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

Forums - Sony Discussion - IGN: MAG Review!

HKN on 02 February 2010
Barozi said:
weaveworld said:
chingrin said:
it's getting a 77/100 from metacritic "critics" but it's getting an 8.4/10 from the actual players. match that with mass effect 2 which is gettinga 96/100 from the "critics" and a 9.0/10 from the users. it seems that maybe listening to "critics" isn't all it's cracked up to be

QFT

But critics play ALL games extensively while those user scores are made up of:

 

Utter bullshit.

 

Two examples for you.

 

MAG reviews coming in a few hours after servers are up, extensive play my arse.

 

GTA4 - 10/10 from most of the big sites, quite clear to see this game is no where near a 10, they gave it for its name.



Around the Network
Onyxmeth on 02 February 2010
chingrin said:
it's getting a 77/100 from metacritic "critics" but it's getting an 8.4/10 from the actual players. match that with mass effect 2 which is gettinga 96/100 from the "critics" and a 9.0/10 from the users. it seems that maybe listening to "critics" isn't all it's cracked up to be

LittBigPlanet 
95 from critics
6.4 from users

Halo 3
94 from critics
7.4 from users 

It seems that maybe listening to "users" isn't all it's cracked up to be either.



Tag: Became a freaking mod and a complete douche, coincidentally, at the same time.



Barozi on 02 February 2010
HKN said:
Barozi said:
weaveworld said:
chingrin said:
it's getting a 77/100 from metacritic "critics" but it's getting an 8.4/10 from the actual players. match that with mass effect 2 which is gettinga 96/100 from the "critics" and a 9.0/10 from the users. it seems that maybe listening to "critics" isn't all it's cracked up to be

QFT

But critics play ALL games extensively while those user scores are made up of:

Utter bullshit.

 

Two examples for you.

 

MAG reviews coming in a few hours after servers are up, extensive play my arse.

 

GTA4 - 10/10 from most of the big sites, quite clear to see this game is no where near a 10, they gave it for its name.

Then they played the beta extensively and afterwards a few hours the full game to see what has changed. At least longer than the average Joe. That was my point.

GTA4 is a fantastic game. I agree it's not worthy of a 10/10, but easily a 9/10, so they're not off by too much. Anybody who think it's bad or mediocre based on its quality shouldn't blame the game, but rather themselves.

It's okay to not like a game, but in some cases it's not the games fault. I don't like Killzone 2 or Zelda so much, but I would never say they're bad just because I don't like playing online or I don't like the setting.



twesterm on 02 February 2010
HKN said:
Another bullshit review, it's gonna take atleast 60 hours to get to level 60 not many gonna do that in a couple of weeks, and then there veteran mode aswell.

60 hours isn't that hard, I played nearly 20 hours of Mass Effect this weekend alone.

chingrin said:
it's getting a 77/100 from metacritic "critics" but it's getting an 8.4/10 from the actual players. match that with mass effect 2 which is gettinga 96/100 from the "critics" and a 9.0/10 from the users. it seems that maybe listening to "critics" isn't all it's cracked up to be

 As others have said (and Onyx said it best I think), that really doesn't mean anything.

If someone doesn't like a game, they give it a 1, if someone likes a game, they give it a 10, there's not a lot of inbetween.

Having an 8.4 means more people generally like it or there are more Sony fans trolling the game page.  I know you might think by me saying more people generally like it that must mean it's awesome, but that 10 they gave it could actually be anything from a 6-10 in a real score.



 

Linkasf on 02 February 2010

Looks guys... The name of the game itself puts me off... I wish it had a better title tbh.



Around the Network
weaveworld on 02 February 2010
Barozi said:
weaveworld said:
Barozi said:
weaveworld said:
chingrin said:
it's getting a 77/100 from metacritic "critics" but it's getting an 8.4/10 from the actual players. match that with mass effect 2 which is gettinga 96/100 from the "critics" and a 9.0/10 from the users. it seems that maybe listening to "critics" isn't all it's cracked up to be

QFT

But critics play ALL games extensively while those user scores are made up of:

A) Fanboys

B) Guys who played the game for 5 minutes at a friends house

C) Fans who were hyped for the game and bought it at launch (and in MAGs case already played the Beta before) so they already knew they'd like it.

Last but not least it's not possible to give an exact score for user scores at Metacritic.

Eh... not all critics play all games extensively, or can you prove that point...?

yeah it's their job and they play it for several hours. This alone is easily better than case B)

My taste is more comparable to other users taste then some critics taste or opinion. It's all about what the gamer likes whether critics give a game a 6 or a 10. You can use an 'official review' as a guideline... not as a standard.

And where in my post do I disagree with that ? I just take an opinion from a professional reviewer more serious than from some random internet dude, who could be a fanboy, someone without any gaming knowledge or some guy who justfies his opinion by talking about screenshots or trailers.

And certainly do not go by just some average number...  i for one tend to READ users reviews to make up my mind.

Well you QFT'd him and he's only talking about average scores except for the last sentence. How the hell should I know that you don't care abour averages ?

 

eh first highlighted wasn't an attack on anything you said... just my cup of tea

second part dito.

Actually he doesn't say a thing about average scores, all he says is that maybe critics reviews aren't all that... (or something like that)

And indeed users reviews aren't all that either, if you know what to look for they can be useful though. But like i said, just don't go by the numbers...



kiefer23 on 02 February 2010
Boutros said:
The graphics score is not really justified. They gave GTAIV 10/10 for graphics and they were not good at all but when you consider the scale of the world it was impressive.
Isn't it the same thing with MAG?

