Im curious if ppl read/watch reviews for their numerical score (metacritic). Or do you use reviews to gather broader information and make up your own mind (classic game room). My take on metacritc is it's like the terror scale the former u.s. pres. used to convey threats. It assumes we wont understand complexties, but will understand counting 1-10. Something like cgr however gives a rundown but no final score. I always know from previews if i want something and watch reviews to see a final analysis. But the point system is beyond ridiculous, isn't it?

I don´t watch reviews.

I read the actual review of course! A number doesn't tell me anything other than how much that person liked the game, which doesn't necessarily mean I'll like it the same.

If it's a game I care about, I listen to what they have to say. I want to get their feelings.

If I have little intent on buying, I check metacritic to see if it sucked or not.

JoeTheBro said:
If it's a game I care about, I listen to what they have to say. I want to get their feelings.

If I have little intent on buying, I check metacritic to see if it sucked or not.




very interesting. i check the score to see if the reviewer sucks (^-^)

Depends. If it's a game I have interest in, I'll read/watch the review. A lot of times I'll read a 9.0 review and thing "this probably isn't for me" and other times I'll read a 7.5 review and think "can't wait for this!".

If it's a game I'm not really interested in buying, I'll probably just check the score out of curiosity. If the score is really high, I may read the review more closely to see if it's something I might want to check out.

For the score mainly, I try not to read to much of it in case of spoilers

Normally to see what score it gets. Also, anything above 60 is decent, i don't see why people see 60 or 70 as a bad score.

To see the game in action.