-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Do you care about 90+ Metacritic score?
- Thread starter BoJack
- Start date
You've missed out on some absolute bangers with that mindset.
And why would anyone careabout your personal score if they really like the game?
Coming in here saying you don't give a shit about MC and then berating others on their preferences measured by yours...
I couldn't give two shits about any scores on meta critic. In general, I'll read up on a game and watch videos and then see what eurogamer and Edge have to say about it.
I expressed my opinion
you are not supposed to like it
i didn't force you to agree with me.
Who are you to begin with?
OP
OP
I'm playing Detroit right now, and I've had hell of a good time so far with it, and It's 78 or something like that. I didn't say 89 or lower games are bad.
I made this thread for posts like this tbh. Great job buddy!
WTF does it matter who I am? Not iconic a member for you to disagree with you?
I just found it ironic of you to lay down your opinion for others while you say you don't give a fuck about the opinion of others.
So why should they give weight to your opinion over their own?
Ill enkoy a game whatever the score is. But a game being given a 90 makes me look into it more if i was not previously interested
Its why i played god of war 4
Its why i played god of war 4
Did i say they should give wieght to my opinion? You are making this up.
Tell me, what's your problem?
I said i don't give a fuck about reviewers opinion, we are on ERA, we are discussion between users, not reviewers.
You should read better next time.
Not gonna waste my precious time anymore.
The notion that a game with bigger metacritic score is better is harmful to videogames.
A game need to have enough mainstream appeal to get a 90+, it pretty much just get the good side of most reviewers by following dumb standards.
Like, imagine if classic Resident Evil games were released nowadays with mandatory ink ribbon mechanics, or if RE2 remake had mandatory ink ribbon stuff in all modes. Reviewers would be like "They are really limiting my save games in 2019?" and a lot of them would give lower scores because of that. Suddenly your game hits the 60s on metacritic because it doesn't follow a really specific standard.
It hurts variety, and unfortunately a lot of publishers really care about the meta score, sometimes even firing people for low meta. Because players really do care about meta scores when doing purchasing decisions.
A game need to have enough mainstream appeal to get a 90+, it pretty much just get the good side of most reviewers by following dumb standards.
Like, imagine if classic Resident Evil games were released nowadays with mandatory ink ribbon mechanics, or if RE2 remake had mandatory ink ribbon stuff in all modes. Reviewers would be like "They are really limiting my save games in 2019?" and a lot of them would give lower scores because of that. Suddenly your game hits the 60s on metacritic because it doesn't follow a really specific standard.
It hurts variety, and unfortunately a lot of publishers really care about the meta score, sometimes even firing people for low meta. Because players really do care about meta scores when doing purchasing decisions.
I'm very capable to decide if I enjoy something and form my own opinion. Believe me I've been on the minority end on several things.
I only play games that are sub-80 myself. Life's too short to waste time on review bait games that aren't fun.
I tend to look at OpenCritic rather than Meta but I like to see games I am looking forward to review well because it means I'm probably going to enjoy it. That's about the extent that I care though.
No. If I look at Metacritic's top 100 list and pick out the games I've actually played, I can fairly confidently say that I didn't particularly enjoy most of them.
Some of the most fun I've had in recent years has been with games that didn't do all that well critically. ELEX had average scores in the 50s and 60s, and I enjoyed that game more than any of the high-scoring big budget titles I've tried since.
Some of the most fun I've had in recent years has been with games that didn't do all that well critically. ELEX had average scores in the 50s and 60s, and I enjoyed that game more than any of the high-scoring big budget titles I've tried since.
OP
OP
Excuse me, can you explain to me what is a "review bait" game?
Sure, if a game is a 90 or higher on MC, I'm more likely to check it out — especially if it was previously under my radar. It's not make or break, but it helps catch my attention.
Yeah, whatever. Doesn't contribute to the topic at hand anyway. Let's just leave it at that.
Well cracking an even ten has some magic to it, but it's the same difference with 89 to 90 than with 69 to 70. So it's not actually that meaningful. Also I think it's been proven from time and time again, that metacritic scores aren't really the biggest factor in driving sales. Many games with more mediocre scores sell hell of a lot more than games with over 90 MC. There's a lot of other factors at play that makes games sell. Slay the Spire is the only 90 MC game this year so far with Resident Evil, it's OT is 3 pages long. The early access thread got 5 pages. Kingdom Hearts III OT is on page 214 with merely 84 MC. Of course this board shouldn't be used as an any meaningful metric of anything, but I think that game has sold over 5 million copies atleast so far. Slay the Spire is well over a million too though, but it also has had considerably more time for those sales because of early access.
