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

Forums - Website Topics - Metacritic is using VGC sales data !

yo_john117 on 09 July 2010
steverhcp02 said:
yo_john117 said:
steverhcp02 said:
Khuutra said:
yo_john117 said:

Its kind of retarded that they will use Vgchartz sales numbers but won't use their reviews.

I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure that VGChartz reviews have a good chance of being on Metacritic in the next little while.

Well it depends. While i enjoy the reviews here, the fact that some reviewers as posters in the forum are questionable as far as objectivity/professional it would be understandable if they didnt.

In my opinion i love when site contributors are active in the forum, but the contributors on this site who are active are usually picking fights, posting condescending things or starting arguments so i think it looks bad on the professionalism and credibility. Just my opinion though.

I think if your name is a different color then there should be a expectation on posting style and substance in the general forum. To this date it isnt so and has always been a problem with VGC forum/contributors.

Who are the people that review games on this site?

I was mainly referring to Seece and his posting style, but just in general i remember the reputation this forum has, when people like FishyJoe wer ein charge,people dont necessarily understand distinction between admin.mod/reviewer colors of names but when people visit this site and see some posts from the aforementioned group it reflects poorly.

Im just saying i feel if someones going to contribute to the website then they should have a higher standard of posting.

Reputation is everything, not just of the reviewer but site credibility as a whole.

Well the thing is there is no such thing as unbiased...every single reviewer out there has at least some bias to them.

All the reviews I have seen from Vgchartz have been pretty good (and i'm not sure Seece even reviews games)

I think it just boils down to you not liking Seece, cause I think he's just a perfectly fine poster...there's nothing wrong with criticizing an idiot you know (as long as your not trolling or flaming them)



Around the Network
hatmoza on 09 July 2010

I come here to celebrate VGC's great feat only to find that us reviewers are being bashed. BLASPHEMY!



I am the black sheep     "of course I'm crazy, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong."-Robert Anton Wilson

steverhcp02 on 09 July 2010
yo_john117 said:
steverhcp02 said:
yo_john117 said:

I was mainly referring to Seece and his posting style, but just in general i remember the reputation this forum has, when people like FishyJoe wer ein charge,people dont necessarily understand distinction between admin.mod/reviewer colors of names but when people visit this site and see some posts from the aforementioned group it reflects poorly.

Im just saying i feel if someones going to contribute to the website then they should have a higher standard of posting.

Reputation is everything, not just of the reviewer but site credibility as a whole.

Well the thing is there is no such thing as unbiased...every single reviewer out there has at least some bias to them.

All the reviews I have seen from Vgchartz have been pretty good (and i'm not sure Seece even reviews games)

I think it just boils down to you not liking Seece, cause I think he's just a perfectly fine poster...there's nothing wrong with criticizing an idiot you know (as long as your not trolling or flaming them)


I understand bias. Im not even saying i dont enjoy the reviews here, if you refer to my first post i said i dont have a problem with them. I even feel Seece's reviews are spot on and great reads.

My main point is credibility. I feel its unfair for you to brush of my substance and say i just dont like Seece when you dont even know whether we have had interactions or anything. To a lot of us regulars we get a feel for posting styles and personalities. A lot of the ocntributors here were posters long before they were contributors. But they never really changed.

I guess i was just thinking via typing i just feel the place has always never gotten the respects its deserved because a lot of the people that are contributors dont act professionally in the forums or even in some articles. There was even an incident involving neogaf which i wont mention because i was threatened to be permabanned for talking about how unprofessional i thought it was....and it reflects poorly on the site as a whole

VGC is finally getting recognized like it should but some things i feel are limiting the exposure.




Get Your Portable ID!

Khuutra on 09 July 2010
hatmoza said:

Jesus Christ everybody RUN! RUUUUN



steverhcp02 on 09 July 2010
hatmoza said:

I come here to celebrate VGC's great feat only to find that us reviewers are being bashed. BLASPHEMY!


:P im not!!!!! I love the reviews here, i even said i think Seece is a damn fine reviewer, informative, articulate and engaging. But  alot of people wont see beyond posting styles or even biases and give those things a chance and be turned away before even discovering his great reviews!!

lets have a computer hug.




Get Your Portable ID!

Around the Network
hatmoza on 09 July 2010
Khuutra said:
hatmoza said:

Jesus Christ everybody RUN! RUUUUN

Pincer Attack!



I am the black sheep     "of course I'm crazy, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong."-Robert Anton Wilson

yo_john117 on 09 July 2010
steverhcp02 said:
yo_john117 said:
steverhcp02 said:
yo_john117 said:

I was mainly referring to Seece and his posting style, but just in general i remember the reputation this forum has, when people like FishyJoe wer ein charge,people dont necessarily understand distinction between admin.mod/reviewer colors of names but when people visit this site and see some posts from the aforementioned group it reflects poorly.

Im just saying i feel if someones going to contribute to the website then they should have a higher standard of posting.

Reputation is everything, not just of the reviewer but site credibility as a whole.

Well the thing is there is no such thing as unbiased...every single reviewer out there has at least some bias to them.

All the reviews I have seen from Vgchartz have been pretty good (and i'm not sure Seece even reviews games)

I think it just boils down to you not liking Seece, cause I think he's just a perfectly fine poster...there's nothing wrong with criticizing an idiot you know (as long as your not trolling or flaming them)


I understand bias. Im not even saying i dont enjoy the reviews here, if you refer to my first post i said i dont have a problem with them. I even feel Seece's reviews are spot on and great reads.

My main point is credibility. I feel its unfair for you to brush of my substance and say i just dont like Seece when you dont even know whether we have had interactions or anything. To a lot of us regulars we get a feel for posting styles and personalities. A lot of the ocntributors here were posters long before they were contributors. But they never really changed.

