta scores after some time have passed aren't bad markers if you want a very general idea of whether or not the game is considered good. For the most part, if it has a 90+ on metacritic, odds are favorable that you'll have at least some fun with the game and will appreciate it, while a game under 70 meta on average will be less impressive. I don't think anybody purely relies on metascores since as a gamer, we should all have at least some vague idea of whether or not something will fit our tastes without needing a number to tell us for certain, but the diverse range of opinions at least for user reviews can be nice. I've seen some games that were ranked fairly positive critically, but more average by users with users doing a better job explaining the pros and cons of the experience than critics ever do in full reviews. |
There are too many exemple of great/good games who got a just average/low metacritic score (Pokémon Mystery Dungeon, Mario Party, a lot of Sonic games, Fatal Frame, NieR...) to say that Metacritic gives a tendency on the quality of a game. And it's worse if you look at all the bad games who get incomprehensible high scores (won't give exemple for them, or the thread will deviate).