I only use the metascore as part of my view on what the general public seems to think. I also make sure to look into comments made by people in discussions about the game to get a sense of what that score means in context. Typically a game getting 90 or more on metacritic to me means it's probably technically well polished and creates a very consistent experience, and then anything beyond that I'll learn from reading discussion about the game.
Metascore has never had a meaningful impact on if I've bought a game on its own, though public reception as a whole occasionally does. That said, two of my top 10 games have metascores around 60 (though, those are deserved, they're very flawed games) so I don't treat it as an absolute measure of whether i'll personally enjoy the games.
Metascore has never had a meaningful impact on if I've bought a game on its own, though public reception as a whole occasionally does. That said, two of my top 10 games have metascores around 60 (though, those are deserved, they're very flawed games) so I don't treat it as an absolute measure of whether i'll personally enjoy the games.
Not 90+ but 80+ for me, unless there is some demo/trial or beta to try the game out (I bought Wildlands because of that)
No. Carring too much about it in combination with most reviewers not using the full scale has led to the awful review culture we currently have.
It couldn't matter less, especially when I haven't even heard of most of the outlets that make up the MC score
Caring about such a thing as metacritic is a sign that you need to seriously recheck your priorities in life.
It's nice to see (especially for low-profile games), but I'm rarely turned off a game I'm interested in as long as it consistently scores above 5.
A great metric score and my personal taste have seldom lined up. My 2 favorite games this gen (destiny and spider man) are so far apart in score it's pointless. At this point it's better to watch a stream see how it is, then try it if possible. Can usally tell with a demo or something if I'll like it, only time I've been brunt this way was sea of theives.
I wish you hadn't divided the Yes options like that, OP. The results would have been more accurate.
I'm happy when I see series/developers I enjoy do well on Open/Metacritic simply because it means more people are liking something/someone I have an affinity for.
However, most of my favourites are under 90, and some of them don't even come close. That and, while a 90+ will probably catch my attention -- particularly for an indie title -- I've been disappointed by enough 90+s that it certainly doesn't make them must-haves, personally.
However, most of my favourites are under 90, and some of them don't even come close. That and, while a 90+ will probably catch my attention -- particularly for an indie title -- I've been disappointed by enough 90+s that it certainly doesn't make them must-haves, personally.
There are few things in life I care less about. My goty last year was Detroit and that's on 70 something.
I feel sorry for people who are unable to form their own opinions
I feel sorry for people who are unable to form their own opinions
OP
OP
See, what I've been trying to say is that if that game had an 82 MC score, those pages could have been 2, instead of 3.
I care about it somewhat.
If I am not interested in a game and it suddenly gets a million 10/10s I usually check it out just to see what the fuzz is all about.
If I am interested in a game I won't really put any regard into the reviews except if it's a total breakdown like some recent games, and some of them can be fun even if they are not a high quality game (crackdown).
But it's also very subjective.
I don't agree on the RDR2 and botw scores for instance.
If I am not interested in a game and it suddenly gets a million 10/10s I usually check it out just to see what the fuzz is all about.
If I am interested in a game I won't really put any regard into the reviews except if it's a total breakdown like some recent games, and some of them can be fun even if they are not a high quality game (crackdown).
But it's also very subjective.
I don't agree on the RDR2 and botw scores for instance.
Thinking that taking widely accepted critical concensus means rechecking your priorities in life, that's something alright
Absolutely not. There's been some games I've really enjoyed over the years that turn out are in the 60's and 70's on MC lol.
Ryse, The Order, Quantum Break, Wolfenstein: TNO...
Zero effect on my fun.
Ryse, The Order, Quantum Break, Wolfenstein: TNO...
Zero effect on my fun.
I mean, it's just another tool in deciding on a purchase. By no means is it the sole deciding factor, but a really high or low score makes me want to investigate further.
So I can't say that there's no purpose to it.
So I can't say that there's no purpose to it.