By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Nem said:

So, presented with evidence you attack the one presenting you the evidence? For shame!

Also, he didnt say it was the zelda fans that bombed Horizon's score. But that there were more that did it than the other way around.

See, thing about Jim is, he isn't attacking the game. He is attacking the fans (who attacked him first). And i applaud him for that. These reactions are shameful and we should be above them.

When presented with cherry-picked "evidence", certainly. Notice how he has to categorize the reviews by their score, as if a 0 is any worse than a 1 when neither reviewer played the game. Furthermore, he makes the assumption that none of the people who voted a zero for BoTW and did not vote anything for Horizon are Horizon (or Sony fans.) A positive review entails more work than a negative review, because you are actually reviewing the game and not pretending to. For most of the voters, the 0 for BOTW is their only review, likely newly created accounts for that sole purpose. You also can find plenty of people who gave 10's to Nioh, Bloodborne, Demon's Souls, etc are the ones doing the 0's in BoTW comments, and since you can't see all of their reviews/ratings on their page (only the most recently voted high one) , you don't know if they also voted 10 for Horizon or not. 

"There were more that did it than the other way around." How can he make that conclusion from his cherry-picked examples?  Here are a dozen links, including many Jim somehow skimmed over in his "investigation."  And there are also the points I brought up about not all reviews are shown on a profile, yet they still affect the score. There are >7000 BOTW user reviews, but only a hundred or so show up on the Metacritic page. 


http://www.metacritic.com/user/Caramelo

http://www.metacritic.com/user/skilly225

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Ytrerio

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Hunter2020

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Lampiaobr

http://www.metacritic.com/user/AmazedBunion

http://www.metacritic.com/user/GamingTV

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Kayno1 (Reviewed Mar 4th)

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Razv (Reviewed Mar 3rd)

http://www.metacritic.com/user/GK0

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Inanis

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Juhiz

Three of the links in Jim's article for Nintendo fans either have no reviews or there is no account, so he even inflated his "evidence" with false examples, but I am sure you didn't check that. 

http://www.metacritic.com/user/JimmyRustle22

http://www.metacritic.com/user/ivand88

http://www.metacritic.com/user/skysayrain

What is  "for shame" is that you didn't look into it yourself.