I guess i was just thinking via typing i just feel the place has always never gotten the respects its deserved because a lot of the people that are contributors dont act professionally in the forums or even in some articles. There was even an incident involving neogaf which i wont mention because i was threatened to be permabanned for talking about how unprofessional i thought it was....and it reflects poorly on the site as a whole

VGC is finally getting recognized like it should but some things i feel are limiting the exposure.


I can see your point on credibility but I don't think most people who look at metacritic will go into the vgchartz forums and read regularly enough to get a opinion on the writers.   And the contributers staff has improved a bunch in their posting styles imo.



Seece on 09 July 2010
steverhcp02 said:
yo_john117 said:
steverhcp02 said:
yo_john117 said:

I was mainly referring to Seece and his posting style, but just in general i remember the reputation this forum has, when people like FishyJoe wer ein charge,people dont necessarily understand distinction between admin.mod/reviewer colors of names but when people visit this site and see some posts from the aforementioned group it reflects poorly.

Im just saying i feel if someones going to contribute to the website then they should have a higher standard of posting.

Reputation is everything, not just of the reviewer but site credibility as a whole.

Well the thing is there is no such thing as unbiased...every single reviewer out there has at least some bias to them.

All the reviews I have seen from Vgchartz have been pretty good (and i'm not sure Seece even reviews games)

I think it just boils down to you not liking Seece, cause I think he's just a perfectly fine poster...there's nothing wrong with criticizing an idiot you know (as long as your not trolling or flaming them)


I understand bias. Im not even saying i dont enjoy the reviews here, if you refer to my first post i said i dont have a problem with them. I even feel Seece's reviews are spot on and great reads.

My main point is credibility. I feel its unfair for you to brush of my substance and say i just dont like Seece when you dont even know whether we have had interactions or anything. To a lot of us regulars we get a feel for posting styles and personalities. A lot of the ocntributors here were posters long before they were contributors. But they never really changed.

I guess i was just thinking via typing i just feel the place has always never gotten the respects its deserved because a lot of the people that are contributors dont act professionally in the forums or even in some articles. There was even an incident involving neogaf which i wont mention because i was threatened to be permabanned for talking about how unprofessional i thought it was....and it reflects poorly on the site as a whole

VGC is finally getting recognized like it should but some things i feel are limiting the exposure.

The majority of my "outspoken" posts, I do check with at least one mod (normally head mod himself) if it's ok to post, if it isn't I tone it down or simply don't post it at all.

I never break any rules, I just get into heated debates/discussion. I don't see anything wrong with that personally, though I will admit I need to stop focusing on petty arguments with certain users, the majority are now blocked and as long as they leave me alone I'll try hard to keep away.

That said, I don't think Meta cares about arguments from staff, more so pathetic insults against his website like "metadarlings" ...

that was just .. ugh



 

GodOfWar_3ever on 09 July 2010

We are on gamerankings, right ? We should be on Meta rather soon me thinks.



steverhcp02 on 09 July 2010
kowenicki said:
steverhcp02 said:

It was a long time ago but i had some dialogue with him about FishyJoe, if anyone remembers him, I personally dont have a huge problem with it because i dont really have anything vested in this website and theres far fewer great posters than bad ones....my only complaint is the forums not the reviews.

People will view this website as a whole, not in segments, this will always be VGChartz and the reputation of the forum will transcend any other section of the branchof, and vice versa.

I posted a complaint in the Robert Ebert news Gamrfeed posting. At the end Nick said Ebert "should keep his mouth shut....that sporbably for the best" I gave him the benefit of the doubt but said it was rather tasteless and hoped it would be edited because i thought it was common knowledge Ebert had thyroid cancer and was unable to speak or even open his mouth much due to the cancer......i felt it was in poor taste and unprofessional, i believe MAchina replied and said he never mentioned his cancer....and thus the editorial was never edited.

I suppose im just venting now, but i guess it relates whether or not theyd accept reviews from VGC, im sure they will, theres probably worse websites they accept that i dont even know wabout.


I kind of agree and disagree at the same time.  I thought that particular editorial was poor, in almost every respect.  BUT it was an editortial... and thats what an editrorial is...  its an opinion piece.

I totally disagree with you about the forum activity of "contributors".  It is of no consequence in my opinion... so long as that bahaviour doesn't wash over into their actual site contributions.  

Lots of  people here would categorise me as having a bias... (I'm so mis-understood!  )  but my articles are anything but biased.  They are factual and neutral.    Aas far as reviews are concerned; well there I'd challenge you to find any reviewer that doesn't have a bias or favoured console/developer/genre on all review sites.

haha. Your articles are a perfect example of what im talking about. You are biased, and thats fine i understand that, hell i even respect it a lot more because you argue your cases (usually :P) very well, and your articles are beyond great. The analysis and Mind the Gap are one of the things i love reading.....but i fear some people would brush it off too soon "its kowenicki that guy only cares about the 360" 

As for the editorial, i dont care if its opinion, those kinds of comments should not be posted in a "professional" piece. I dont have a problem with the opinion of the editorial, i had a problem with the word choice and slight at Eberts cancer.

You dont need to challenge me to find an unbiased reviewer. Im not requesting such or thing or expecting one, as ive said Seece is insanely biased but also i feel hes one of th ebest if not the best reviewers this site has, but i feel in general its a turn off to people and it reflects onto the site poorly.

Also your comment above "take that N4G and NeoGaf" I mean whats the point? It just seems juvenile, doesnt it? This place is moving forward like its always deserved, why even bother with that kind of crap? It just seems you guys should be above it and instead it sounds bitter and its trivial, imo.




Get Your Portable ID!