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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Journey gets a 40, halo 4 20 on Metacritic. Quarter to Three should be removed from metacritic

JayWood2010 said:
LemonSlice said:
JayWood2010 said:
LemonSlice said:

What I don't get is why are their negative reviews featured on the game's front page? (like here: http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/journey) If 99% of reviews were extremely positive, why is it so important what one negative Nancy had to say? Fair representation my ass.

 


It doesnt realy have much to do with people beiong upset.  it is just unprofessional and he shouldnt be features if he is unprofessional.  That makes metacritic look unprofessional at the same time for including his reviews

Featuring them on the main page makes them look even less professional.


ohhh I mustve read your last message wrong.  My bad bro.  Yeah the always show the lowest score on the main page a i believe.  it just so happens to be them often because that reviewer is a troll -_-

No problem lol.

 

Anyway here's his Journey review in all it's glory:

Quarter to Three said:

I can groove on a good arthouse game. I don’t mind short, experimental, or inscrutable. I’m the kind of guy who thought Bastion was deep, The Path was meaningful, and Gravity Bone was transcendent. I might even play Dear Esther one day. But Journey, the latest release from the creators of Flower at thatgamecompany? I’d rather stay home.

After the jump, indie cred revoked 

Journey is nothing like Flower, which was a unique spry tale of wind, color, and redemption. Journey is yet another game in which you control a little dude who sometimes jumps. Most of the time, you just push your stick up and watch him move languidly and sometimes ponderously past scenery. It’s certainly a pretty game, if somewhat monochromatic. It imagines an exotic (i.e. Middle Eastern) culture of sand and cloth, except that these people have sharp points where their feet should be and they’re polytheists who believe in reincarnation.

The eponymous journey takes you over minor puzzles, underneath threats, though a limp-to-the-finish finale, and into a supposedly rapturous conclusion. Along the way, the story is illustrated with line drawings and presided over by a tall luminescent god creature who’s part of a committee of god creatures who show up at the end to, um…well, that’s for you to parse. The point seems to be some sort of circle of life affirmation about how the journey matters more than the destination, so you should probably play a second time.

It’s often picturesque and occasionally rousing. Your pilgrim on this brief hajj wears a burka, with a scarf thrown on for good measure. The scarf is actually Journey’s only claim to an interface for how it measures how much jump juice you have. You also have preternaturally wise alien/cat eyes. Think Jawas, but lithe. It’s great character design in search of a game. A couple of times, Journey made me want to play SSX. But it mostly reminded me of some of the dull and barely interactive bits of Uncharted 3. I think the lesson here is that deserts are often poorly suited to games without dune buggies.

There’s no challenge and no real gameplay, which isn’t necessarily a criticism. It’s sort of like Shadow of the Colossus without any colossi, or Ico without the little girl. It does have multiplayer, though. Other players run around in your game pulling your switches, mashing their circle buttons to activate the “hey, over here!” beacons, and basically going the same place you’re going without any meaningful way to interact with you unless you both know Morse code. How’s that for a metaphor for online gaming?

2 stars

It's complete nonsense, and way more pretentious than the actual game.



Around the Network

They are obvious attention sluts. Eurogamer does that, they also have lot of reviews that are 3/10, and lot of people find EG reliable source for reviews....

Whenever I see scores like those, or 100/100 I just skip them completely....pity Metacritic does not...



Personally, I hate that so many people focus on Metacritic scores as though they were anything but very, very rough indicators. My own +/- is at least 10, which means that I when I see a Metacritic score of 80, I assume it will be anywhere from a 70 to a 90 for me, and possibly even further out than that.

Also, no one should ever be removed for not following the nonsensical "80 is average" scale so many others seem to think is an absolute. It's not uncommon to read a review that tears a game apart, only to see a 70 tacked on the end. I mean, what?

Still, all that being said, this guy gave Brutal Legend a 100. Do with him as you will.



I don't give a flying duck about most reviewers these days. They are so horribly wrong.

However other people care so as a result I'm forced to care or something like that. Let's make a petition to metacritic to get this guy kicked off.



freaking troll. and yeah i agree, the guy site should be removed from metacritic



Around the Network

Keep them around I say, a little controversy is fun.



TheKoreanGuy said:

Do people seriously use metacritic as a viable metric towards a game's worth? Imo, the best way is to try the games yourself.

Some people don't have that much free time/money to play all the games they are somewhat interested in

On topic: the best way to take the an average is to eliminate the two extremes. I'd like to see Metacritic do that



paid troll lol



All of this, of course, is just my opinion.

Skyrim 100%'d. Dark Souls 100%'d. 
Dark Souls > Skyrim.
Halo 4 is the best damn FPS since Halo 3.
Proud pre-orderer of 2 PS4's and an Xbox One. 

Currently Playing: Dark Souls II, South Park
Playstation 4: MGS V GZ, Killzone: Shadow Fall, NBA 2k14.

I don't care about the scores a publication gives, and it's ridiculous to ask for outlying scores to just be discounted. What does matter though is the content of the review, and I remember reading their Journey review and it displaying about the level of analysis and communication I'd expect to find in a middle school student magazine. So that should discount them from the site. 

 

Then again, there are plenty of positive reviews where I could level exactly the same criticism. So the best idea is to not bother with metascores whatsoever. 



Most likely a marketing ploy for the website. It gives popular games a terrible (and underserved) review and hopes will see it, think "what the hell, who are they" and then go to the website. If not he is just terrible reviewer.

The Halo 4 one contains something along the lines of "if there's anything worse than more of the same, its less of the same". This is enough to to show the review is worthless. You can either dislike things for being too similar or dislike them for being too different. This line basically says "nothing is good, everything sucks".

Given the other review scores he's given, I don't think this summary is wrong. So how can such a reviewer have there opinions be valued or considered worth listening to?