390 réponses à ce sujet

[epiccrabs]

Dragon Age 2 user score: 4.4

The Witcher 2 user score: 9.0

Based on these scores, I can safely conclude that if your game isn't crap you won't get a mediocre score on metacritic.

"herp derp 4chan raid luzlzlz" This kind of reasoning is possibly the dumbest I've ever heard to date, if bioware had not released a crappy game(dragon age 2) but instead released a quality game(the witcher 2) then they wouldn't had to suffer a raid (if there was even a raid) logically speaking. As of this moment, 4chan is actually enjoying a game unlike in the past where they post countless general dragon age 2 hate threads.

4chan happy: http://boards.4chan....009550#96010240

4chan angry: http://4chanarchive....Dragon Age Hate

tl;dr don't release a sub-par game anymore bioware then you'd have a.) a nice metacritic score b.) no hate threads on 4chan and c.) forums not flooded with "is dragon age 2 worth it/a bad game/the devil incarnated.

Modifié par epiccrabs, 22 mai 2011 - 06:11 .

[marshalleck]

No way man it's totally a huge conspiracy, that makes much more sense

[Aurvan]

At least it's true for some games, even if they are commercial successes:

PC:
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 - 86/100. User score: 3.7
Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare - 92/100. User score: 8.7

This is pretty much correct.

[Vaern Sul]

In before the incoming lock.

But yeah, true.

[Mrbananagrabber]

The truth. The gospel truth.

End of line its a huge conspiration!

[Selene Moonsong]

Since any user can rate a game on Metecritic, it can hardly be taken as definitive as to any game's success or failure based on user ratings. Take out all 1's and 10's, remove all scores entered by those who have not even played a given game they are rating, take out all user ratings where a same person has been using multiple identities to rate a game, THEN you might have a more reasonable idea of actual player ratings.

Without verification and validation of the 'player ratings', Metecritic is just so much noise on the Web.

[Drachasor]

Selene Moonsong wrote...

Since any user can rate a game on Metecritic, it can hardly be taken as definitive as to any game's success or failure based on user ratings. Take out all 1's and 10's, remove all scores entered by those who have not even played a given game they are rating, take out all user ratings where a same person has been using multiple identities to rate a game, THEN you might have a more reasonable idea of actual player ratings.

Without verification and validation of the 'player ratings', Metecritic is just so much noise on the Web.

I've yet to see a aggregate user score on there for a major game (so tons of a reviews) that isn't more or less correct though.  Sure, there's noise, but the signal to noise ratio seems to be pretty good.  It is certainly a heck of a lot better than any review site/magazine.

[daemon1129]

It's not like there is someone who just hate Bioware so much that he just spams reviews...It might not be an accurate score on how good or bad the game is, but such extreme low scores shows how disappointed a lot of people are. The noise doesn't just barge in and randomly start bashing a random game. There must be a reason why so many of them put in an effort to flame. And that reason is quite obvious.

[epiccrabs]

Selene Moonsong wrote...

Since any user can rate a game on Metecritic, it can hardly be taken as definitive as to any game's success or failure based on user ratings. Take out all 1's and 10's, remove all scores entered by those who have not even played a given game they are rating, take out all user ratings where a same person has been using multiple identities to rate a game, THEN you might have a more reasonable idea of actual player ratings.

Without verification and validation of the 'player ratings', Metecritic is just so much noise on the Web.

I'm not saying all reviews are an accurate depiction of the game but they're more of a  general concensus of the public. There are always going to be several people who rate it 10/1 repeatedly but the same could be said to its competition. Not even a barrage of 0's could've brought down the witcher to a 4.4 and likewise not even a barrage of 10's could've brought up dragon age 2 to a 9.0.

P.S will be updating the 4chan thread with another witcher 2 general.

Modifié par epiccrabs, 22 mai 2011 - 06:10 .

[Vaern Sul]

True but the "helpfulness" of user reviews acts as a screen (an imperfect one of course, but it still works to some extent) that gives you a good idea of the majority's opinion. And the 1 and the 10 tend to balance each other. Add to that that among the people who took the time to write an user review, precious few of them use multiple accounts.

No, metacritic isn't the absolute truthsayer of game quality.
Yes, metacritic gives you a good idea of the overall impression that game made.

Or do we have to dig out the VGchartz thing again ?

[Elhanan]

daemon1129 wrote...

It's not like there is someone who just hate Bioware so much that he just spams reviews...It might not be an accurate score on how good or bad the game is, but such extreme low scores shows how disappointed a lot of people are. The noise doesn't just barge in and randomly start bashing a random game. There must be a reason why so many of them put in an effort to flame. And that reason is quite obvious.

Yep; Witcher fans....

[marshalleck]

Selene Moonsong wrote...

Since any user can rate a game on Metecritic, it can hardly be taken as definitive as to any game's success or failure based on user ratings. Take out all 1's and 10's, remove all scores entered by those who have not even played a given game they are rating, take out all user ratings where a same person has been using multiple identities to rate a game, THEN you might have a more reasonable idea of actual player ratings.

Without verification and validation of the 'player ratings', Metecritic is just so much noise on the Web.

Keep dreaming. Somehow I doubt you'd be rationalizing DA2's user rating in such a way if it were 9.5+.

Modifié par marshalleck, 22 mai 2011 - 06:16 .

[DASockDA]

Selene Moonsong wrote...

