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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Petition: Remove Uncharted 4 Washington Post Review from Metacritic

pokoko on 15 May 2016
CGI-Quality said:
CenterYharnham said:
How insecure does someone have to be to start/sign a petition to have a video game review removed from a website like Metacritic?

When The Order 1886 scored a 63 everyone was yelling about how irrelevant/meaningless Metacritic was but now the difference between a 93 and a 94 warrants multiple threads and a petition?

I've seen a lot of embarrassing things here at VGC but this hands down takes the cake.

Oh yeah, there are certainly embarrassing things that could be pointed out. For your sake, I won't do it. ;P

The lack of comprehension exhibited in this thread is interesting, isn't it?  Seriously, just laugh.  I always find it amusing when people comment on something without even making it past the title.



Around the Network
Puppyroach on 15 May 2016

Some fans really are the most sensitive beings around....



Areym on 15 May 2016

While I would like to have it removed, as it appears to be a satirical review, I don't care nearly enough to sign a freaking petition. Come on, that's overkill.



"Trick shot? The trick is NOT to get shot." - Lucian

mornelithe on 15 May 2016
spemanig said:
mornelithe said:

No, it's not rhetorical, because it has an answer and I gave it.  Troy Baker.   You may have meant it rhetorically, but, you may not have known that Troy Baker signed the petition, so, it's of no consequence.

Now, I'm not really sure why it matters who I am.  Some of the smallest and most unimportant people have changed the course of history.  So, attacking my bona fides doesn't really make much sense.  Nevermind that I highly doubt you'd be capable of asking this question of Troy Baker, is he close enough to the industry for his concern to register w/ you?   Nevermind that if you look at the games in question, FH2, and here UC4, you'll notice that there's literally _1_ negative review for both games (20 and 40 respectively), whereas the meta is 86 and 93 respectively.  Not much of a stretch to theorize from there.  Granted, it's not proof, then again, you have nothing.

You're contradicting yourself. Of course it has an answer. It's a question. All questions have answers. It's still a rhetorical question. A rhetorical question is a question who's sole function is to push a rhetoric from an assumed answer rather than to enquire. All that matters is that I meant it rhetorically and that my inferred answer is understood for it to be a rhetorical question. I asked "Who cares," because the assumed answer in the context that I used it in was "no one should care." When anyone asks "who cares," the assumed answer is always "no one blah blah." It doesn't matter if you have your own answer for it. I didn't ask the question so you could answer it. I asked the question to push the rhetoric that no one should care about a joke review.

Not even Troy Baker. Everyone at Naughty Dog could tweet about this and it wouldn't change the sentiment.

And by the way "who are you to blah blah blah" is rhetorical too. It doesn't matter who you are. I'm not trying to learn about you as a person. I'm being rhetorical. You are not in a place where you have the insight or knowledge to spew that kind of accusation at anybody. That's the rhetoric. People changing history or whatever doesn't matter. I wasn't asking. I wasn't "attacking your bona fides." I was being rhetorical. Troy Baker didn't say or imply that he thought that gaming media made bad reviews for hits. You did. He literally doesn't matter in any of this. You're not basing your accusation on anything but the fact that two reviews don't match the popular consensus. So it's either they did it for the clicks, or the far more likely reason the reviewers just didn't like the fucking games.

Or it was just satire, in which case, who the fuck cares? (Don't answer that. It's rhetorical.) It's a joke.

And I'm not sure you get how this stuff works. You are the accuser, not me. I don't need to have anything - you do. It's not proof, so there's no "then again" here. It is a stretch, and you don't have an even remotely solid foundation from which to make an accusation of ethics like that on such weak theory. You have nothing, and that's all that matters when you're the accuser.

P.S. I follow Troy on twitter and I actually read the OP of the thread. Of course I knew about his endorsement.

This is false, it's not that two reviews (3 actually, AVClub did it as well, years ago), don't match the popular consensus, it's that these 3 reviews are so far outside the min/max of consensus as to...well, strain credulity.   Still 5 sites to finish their scoring, but the lowest score for UC4 currently, is an 80 (5 of them). That's 40 points more than WaPo's review.    You're telling me that doesn't sound a few warning bells?  Screams clickbait to me(and likely is).

And you're right, everything pointed out isn't stable ground to make an accusation.  However, I don't have to be on solid ground.  I can just avoid Metacritic and WaPo for any games related articles, and omit it, when discussion of games/reviews/sites etc... come up.  There's plenty I already go to, crossing one of the list doesn't hurt me.  

That still doesn't change the fact there's plenty wrong with the games journalism industry, that HAS been proven, and yes, I believe the Journalism industry should be concerned with it, and try to handle it internally.

EDIT: Also, we're both forgetting there's more to this petition than just that.   The score itself isn't on the page on the site.  There's some issue w/ the writer not being WaPo staff (one of these is required for submission to metacritic, I don't remember which it's stated earlier in the thread), and there's 2 reviews on the site.  As CGI states later, the petition is just looking for clarity or removal.



nanorazor on 15 May 2016

People commenting based on the title alone. *facepalm*



Around the Network
Aeolus451 on 15 May 2016

I didn't know that the washington post did game reviews. Reviews are supposed to help anyone that's somewhat interested in a game to learn about it. Different perspectives are needed for that.



midrange on 15 May 2016

Uncharted 4 could get a -5 out of 10 and I wouldn't care. Opinions are opinions and everyone is entitled to them.

But in this case, the "opinion" in question was in a satirical section, did NOT have a score, and was in direct contrast to the review by the SAME organization a day before.

Therefore that review should not count and should be removed from meta critic (a site that can affect the salaries of developers involved)

Whether you think this petition is petty or not is IRRELEVANT. Whether the game reviewed was by Sony or not is IRRELEVANT. Whether you think the game deserves a higher or lower score is IRRELEVANT.

If only this was in the first post so people wouldn't just skim the title and make baseless claims



CenterYharnham on 15 May 2016
nanorazor said:
People commenting based on the title alone. *facepalm*

No matter what the circumstances are, no one other than Naughty Dog should be fighting to have a review removed for Uncharted 4.  

Whether the review was fake, satire, or a mistake, none of us are on Naughty Dog's payroll and the game's reviews have absolutely zero affect on us whatsoever.

If the fact that someone gave the game a 4/10, no matter what the reason, is really this upsetting to you, get up from your computer and go get some help.

 



cesarmgc on 15 May 2016

Signed!



In Sony We Trust!

 

peterdavid12345 on 16 May 2016

Uncharted 4 has it flaws, i don't think it's the greatest game ever made but anything below 8.5 is unacceptable to me. On top of that, the review is full of shits and trolling, like seriously, "useless visual" "Unnecessary details" "Too much story" ???? What the actual ph*ck ???

Whoever make that review, is either a troll or a complete hater. This is FACT!

Now please excuse me, i will go back and play Uncharted 4 the Masterpiece.