Detroit: Become Human Reviews: 79 Metacritic, 80 OpenCritic

[DonFerrari]

yvanjean said:

DonFerrari said:

You gone to their review? I don't think so.

https://www.videogamer.com/reviews/detroit-become-human-review is 4/10 so it isn't a 5 point scale.

http://www.digitallydownloaded.net/2018/06/review-west-of-loathing-nintendo-switch.html they give half star as well, so another 10 point scale.

So your whole premise of they giving 5 point and based on how much they like the game (which isn't even a good way of reviewing games, I don't want to know if a reviewer like the game I want to see what is the game) is dead wrong.

And considering digitallydownloaded gave 9/10 to the game I gave the link I have very hard time accepting that this game is a whopping 50 points out of 100 better than Detroit.

Or that this game http://www.digitallydownloaded.net/2018/05/review-happy-birthdays-nintendo-switch.html is perfect and Detroit dwelves on the broken side of the scale.

Please keep defending that they were totally professional with both 40/100.

And no one is saying the average would change much (although it would keep the 80 it had), but that both are at troll level clickbaiting side.

Well just look at their prior work. I'm not ruling out click baiting but that is the same has committing fraud. Yes, on Metacritic 40% rating means it's a bad game, but on their own scale 2 out of 5 could just mean it's a game they din't enjoy and they are not recommending it. 

http://opencritic.com/critic/577/colm-ahern

http://opencritic.com/critic/65/tyler-treese

Also, Different website use their own internal scale to rate games and Metacritic doesn't adjust their score base on these unique scale. 4 out of 10 doesn't always mean the same thing.  The review doesn't get to assign a metacritic score even if they are not using the same scale.  Reviewers don't review games for Metacritic, Metacritic use their score without consulting them. 

for example: I'll go back to 5 point scale because it's easier to explain.

Site could have internal 5 point scale has followed: 

Bad-OK-Good-Very Good- Excellent - Bad game is 20%
Broken-Bad-Average-Good-Excellent - Bad game is 40%
Unplayable/Broken-Flawed-Bad- Good- Excellent - Bad game is 60%

And I have explained to you that both sites uses half star, so it's effectively a 10 point scale so using a 5 point to excuse them doesn't work. And as I put in my answer to MCube, one of them gave 10 to HR and B2S (not same reviewer) so unless you can see reasons to consider both 2.5x better than Detroit they lack consistency.

Also as I also put, reviewers should concentrate most of their analysis on objective points, so when the game works good, have good sound, good graphics, coherent story, etc. At least average it should be considered (60-70).

Mcube said:

DonFerrari said:

Unless you can explain me with a straight face that giving 10 to HR, B2S and 4 for Detroit is justified because those are 2.5x better than it (and also NMS and other high scores for bad games) then no, I won't accept the validity of any review that gives score based on the person liking or not the game. That isn't how reviewing is supposed to be. You want to give your opinion on if you like a game you do an editorial, a review needs to talk about the game, what it try and accomplish. Not about what you wanted the game to be.

Its what they thought about the game. Their justified to their opinion just like everybody else. This really doesnt come across as a troll review to me. Its obvious you like this game alot so I´d just ignore their review entirely but the metascore shouldnt go up because you disagreed with their opinion. Its not a fact that this game is good its all opinions. This is a story heavy game if the story doesnt appeal to someone they shouldnt give it a review unless they see the value in what it has to offer to other people. It really seems they just thought this game was mediocore. They used a 5 point system so the metascore comes across harder then it actually is. 

As for the NMS review: 8 other people give it a 90+ whereunder Time, IGN sweden (99) Ign spain and Playstation lifestyle Do these publications lose credibility because they gave the game a high score? I Wouldnt know why. These are peoples own opinions. These arent click bait reviews because their review explain why they dislike it and they arent calling out people for liking this. I really dont see a problem with both of these reviews even if their opinions differs from what most other reviewers think. 

I haven't played Detroit yet to say I'll like the game. But I know the type of game deserves a 40 (broken ones). We aren't discussing how these affect the average (since we already know it is no more than 1 point), but how much deviant they are and how they miss any consistency because both giving perfect scores for previous works of the studio (and as far as we know this one is better than the previous 2) but also gave perfect scores to shitty and broken games.

And again reviews shouldn't be about personal opinions. Unless you can say with a straight face that me giving 0 to Halo because I don't like FPS or to Zelda because I never cared much about it is justifiable.

And stop saying they use a 5 point system. They both give half point so it's effectively 10 points. So not using that excuse.

I want to see when you do a paper or work and it's scored 0 or even 4 because the one analyzing didn't like (doesn't matter if it was right or well done), since it seems to you is that how you fell matter the most. That is the biggest problem of this generation the "how I fell generation".