Me personally I think once you get below a 60 is when a game is considered bad. What do you think higher or lower than mine?
Bad Meta score? | |||
Anything below a 90 | 17 | 5.78% | |
Anything below a 80 | 36 | 12.24% | |
Anything below a 70 | 128 | 43.54% | |
Anything below a 60 | 76 | 25.85% | |
Anything 0-59 | 30 | 10.20% | |
Unless it's a perfect 100 it's bad. | 7 | 2.38% | |
Total: | 294 |
Me personally I think once you get below a 60 is when a game is considered bad. What do you think higher or lower than mine?
Anything below a 69 with rare exceptions
PC Specs: CPU: 7800X3D || GPU: Strix 4090 || RAM: 32GB DDR5 6000 || Main SSD: WD 2TB SN850
I see 60-70 as games to play, but be careful, under a 60 o.O
Also it depends on franchise
Ex: If LoZ (main game not spinoff) gets an 80-85 then it might not be as good considering every LoZ averages 89-93, but if a Sonic game averages out to be an 80-85 OMG, it must be good
Kyuu said: I wouldn't bother myself with anything below 80. But Knack, the Mario-Killer, is an exception. |
Knack has nothing on Mario.... NOTHING
tbone51 said:
|
Fixed
Game reviews have been inflated for years so I pretty much ignore them except for a point of reference, game reviews are a joke.
Honestly, I think once the metascore looks yellow, I have to do more looking into the game than if it weren't. I would look into a game regardless of its metascore, but if enough people are rating it lower, it warrants me making sure I want to purchase the game. Of course, in the end exactly how much the metascore is doesn't reflect much on how much I enjoy the title. Plenty of 90+ games I did not enjoy as much as 70-80 games.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.