Without verification and validation of the 'player ratings', Metecritic is just so much noise on the Web.

Isn't that all that any sort of review is, regardless of the venue? I can't think of any situation where the community has banded together to poorly rate a game that they actually enjoyed. The internet, at large, is about sharing. Sharing funny pictures of cats, good music, and sharing ideas and thoughts through discussion. When people encounter something they think is awesome, they share their opinion. And likewise for when they encounter something that was awful or disappointing. 

And yes, the internet is full of hyperboyle. Duh. Just about everyone knows that. Look at the nature of viral videos. They wouldn't exist without extreme hyperboyle. Is the tickle cat really the greatest thing in the world? Or double rainbows? And is Ian McKellen being both Gandalf AND Magneto really the greatest revelation we've ever faced? Likewise, is Dragon Age 2 the worst game ever? But it clearly has more cons than it does pros, due to where it falls on the divide. Ignore the hyperboyle, and realize that the community at large has decided that Dragon Age 2 is more worthy of being treated poorly than it is in being hoisted on our shoulders and cheered. 

You can try to invalidate the claims of disgruntled players, but then you have to do it with pleased ones, too. All that you're left with is "Dragon Age 2 was a game." It is the reaction from the community and critics that determine the actual reception, and thus approval/disapproval. 

[inkjay]

Selene Moonsong wrote...

Since any user can rate a game on Metecritic, it can hardly be taken as definitive as to any game's success or failure based on user ratings. Take out all 1's and 10's, remove all scores entered by those who have not even played a given game they are rating, take out all user ratings where a same person has been using multiple identities to rate a game, THEN you might have a more reasonable idea of actual player ratings.

Without verification and validation of the 'player ratings', Metecritic is just so much noise on the Web.

The Witcher 2 has a lot of 0's out of trolling & spite and still the game is sitting at a healthy rating. They might not give a perfect representation of what the game is (like "professional" reviews are any better, right?) but they mirror the general perception of the game e.g. that DA2 is a rushed piece of trash and The Witcher 2 is an excellent game.

Well, at least Bioware can always offset this by havng its employees rate all their games with a perfect score... not that this would ever happen

Modifié par inkjay, 22 mai 2011 - 06:20 .

[Vaern Sul]

Elhanan wrote...

Yep; Witcher fans....

Considering what I've read from you, and concluding that you're not an idiot, I believe you jest.
But just in case you don't.

http://www.metacriti...user/M_Stannard
http://www.metacritic.com/user/Jezovuk
http://www.metacriti.../RolandDeschain
http://www.metacriti.../VuleeHarkonnen

Modifié par Vaern Sul, 22 mai 2011 - 06:19 .

[Elhanan]

marshalleck wrote...

 Keep dreaming. Somehow I doubt you'd be rationalizing DA2's user rating in such a way if it were 9.5+.

I wouldn't and don't, as the scores there have shown me they seem invalid whether it be high or low.

And I save my dreams for Forums without trolls, flamers, and whiners....

[Elhanan]

@ Vaern Sul - those linked sigs have no more credibilty or validity to me than the junk mail I dump daily from some lass named Sarah, if she is a lass.

Modifié par Elhanan, 22 mai 2011 - 06:26 .

[MonkeyLungs]

The Metascores and userscores for ME2 and DA:O seem to reflect very similar feelings from gamers and 'pro' critics. However, when you look at the scores for DA2 user ratings are well below the critic scores.

Some of you seem to suggest that this is because of some conspiracy to beat down Bioware on the internet ... why would users suddenly decide to do that when they didn't for ME2?

Is it possible that maybe gamers really HAVE a lower opinion of DA2 than 'pro' critics? Is it possible that DA2 has been a disappointment for fans? Maybe even fans who like DA2 are a little disappointed?

[inkjay]

Elhanan wrote...
And I save my dreams for Forums without trolls, flamers, and whiners....

...and companies/games apologists and cheerleaders... just sayin'

[xkg]

Subject : Professional Review
Example : Dragon Age 2 - PC Gamer 94/100 score review

Conclusion : No comments.

[Elhanan]

MonkeyLungs wrote...

The Metascores and userscores for ME2 and DA:O seem to reflect very similar feelings from gamers and 'pro' critics. However, when you look at the scores for DA2 user ratings are well below the critic scores.

Some of you seem to suggest that this is because of some conspiracy to beat down Bioware on the internet ... why would users suddenly decide to do that when they didn't for ME2?

Is it possible that maybe gamers really HAVE a lower opinion of DA2 than 'pro' critics? Is it possible that DA2 has been a disappointment for fans? Maybe even fans who like DA2 are a little disappointed?

Sure it is possible. What isn't possible is the vaidity any of these scores have in swaying my opinion of these games, or in using the site. Personally, if the 10 - 0 thing is common, simply make it two options with Like - Dislike and state reasons.

[Valus]

Meh, I found it a little odd that Witcher 2 received more positive reviews in less than 2 days of launch than Dragon age 2 received in 2 months. Not to say it isn't amazing and way better than DA2, because omg it is, but honestly the game is pretty long and It's hard to believe that many people finished it in that small a time frame.

That being said even if people can't accept that user scores on metacritic are reliable they need merely look to the left and see the critic reviews. Seriously, a 10 point difference between 2 AAA games is massive. Most seem to agree that Witcher 2 is A) awesomesauce and better than DA2. Of course there was PC gamers review but I honestly can't figure out what their problem was.