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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Should console-exclusive sites be allowed on metacritic?

 

Should console-exclusive sites be allowed on Metacritic?

Yes 31 63.27%
 
No 18 36.73%
 
Total:49

Yes.
If that helps people realize that they should read the reviews rather than look at an aggregate score, then that's a positive thing imo.



Around the Network
Azzanation said:

If those Xbox sites gave SoTs 10s i will agree but they havnt and those scores are quite justifiable.

If I'm a reviewer and I want to jack up the score by 20 or so above the average, you'd never question it as long as I'm not conspicuous (dumb) enough to give it a perfect 100?

I'm not suggesting that's necessarily what happened here, but I wouldn't expect any reviewer who wants to be taken at least somewhat seriously to adopt user review tactics of giving things 0's or 10's, unless it's very obvious why.

Last edited by Hiku - on 25 March 2018

I don't see why it matters. Assuming the OP's premise is correct (and, I don't know that it is), who is negatively affected by platform-exclusive sites giving favorable reviews to platform-exclusive games? At most, you're talking about 1 or 2 points bump to the metascore.



Hiku said:
Azzanation said:

If those Xbox sites gave SoTs 10s i will agree but they havnt and those scores are quite justifiable.

If I'm a reviewer and I want to jack up the score by 20 or so above the average, you'd never question it as long as I'm not conspicuous (dumb) enough to give it a perfect 100?

I'm not suggesting that's necessarily what happened here, but I wouldn't expect any reviewer who wants to be taken at least somewhat seriously to adopt user review tactics of giving things 0's or 10's, unless it's very obvious why.

Iv been seeing this type of stuff all though the PS2 era. Its a common thing. Even is they weren't exclusive console review sites, you will still get bias opinions based on what the reviewer prefers. Honestly the gaming industry review system sucks anyways. 7s and 8s are considered bad to average games while gamers will only want 9s and 10s to be happy. 

Nothing like the movie industry unfortunately. 

One of the best reviewers I love watching is Angry Joe, his honest and he bashes even my favourite games however he gives good explanations to why they got that score and to him a 5 is an average game not an 8. That's how it should be. This day and age if a game isn't a 90meta its not considered worthy. 

Also most times they don't make much of a difference to the final score, you might see a couple points higher or lower than usual once all the reviews are in. 



yes. if for no other reason then because if they aren’t allowed, sites that are “not console exclusive” could still have biases towards certain consoles and rate their games higher. and then should we ban those reviewers too?

aggregate scores are not much more than hype when it comes down to it. it’s up to us gamers to tell the difference between objectivity and subjectivity in the evaluation of games. only we know what games we’ll like best in the end.



Around the Network
Hiku said:

Yes.
If that helps people realize that they should read the reviews rather than look at an aggregate score, then that's a positive thing imo.

Most people don't read anymore. They just watch videos and look at numbers, unfortunately.



G O O D B O I

Aeolus451 said:
It doesn't really matter because the gaming media makes their money by advertising games to consumers. Alot of them are pseudo gamers like Anita. Any review done by an actual gamer is likely to be biased. Alot of games just get extra points for being a new entry of an IP.

Sorry, but who's Anita? The only Anitta I can think of is this one:



G O O D B O I

Azzanation said:

If those Xbox sites gave SoTs 10s i will agree but they havnt and those scores are quite justifiable.

It doesn’t take a 10 to make a review an outlier when a game gets such a low score (e.g. SoT). That Xbox score is 8 points higher than any other score and 19 points higher than the average (which will surely drop several more points, likely down to around 66). 



Azzanation said:
Hiku said:

If I'm a reviewer and I want to jack up the score by 20 or so above the average, you'd never question it as long as I'm not conspicuous (dumb) enough to give it a perfect 100?

I'm not suggesting that's necessarily what happened here, but I wouldn't expect any reviewer who wants to be taken at least somewhat seriously to adopt user review tactics of giving things 0's or 10's, unless it's very obvious why.

Iv been seeing this type of stuff all though the PS2 era. Its a common thing. Even is they weren't exclusive console review sites, you will still get bias opinions based on what the reviewer prefers. Honestly the gaming industry review system sucks anyways. 7s and 8s are considered bad to average games while gamers will only want 9s and 10s to be happy. 

Nothing like the movie industry unfortunately. 

One of the best reviewers I love watching is Angry Joe, his honest and he bashes even my favourite games however he gives good explanations to why they got that score and to him a 5 is an average game not an 8. That's how it should be. This day and age if a game isn't a 90meta its not considered worthy. 

Also most times they don't make much of a difference to the final score, you might see a couple points higher or lower than usual once all the reviews are in. 

Yeah, it is a common thing.  I'm just saying we can't rule out the possibility foul play, just because the score isn't ridiculously conspicuous.
I guess OP thinks these things more commonly occur when a site is dedicated to a particular system.
But I say those kind of reviews should be allowed, just as any other. People need to get into the habit of reading/vieweing the content of the actual review, rather than just looking at the score, like with your example of Angry Joe and why his reviews are popular.



MC gives different weights to different sites. So random fan site A B or C rating a game 15 points higher than the average, won’t have the effect assumed. Especially if that website has a history of “inflating” review scores. Also, until all review sites use the same scoring method, sites like MC and OC are flawed and should not be taken seriously.

To use the OPs example game, if I were to review SoT right now I’d say 7/10. Which converts to a 70 on MC. But if I were using a 5 point scale, I’d say it’s about a 2.5 out of 5. To me, that’s right about at a 7/10 game. But in MC, it translates literally, which means 50. But what if I use a letter system? I’d say SoT is a good C game right now. A C is not bad. I’d love a C in some of my college classes right now. But on MC a C is a 50. There are just too many different scoring systems with their own interpretations to take these aggregate sites seriously.