Metacritic Implements Waiting Period for User Reviews

[Dizzy]

It’s had the highest amount of unfair scores but it’s still at 50% positive with a discrepancy of 3.9 from the critics.

Cod MW3 has only 25% positive with a discrepancy of 5.4 from the critics and that was in 2011.

Why not stop it then.

It’s clearly been the most egregious example. It was sitting in the 3’s until they removed tons of obvious review bombing. 100k reviews at launch, the vast majority of them negative. How could that many people have played through the game the instant it launched?

 

[Dizzy]

...i know. and i've been talking about ghostbusters/rt, because it's a well-known example of basically the same bullshit. when rating sites start implementing measures to protect a score (even userscore) of something...

when ratings are censored, there's basically no point to them.

Basically the same bullshit? MC telling people to take a few days to calm down and actually play the thing before giving a game a score isn’t the same thing as manipulating numbers to suit an agenda.

Besides, who the hell is looking at user scores at launch of a game? That’s completely nonsensical since they don’t have review copies to form a complete opinion on the game before it launches.

Leaving a review on a website isn’t some inalienable right. Act like a bunch of shit birds and get put in time out. Pretty simple.

 

[rob mafia]

Basically the same bullshit? MC telling people to take a few days to calm down before giving a game a score isn’t the same thing as manipulating numbers to suit an agenda.

...hiding scores for 3 days due to this IS literally "manipulating numbers to suit an agenda"

Besides, who the hell is looking at user scores at launch of a game? That’s completely nonsensical since they don’t have review copies to form a complete opinion on the game before it launches.

Leaving a review on a website isn’t some inalienable right. Act like a bunch of shit birds and get put in time out. Pretty simple.

then why did you care so much about tlou's bad ratings?

 

[Diogenes of Sinope]

The leaks made me not even want to buy TLOU2

 

[Kevster]

It’s clearly been the most egregious example. It was sitting in the 3’s until they removed tons of obvious review bombing. 100k reviews at launch, the vast majority of them negative. How could that many people have played through the game the instant it launched?

Oh they haven’t it’s obviously a pile of shite, it’s just something like Cod has been getting bombed into the red for about 10 years.

Maybe I’ve got my tinfoil hat on and it’s a coincidence but who doesn’t like a conspiracy.

 

[Dizzy]

...hiding scores for 3 days due to this IS literally "manipulating numbers to suit an agenda"



then why did you care so much about tlou's bad ratings?

Nope, how can someone offer a full opinion on a video game immediately after launch? It’s nonsensical.

I’ve called review bombers pathetic and I won’t take someone’s opinion seriously on something that they haven’t played. That’s really it. I know my feelings on it and that’s what I care about.

I’ve talked about how the negative narrative surrounding the game from people who didn’t play it doesn’t really fit when you look at the overwhelmingly positive experiences from people who did here.

People actually tried review bombing a thread about it on a karate forum. It’s not anger inducing, just really sad.

 

[Dizzy]

Oh they haven’t it’s obviously a pile of shite, it’s just something like Cod has been getting bombed into the red for about 10 years.

Maybe I’ve got my tinfoil hat on and it’s a coincidence but who doesn’t like a conspiracy.

Any game that’s at all divisive gets this treatment. Death Stranding went through this a year ago. That was a Sony property as well and nothing happened.

I just don’t see the conspiracy after this was literally the worst example of review bombing ever in the site’s history.

 

[rob mafia]

Nope, how can someone offer a full opinion on a video game immediately after launch? It’s nonsensical.

you know a rating isn't a review, right?

ffs, i can hate a game within 5 minutes. i don't need to play it for x hours to know i hate it. and if i hate it, why would i keep playing?

I’ve called review bombers pathetic and I won’t take someone’s opinion seriously on something that they haven’t played. That’s really it. I know my feelings on it and that’s what I care about.

I’ve talked about how the negative narrative surrounding the game from people who didn’t play it doesn’t really fit when you look at the overwhelmingly positive experiences from people who did here.

People actually tried review bombing a thread about it on a karate forum. It’s not anger inducing, just really sad.

same with white knighting.

