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

Forums - Gaming - Is the median score better than a weighted mean as a metascore?

binary solo said:

Some notable recent releases:

LBP3 median=80 weighted mean=79

Farcry 4 median=88 weighted mean=84

GTAVR median=97 weighted mean=96

Destiny median=80 weigted mean=76

Dragon Age Inquisition median=90 weighted mean=89

Halo MCC median=90 weighted mean=87

FH2 median=90 weighted mean=86

Sunset overdrive median=82 weighted mean=82

Titanfall median=90 weighted mean=86

MK8 median=90 weighted mean =88

Bayo2 median=90 weighted mean=91

Hyrule Warriors median=80 weighted mean =75

Interesting that the median is nearly always higher. And also interesting to see which games have more than a 1 point difference. Also interesting that Bayo2 is the only game in my selection where the median is a point lower.

To me this suggests there are trolls reviews giving low scores scewing the bell curve. And also that whatever weighting metacritic does do, it does not really negate those troll-ish reviews.

Therefore I say, for those games that get punished in the metascore by crappy reviewers, metacritic should move to the median score as the metascore not a weighted mean.

Do you think the median score better represents your opinion of the above games, or does the weighted mean better epresent you opinion; especially for those games where the difference is 3-5 points?

 

This is exactly what's going on the median gets a good sense of it. Neither median nor mean (average) is better than the other and we need to see the distribution to have a better judgement. Seeing both mean and median is usually enough to get the sense of it. If the mean is well below median, like in here, some low scores are screwing up the average, or vice versa. In this case, median is a much more reliable estimate (which is not always the case though).

A funny example:

In a classroom of 30 poor people, when Bill Gates enters the room, everyone is rich on average while the median is still as poor as s/he was before.

In a classroom of 15 poor and 15 rich people, when another person enters the room, the average hardly changes but the median person becomes rich.



Playstation 5 vs XBox Series Market Share Estimates

Regional Analysis  (only MS and Sony Consoles)
Europe     => XB1 : 23-24 % vs PS4 : 76-77%
N. America => XB1 :  49-52% vs PS4 : 48-51%
Global     => XB1 :  32-34% vs PS4 : 66-68%

Sales Estimations for 8th Generation Consoles

Next Gen Consoles Impressions and Estimates

Around the Network
Ninsect said:
ghettoglamour said:
Ninsect said:
97 for GTAV is more like it. I wouldn't have cancelled my pre-order if Metacritic used that


Poor guy has been waiting to play a game since Super Mario Galaxy 2^^

Nah I played GTAV on PS3 last year


Yeah I mean before that.



Game of the year 2017 so far:

5. Resident Evil VII
4. Mario Kart 8 Deluxe
3. Uncharted: The Lost Legacy
2. Horizon Zero Dawn
1. Super Mario Odyssey

Yeah I agree that the median is a better a measure than the mean. The MCC deserves to be 90+!



    

NNID: FrequentFlyer54

binary solo said:

Some notable recent releases:

LBP3 median=80 weighted mean=79

Farcry 4 median=88 weighted mean=84

GTAVR median=97 weighted mean=96

Destiny median=80 weigted mean=76

Dragon Age Inquisition median=90 weighted mean=89

Halo MCC median=90 weighted mean=87

FH2 median=90 weighted mean=86

Sunset overdrive median=82 weighted mean=82

Titanfall median=90 weighted mean=86

MK8 median=90 weighted mean =88

Bayo2 median=90 weighted mean=91

Hyrule Warriors median=80 weighted mean =75

Interesting that the median is nearly always higher. And also interesting to see which games have more than a 1 point difference. Also interesting that Bayo2 is the only game in my selection where the median is a point lower.

To me this suggests there are trolls reviews giving low scores scewing the bell curve. And also that whatever weighting metacritic does do, it does not really negate those troll-ish reviews.

Therefore I say, for those games that get punished in the metascore by crappy reviewers, metacritic should move to the median score as the metascore not a weighted mean.

Do you think the median score better represents your opinion of the above games, or does the weighted mean better epresent you opinion; especially for those games where the difference is 3-5 points?

I think a better option is to discart the 10% best values and 10% worst values and mean the rest.

This avoid totaly out of curve scores from crappy reviwers.



Possibly.



Around the Network

Ive been thinking the same recently and i do believe median might be better because it removes clickbait reviews or reviews that generally just arent agreed with




       

binary solo said:

Some notable recent releases:

LBP3 median=80 weighted mean=79

Farcry 4 median=88 weighted mean=84

GTAVR median=97 weighted mean=96

Destiny median=80 weigted mean=76

Dragon Age Inquisition median=90 weighted mean=89

Halo MCC median=90 weighted mean=87

FH2 median=90 weighted mean=86

Sunset overdrive median=82 weighted mean=82

Titanfall median=90 weighted mean=86

MK8 median=90 weighted mean =88

Bayo2 median=90 weighted mean=91

Hyrule Warriors median=80 weighted mean =75

Interesting that the median is nearly always higher. And also interesting to see which games have more than a 1 point difference. Also interesting that Bayo2 is the only game in my selection where the median is a point lower.

To me this suggests there are trolls reviews giving low scores scewing the bell curve. And also that whatever weighting metacritic does do, it does not really negate those troll-ish reviews.

Therefore I say, for those games that get punished in the metascore by crappy reviewers, metacritic should move to the median score as the metascore not a weighted mean.

Do you think the median score better represents your opinion of the above games, or does the weighted mean better epresent you opinion; especially for those games where the difference is 3-5 points?

As someone who occasionally has very diffrent opinions to metacritic scores, I don't like the asssumpion that an odd one out score has to be a troll (Though some might be). 

If you had a system that compencated you would basically be invalidating any opinon that dares be too diffrent from the norm.

Of course this comes down to what you're hoping to achieve. Maybe you want to rule out fringe opinions. You are trying to reduce the critical reception of a game down to a single number, after all. Infomation has to be lost one way or another.