GTA IV had good graphics for its time especially with everything else running at once. Endorphin Physics etc.

You can't look back on a game released a couple of years ago and say WHY DID THAT GAME GET A 10/10! when this brand new game in front of me looks better and only received an 8!

I hate IGN anyway (tricked me into purchasing NFS Shift, 9/10 my ass) and GTA IV looks pants, too todays standards.



Barozi on 02 February 2010
weaveworld said:
Barozi said:
weaveworld said:
Barozi said:
weaveworld said:
chingrin said:
it's getting a 77/100 from metacritic "critics" but it's getting an 8.4/10 from the actual players. match that with mass effect 2 which is gettinga 96/100 from the "critics" and a 9.0/10 from the users. it seems that maybe listening to "critics" isn't all it's cracked up to be

QFT

But critics play ALL games extensively while those user scores are made up of:

A) Fanboys

B) Guys who played the game for 5 minutes at a friends house

C) Fans who were hyped for the game and bought it at launch (and in MAGs case already played the Beta before) so they already knew they'd like it.

Last but not least it's not possible to give an exact score for user scores at Metacritic.

Eh... not all critics play all games extensively, or can you prove that point...?

yeah it's their job and they play it for several hours. This alone is easily better than case B)

My taste is more comparable to other users taste then some critics taste or opinion. It's all about what the gamer likes whether critics give a game a 6 or a 10. You can use an 'official review' as a guideline... not as a standard.

And where in my post do I disagree with that ? I just take an opinion from a professional reviewer more serious than from some random internet dude, who could be a fanboy, someone without any gaming knowledge or some guy who justfies his opinion by talking about screenshots or trailers.

And certainly do not go by just some average number...  i for one tend to READ users reviews to make up my mind.

Well you QFT'd him and he's only talking about average scores except for the last sentence. How the hell should I know that you don't care abour averages ?

 

eh first highlighted wasn't an attack on anything you said... just my cup of tea

second part dito.

Actually he doesn't say a thing about average scores, all he says is that maybe critics reviews aren't all that... (or something like that)

And indeed users reviews aren't all that either, if you know what to look for they can be useful though. But like i said, just don't go by the numbers...

He compares the average user score for MAG with the average critics score for MAG and then he does the same with Mass Effect 2 and basically concludes that MAG and Mass Effect 2 are according to users opinions on the same level.

So he tries to prove that the average score of users is more reliable than the average score of reviewers.

Which is quite interesting, because I've heard more "negative" opinions of MAG here on VGC than of Mass Effect 2....



Catlana on 02 February 2010
Onyxmeth said:
chingrin said:
it's getting a 77/100 from metacritic "critics" but it's getting an 8.4/10 from the actual players. match that with mass effect 2 which is gettinga 96/100 from the "critics" and a 9.0/10 from the users. it seems that maybe listening to "critics" isn't all it's cracked up to be

LittBigPlanet 
95 from critics
6.4 from users

Halo 3
94 from critics
7.4 from users 

It seems that maybe listening to "users" isn't all it's cracked up to be either.


User votes tend to be the worst way to get solid views. Way too many fanboys vote a 10 while haters vote 0. User votes really mean very little because of this. Reviews are a far better measure of quality than fanboy / hater votes. If you read the review, you can tell what the issues that they had a problem with were. Then you can decide if these issues matter to you.



weaveworld on 02 February 2010
Barozi said:
weaveworld said:
Barozi said:
weaveworld said:
Barozi said:
weaveworld said:
chingrin said:
it's getting a 77/100 from metacritic "critics" but it's getting an 8.4/10 from the actual players. match that with mass effect 2 which is gettinga 96/100 from the "critics" and a 9.0/10 from the users. it seems that maybe listening to "critics" isn't all it's cracked up to be

QFT

But critics play ALL games extensively while those user scores are made up of:

A) Fanboys

B) Guys who played the game for 5 minutes at a friends house

C) Fans who were hyped for the game and bought it at launch (and in MAGs case already played the Beta before) so they already knew they'd like it.

Last but not least it's not possible to give an exact score for user scores at Metacritic.

Eh... not all critics play all games extensively, or can you prove that point...?

yeah it's their job and they play it for several hours. This alone is easily better than case B)

My taste is more comparable to other users taste then some critics taste or opinion. It's all about what the gamer likes whether critics give a game a 6 or a 10. You can use an 'official review' as a guideline... not as a standard.

And where in my post do I disagree with that ? I just take an opinion from a professional reviewer more serious than from some random internet dude, who could be a fanboy, someone without any gaming knowledge or some guy who justfies his opinion by talking about screenshots or trailers.

And certainly do not go by just some average number...  i for one tend to READ users reviews to make up my mind.

Well you QFT'd him and he's only talking about average scores except for the last sentence. How the hell should I know that you don't care abour averages ?

 

eh first highlighted wasn't an attack on anything you said... just my cup of tea

second part dito.

Actually he doesn't say a thing about average scores, all he says is that maybe critics reviews aren't all that... (or something like that)

And indeed users reviews aren't all that either, if you know what to look for they can be useful though. But like i said, just don't go by the numbers...

He compares the average user score for MAG with the average critics score for MAG and then he does the same with Mass Effect 2 and basically concludes that MAG and Mass Effect 2 are according to users opinions on the same level.

So he tries to prove that the average score of users is more reliable than the average score of reviewers.

Which is quite interesting, because I've heard more "negative" opinions of MAG here on VGC than of Mass Effect 2....

Well, seems we interpreted this somewhat differently.

I thought he was just pointing out the differences between the two without trying to make an actual point accept for telling us that maybe you should not blindly go by those critics reviews.