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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Have you ever had 2nd thoughts because of Metacritic?

 

How Metacritic influenced you?

Waited for game to get cheaper. 15 22.06%
 
Cancelled a pre-order, wa... 2 2.94%
 
Lost all the interest for the game. 15 22.06%
 
Affected my opinion at fi... 4 5.88%
 
Didn't affect my percept... 13 19.12%
 
Other / FY Metacritic! 19 27.94%
 
Total:68
Neodegenerate said:
fluky-nintendy said:
Neodegenerate said:

Fair enough.  I find that these days there is an expectation in reviews that doesn't actually work to help the gaming industry.  If the game is an annual franchise, it gets an 80-90ish score (for the most part) and is largely hailed for giving you the "same experience, with a few upgrades this time around" whereas a game that is not in an annual franchise gets a 70-80 for being "too much like game X" or "not different enough from it's predecessor to truly break away" or some other nonsense like that.  Also, reviewers get caught up in hype (Destiny) just like we do, and that can sway a score in a direction that it wouldn't have gone in if they went in fresh.  

 

I prefer to make my purchases based on my own gaming preferences (RPGs, Nintendo platformers, Survival Horror, TPS with good story) and research.  And of course, demos.

It angers me especially the fact reviewers contantly compare games that came before and at the same time downplay the original stuff devs introduce. It's like they want the game to be different but at the same time being too different is also bad. Also the budget of a game and the price point of it, should start to be taken in consideration as well imo. Reviewers can't always use the same measures to review games and should clearly say these things in their reviews. 



...Let the Sony Domination continue with the PS4...
Around the Network

Yes, but it was more the sum total of all the reviews for that/those specific game(s). Example: Aliens: Colonial Marines. That meta score turn me off that game, and I'm damn glad it did! Same thing can be said about Sim City



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.

What is said in reviews is a lot more important than the numner assigned. I've seen more than a few reviews take off points I see for something I would like and praise it for something I see as bad.



Yes! Although i'd say a bit of all options you pointed out.

I always check out reviews before buying games, as I do with movies for exemple. I have 4 kinds of games:

1) Those I have interest on and are good - these I buy for sure
2) Those I have interest on but are no good - I'm on the fence about buying or not, Metacritic and reviews in general might help me decide
3) Those I have no interest/aren't my type but are good - I'm on the fence about buying or not, Metacritic and reviews in general might help me decide
4) Those I have no interest/aren't my type and are no good - hell no i won't buy

For situations 2) and 3) metacritic can help me decide. Of course there are also other factors, like is there any other games out more appealing? Should I just save Money for another game releasing soon, etc.

For exemple, I was looking forward to Destiny and Watch Dogs, although I never fell for the hype (ok, maybe a little bit), and reviews helped me decide. Although I was a bit disappointed at both, I'm going for watch dogs (just waiting for WiiU version to see how it stands against ps version) and not going for Destiny.

Either way, I think people should mind reviews cuz this prevents hype sales and prevents developers from releasing unfinished/crappy games. If I read a game isn't even finished or has a lot of issues, I ain't touching that thing until they're all taken care of. Just look at the BF4/driveclub fiasco, my brother couldn't be more angry at those games/developers.



Nah metacritic is flawed as long as gaming journalism remains corrupt and biased



Around the Network

Yes, to a certain degree. I've enjoyed a lot of games on the 70s or even 60s and I think reviewers are being completely crazy nowadays, but somethings are indicators:
- Less than 60: I will think that the games is either broken or has terrible mechanics. Will check gameplay videos on YouTube and read the full reviews to confirm if it's really that bad.
- 70s: if I want the game, I will buy it. But I will give a look at the reviews.
- High 80s, 90s: if the game wasn't on my radar, I will give a look at some videos and see if I like it.

So basically, very low metas will make me check more if the games isn't broken/terrible before buying. If it's just underwhelming, it may even make me delay buying it or not buying it. Very high metas can put a game on my radar and make me buy it. Either way, I'll check gameplay videos first before making the decision because sometimes reviewers will just get in the hype and give 10s or will be unfair and give bad reviews to a decent/good game.



Nope.



Metacritic is only useful to find the non glowing reviews and see if the complaints are something that might apply to my gaming style. The superlative 9/10 reviews are mostly useless.

The aggregated score doesn't mean much, more a reflection of what's popular at the moment. Useless as a comparison tool, especially between different genres.



Don't look at review scores, look at what the reviewers are saying.



Don't copy random editorials.

For me it depends, if its a game I know I want to buy nothing is going to change my mind, however if its a game I am on the fence about, it can sway my decision to buying it new, or waiting till I can get it on sale.



"I think it will be the HDS"-Me in regards to Nintendo's next handheld.