 

[SaiWa]

Metacritic is a heaping pile of shit. They've been manipulating scores for years at the behest of their corporate overlords. They're no different than Rotten Tomatoes. Why do you think their critic weighting isn't transparent?

Open Critic is the way to go:
https://opencritic.com/

Top Critic Avg of 94% and Critic Recommend of 96% for TLOU2 according to opencritic...

How is that different from the Metacritic score (94%)? This is the most controversial game of the year and there are no differences...

 

[Dizzy]

you know a rating isn't a review, right?

ffs, i can hate a game within 5 minutes. i don't need to play it for x hours to know i hate it. and if i hate it, why would i keep playing?



same with white knighting.

It should be. That’s literally the point. You’d have to be deliberately obtuse to think that the 100k reviews were made by people who played even a second of it.

Didn’t take long for you to abandon any argument and start the ad hominem.

 

[rob mafia]

It should be. That’s literally the point. You’d have to be deliberately obtuse to think that the 100k reviews were made by people who played even a second of it.

Didn’t take long for you to abandon any argument and start the ad hominem.

what the hell are you talking about? there's no ad-hom in any of my posts. and my argument's been consistent.

you operate on a fallacy that people can't have a quantifiable opinion unless they 'finish' a game (which is barely even relevant to most games today, anyway - ie: sportsball to arpgs/mmos with endgame to shooters). as if one should keep playing a game they hate just to _____________________________ (with nothing inserted here, since there's no actual argument or logic).

 

[Dizzy]

what the hell are you talking about? there's no ad-hom in any of my posts. and my argument's been consistent.

you operate on a fallacy that people can't have a quantifiable opinion unless they 'finish' a game (which is barely even relevant to most games today, anyway - ie: sportsball to arpgs/mmos with endgame to shooters). as if one should keep playing a game they hate just to _____________________________ (with nothing inserted here, since there's no actual argument or logic).

So you’re trying to present the argument that people who immediately review bombed TLOU2 played it for five minutes and hated it?

Heh.

Imagine taking offense to the notion of being told “hey maybe take some time to play a game before giving it a score.” The logic is pretty obvious.

 

[rob mafia]

So you’re trying to present the argument that people who immediately review bombed TLOU2 played it for five minutes and hated it?

no, but lolz @ accusing me of an ad-hom i didn't make and then just going strawman again.

Imagine taking offense to the notion of being told “hey maybe take some time to play a game before giving it a score.” The logic is pretty obvious.

ok, how much time? and now it's a slippery slope/arbitrary number.

additionally, you evade the point that the story was leaked (ie: known/seen) in a story-based game. a lot of games today are games in name only (ie: walking simulators/etc). for "games" that are essentially an anime/movie, one doesn't really need to play even a second to know if it's enjoyable or not, as the story/plot/animation/etc will generally decide it. this overlaps into tlou2.

i'll also point out that you made a thread to rip on a "game" that doesn't yet exist

 

[Dizzy]

no, but lolz @ accusing me of an ad-hom i didn't make and then just going strawman again.



ok, how much time? and now it's a slippery slope/arbitrary number.

additionally, you evade the point that the story was leaked (ie: known/seen) in a story-based game. a lot of games today are games in name only (ie: walking simulators/etc). for "games" that are essentially an anime/movie, one doesn't really need to play even a second to know if it's enjoyable or not, as the story/plot/animation/etc will generally decide it. this overlaps into tlou2.

i'll also point out that you made a thread to rip on a "game" that doesn't yet exist (gamer girl, or whatever the fuck it's called).

Then you have no argument. Review bombing is a problem kills the legitimacy of user scores.

Depends on the game. A single player game should be completed before scoring it. A MP game should have matches played, enough to understand the mechanics. I don’t feel like I should have to explain what it takes to review a game.

And yes, I’m aware that the story was leaked without context and several key sticking points were found to be complete bullshit.

I did, it seems like an absurd game. I made a thread about something I found funny and I’ll never go out of my way to offer a score or review bomb it because I’ve moved on with my life and will never play a second of it.

 

[rob mafia]

Then you have no argument.

wat

Review bombing is a problem kills the legitimacy of user scores.

as does dismissing the scores, to begin with. derp. you're walking right into my point.

