By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
AngryLittleAlchemist on 02 November 2018
Edit Thread
Nate4Drake said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

Uh ... actually ... the tastes of consumers DO change the value of a game? Lol. Metacritic has never determined the value of something. Profitability is the second closest measure, but even that's flawed because people can buy a game and not like it, which is clearly what has happened to many here. Sad truth is we'll never know the value of games at an objective level, the best we can do is try to assess popular opinion which is the closest benchmark. 

The popular opinion in a forum which represents the 0.01% of all the RDR2 players, you mean ?

 

...Huh? Where did I say or even imply that a forum dictates popular consensus? I'm literally doing the opposite. 

 

Metacritic is better as a means for consensus when we look at user scores though, not critics. Critics are by far a minority. Unfortunately user averages are easily manipulated by trolls. I will say that I believe the big difference between user score and reviewer scores is probably mostly earned legit though. I can't imagine how much GTA fans got bored with the game an hour in. 

" Then it's up to you, and if you don't like it's your taste, don't talk about the value or what the Game deserves or not. "

Ehh? No... Because as you said, we should listen to all players. That doesn't meab we have to agree with them, but quality and value isn't objective anyways (although the reception of games could be measurable though, but the objective quality in that would be statistics of how liked a game is, not it's """value""")