Detroit: Become Human Reviews: 79 Metacritic, 80 OpenCritic

[Aura7541]

VGPolyglot said:

Aura7541 said:

The arbitrary scoring of a game and having a standard metric of scoring a game are not mutually exclusive. A lack of standard metric opens the door to high variance, which isn't a good thing. It can be a problem if two reviews offer very similar opinions, but give a game numerically different scores. At that point, it's meaningless to even have numerical scores if they are less informative than the written reviews. This is not to say the number is more important than what is written, but if you want to involve numbers, then the numbers need to be more informative. Maintaining a more consistent standard will help achieve that goal.

How are we going to reach a consistent standard though? The different sites/reviewers would have to collectively agree on a standardized meaning for their scores, which I do not see happening.

Sites like Metacritic and Opencritic, since they are responsible for aggregating all the scores, would need to ask the sites to adjust their scales accordingly. People can Tweet them or contact them through other means as a way to convince them.

However, I wasn't talking about the chances of the sites collectively agreeing on a standardized meaning. I was merely making a counterargument that having a lack of standard metric leads to a higher variance. You want to have the least amount of statistical noise as possible so that you can get a more accurate average.