Depends on the game. A single player game should be completed before scoring it. A MP game should have matches played, enough to understand the mechanics. I don’t feel like I should have to explain what it takes to review a game

1. like i already said, this isn't about reviews, just user scores.
2. you should be able to answer this, since it's your own claim. you apparently don't even know where the line should be drawn in your own criteria, let alone en masse.

And yes, I’m aware that the story was leaked without context and several key sticking points were found to be complete bullshit.

...such as?

I did, it seems like an absurd game. I made a thread about something I found funny and I’ll never go out of my way to offer a score or review bomb it because I’ve moved on with my life and will never play a second of it.

so criticizing something you never played is ok, then? interesting, you just said the opposite for 3 pages and an awful lot of other threads.

you know this is MY point, right? i don't need to play something to have an opinion on it. this is what you found fault with.

 

[Dizzy]

wat



as does dismissing the scores, to begin with. derp. you're walking right into my point.



1. like i already said, this isn't about reviews, just user scores.
2. you should be able to answer this, since it's your own claim. you apparently don't even know where the line should be drawn in your own criteria, let alone en masse.



...such as?



so criticizing something you never played is ok, then? interesting, you just said the opposite for 3 pages and an awful lot of other threads.

you know this is MY point, right? i don't need to play something to have an opinion on it. this is what you found fault with.

If you yourself can admit that the scores aren’t genuine then what is there to argue? Something needs to change. I don’t know how much this will help but it’s better than the current system.

You’re talking about suppressing trolls as if that’s a bad thing.

And yes, my opinion should mean fuck all on Gamer Girl as I’ll never play a second of it. I also won’t offer a score without playing it because that’s moronic. Imagine thinking you got me there lol.

 

[Dizzy]

“Take a day and play the fucking thing for a bit.”

The audacity...

 

[usmctanker242]

Poorly worded on my part, I suppose. It's mostly about shit disturbing for maximum effect. If you make them wait to review bomb a game/movie/etc until after the maximum damage can be done, a good percentage will likely not bother. Being part of the initial review cycle, gives them a heightened sense of importance and impact. Take that away, and it will disarm them to an extent.

This guy has watched the South Park season where Kyle's Dad is an internet troll. LMAO

I think you've hit the nail on the head and I'm surprised to see so many people pushing back against such a simple change. Really, if you want legit Day 1 reviews then follow a YouTuber whom you like and watch them play it. MOST of the popular games are being streamed live the instant they drop, so that way you can watch some game play and make up your own mind.

Is anyone really using Metacritic as the determining factor as to whether or not to buy a game? Maybe I just got burned by the box covers of NES games in the past, but I do quite a bit of "research" before I buy any games these days.

 

[rob mafia]

If you yourself can admit that the scores aren’t genuine then what is there to argue? Something needs to change. I don’t know how much this will help but it’s better than the current system.

i truly don't know what you're talking about. i never said anything about genuine. ffs, you can't even determine what you think the criteria for genuine is.

You’re talking about suppressing trolls as if that’s a bad thing.

you just went full hypocrite again. you're now advocating manipulating scores when it fits the narrative.

And yes, my opinion should mean fuck all on Gamer Girl as I’ll never play a second of it. I also won’t offer a score without playing it because that’s moronic. Imagine thinking you got me there lol.

...what's the difference? you're bitching about people complaining about tlou2 when they didn't play it. you're complaining about a game you didn't play. this isn't rocket surgery.

 

[Dizzy]

i truly don't know what you're talking about. i never said anything about genuine. ffs, you can't even determine what you think the criteria for genuine is.



you just went full hypocrite again. you're now advocating manipulating scores when it fits the narrative.




...what's the difference? you're bitching about people complaining about tlou2 when they didn't play it. you're complaining about a game you didn't play. this isn't rocket surgery.

You already admitted that people who were review bombing it hadn’t played it. Argument is over. If this stopped people from just giving negative scores then you’d have a point. It stops all sides for 36 hours.

I’m not complaining about Gamer Girl. I thought it was hilarious looking and made a joke about it. I’m not going to argue and act like I know what I’m talking about to people who have played it because again, that would be moronic.