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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Metacritic system compromise with calculations. Halo 4 really is at 90% not 87%

 

This System > Meta system?

Yes 37 33.04%
 
No 50 44.64%
 
Meh 25 22.32%
 
Total:112
ethomaz on 05 November 2012

I think GT5 is a 90 too... move ahead.



Around the Network
Jaywood2010 on 05 November 2012
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:

Those who cant be bothered reading these bunch of numbers should JUST SKIP TO THE CONCLUSION where I will explain. 

******************************************************************************************************************************

Calculations First

I will use these data gathered from the Halo 4 metcritic review pool (Nov 5 version): 20, 55, 70, 80, 80, 80, 80, 80, 80, 80, 80, 80, 80, 80, 85, 85, 85, 85, 89, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 91, 92, 93, 93, 93, 94, 94, 95, 95, 95, 95, 96, 98, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100. 

So in this case we have (Calculations NOT shown): Sample size: 61 Minimum: 20 Quartile 1: 85 Median: 90 Third Quartile: 93.5 Inter Quartile Range: 8.5 

I will use the "1.5 IQR" rule for calculating the outliers.

*****

(Q1-1.5IQR) 85-1.5*8.5= 72.25

(Q3+1.5IQR) 93.5+1.5*8.5= 106.25

*****

So the outliers are  20 55 and 70 BECAUSE they fall under the 72.5 value. 

Therefore Outliers are 20, 55, and 70. 

IF the outliers are then disregarded for the statistical data for Metacritic Halo 4 would get a score of 90/100 (More like 89.99 2sf) 

******************************************************************************************************************************

Conclusion: Please read. 

Halo 4 would get a score of 90/100 (More like 89.99 2dp)

Outliers - are the "extreme' numbers and are ussually counted out of a statistical data to increase the data accuracy. Although they shouldn't be deleted but just disregarded in the mean or in a statistical graph.

The MAIN problem with Metacritics Halo 4 reviews (Or any other game) is that extreme reviews are counted on ,or god-forbid, handpicked . I believe it is safe to assume that SOME of the review scores we often dislike dont qualify on the "1.5 interquartile range rule". Since we have a sample of 61 ( or 58) I believe that this sample size is more than enough for this kind of calculation. Since the acceptable amount of samples for a fair statistical survey is in minimum of 30 anyway. And since theres a healthy amount of samples, I believe it is rational that a general consensus is present therefore safe to calculate. 

Also I believe that Metacritic should NOT implement this system on games with review numbers less than 30 samples. And I also belive that they should automate the system to calculate a new mean (average score) whenever a new review gets added when there are more than 30 samples. 

 

*******************************************************************************************************************************

If it makes you sleep at night, here's a statistical data that I found.. 90/100 score is the most recurring review score. With 20 reviewers scoring halo 4 90%. 

Thoughts? Is this system fair? 

Thanks Kain for the thread idea anyway. 


Gamespot already does this basically.  It's at a 89 metacritic on gamespot.

Edit:  Nevermind they are just behind on updating it looks




       

Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 on 05 November 2012
JayWood2010 said:
Wh1pL4shL1ve_007 said:

Those who cant be bothered reading these bunch of numbers should JUST SKIP TO THE CONCLUSION where I will explain. 

******************************************************************************************************************************

Calculations First

I will use these data gathered from the Halo 4 metcritic review pool (Nov 5 version): 20, 55, 70, 80, 80, 80, 80, 80, 80, 80, 80, 80, 80, 80, 85, 85, 85, 85, 89, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 90, 91, 92, 93, 93, 93, 94, 94, 95, 95, 95, 95, 96, 98, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100, 100. 

So in this case we have (Calculations NOT shown): Sample size: 61 Minimum: 20 Quartile 1: 85 Median: 90 Third Quartile: 93.5 Inter Quartile Range: 8.5 

I will use the "1.5 IQR" rule for calculating the outliers.

*****

(Q1-1.5IQR) 85-1.5*8.5= 72.25

(Q3+1.5IQR) 93.5+1.5*8.5= 106.25

*****

So the outliers are  20 55 and 70 BECAUSE they fall under the 72.5 value. 

Therefore Outliers are 20, 55, and 70. 

IF the outliers are then disregarded for the statistical data for Metacritic Halo 4 would get a score of 90/100 (More like 89.99 2sf) 

******************************************************************************************************************************

Conclusion: Please read. 

Halo 4 would get a score of 90/100 (More like 89.99 2dp)

Outliers - are the "extreme' numbers and are ussually counted out of a statistical data to increase the data accuracy. Although they shouldn't be deleted but just disregarded in the mean or in a statistical graph.

The MAIN problem with Metacritics Halo 4 reviews (Or any other game) is that extreme reviews are counted on ,or god-forbid, handpicked . I believe it is safe to assume that SOME of the review scores we often dislike dont qualify on the "1.5 interquartile range rule". Since we have a sample of 61 ( or 58) I believe that this sample size is more than enough for this kind of calculation. Since the acceptable amount of samples for a fair statistical survey is in minimum of 30 anyway. And since theres a healthy amount of samples, I believe it is rational that a general consensus is present therefore safe to calculate. 

Also I believe that Metacritic should NOT implement this system on games with review numbers less than 30 samples. And I also belive that they should automate the system to calculate a new mean (average score) whenever a new review gets added when there are more than 30 samples. 

 

*******************************************************************************************************************************

If it makes you sleep at night, here's a statistical data that I found.. 90/100 score is the most recurring review score. With 20 reviewers scoring halo 4 90%. 

Thoughts? Is this system fair? 

Thanks Kain for the thread idea anyway. 


Gamespot already does this basically.  It's at a 89 metacritic on gamespot

Or... they just haven't updated it. 



Yay!!!

askel50 on 05 November 2012
ishiki said:
If you're throwing out outliers you have to throw some 100's too. If you just throw out the bottom scores that's dumb. And you're just inflating the score.

Or just not do this at all.


That's not how it works. The principle is that values that differ too much from the mean are anomalous, you can keep track of them but you shouldn't use them. If 99 persons say 10 and 1 person says 0, the effective mean should be 10 because that one person is an anomaly, is not normal. You don't take out 0 or 10 because they are extreme, you take them out because they are too big or too small in relation to the expected value. If the mean is high you take out small values, if the mean is low you take out high values.



thehusbo on 05 November 2012

dont think ive seen such a fuss over the metascore of one game.. its obviously going to be a good game. just play it and enjoy it..



Around the Network
Gilgamesh on 05 November 2012

Does it really matter?

Instead of complaining with the scores why not actually spend that time playing the game?

This happens all the time.



Argh_College on 05 November 2012
thehusbo said:
dont think ive seen such a fuss over the metascore of one game.. its obviously going to be a good game. just play it and enjoy it..

iTs Halo man.

If Uncharted got 2/10 reviews on Meta people would go crazy about it aswell.



Naum on 05 November 2012

Jesus how the hell can the score mean so much for some people....
Play the game and enjoy it dont think the game will be less good for you just beacuse it got 87 instead of 90



If it isn't turnbased it isn't worth playing   (mostly)

And shepherds we shall be,

For Thee, my Lord, for Thee. Power hath descended forth from Thy hand, That our feet may swiftly carry out Thy command. So we shall flow a river forth to Thee And teeming with souls shall it ever be. In Nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritūs Sancti. -----The Boondock Saints

non-gravity on 05 November 2012

I'd say those outliers fit nicely with some truncated gamma distribution curve



Fayceless on 05 November 2012

Sorry, but you have to count those outliers unless you disregard the outliers for every game. Every single game. Otherwise it's not a fair comparison.