Give me more time and money and I will never care about reviews any more, but as of now I have no choice.
Review Scores shouldn't be enough for you to make an informed decision about your purchase
- Thread starter gitrektali
- Start date
OP
OP
Just to be clear, this thread isn't a reaction to just the Death Stranding post, but how obsessed people are with scores in general.
I have a Terry, a Terry is someone who has similar interests in you but is willing to buy the game first and tell you if it's bullshit or not.
Or I just trust my own instinct. For example I know I wouldn't enjoy Death Stranding mainly because it's an overindulgent vanity project by Mr Ego himself, and from what I've seen gameplay wise it's certainly wasn't screaming "good" (in my opinion).
Or I just trust my own instinct. For example I know I wouldn't enjoy Death Stranding mainly because it's an overindulgent vanity project by Mr Ego himself, and from what I've seen gameplay wise it's certainly wasn't screaming "good" (in my opinion).
A 10 for BotW wouldn't have garnered any extra attention for Jim as it was already dripping in perfect scores. By giving it a 7 everyone online suddenly turned to him at the same time be it people agreeing or disagreeing with him.
The point is giving such a hugely praised game a 7 got him a few days of massive notoriety online that giving it a 9 or even an 8 wouldn't have. He knows that and anyone with a business brain in their head knows that.
That's the issue with giving scores in this era. You don't know if someone has been paid off to give positive score (be it through the promise of future coverage or ad revenue) or they're being negatively contrarian for the sake of all the brand attention that it brings.
Okay but none of that has anything to do with the contents of his review, it establishing a narrative entirely based on the number. People reacted to the number first and foremost and established the narrative from there.
I don't think reviews score were ever the main determinants, the actual reviews are. The score are just scores.
Someone like me with limited income reviews scores help me consider buying a game without taking time to read or watch reviews.
Most times I actually read or watch because if not I woulda have missed gems like Gravity rush 2. I read reviews to know if the game has elements I would find interesting. Don't have enough money to buy a game based on faith, many design decisions are very confusing and reviews help bring them out. Reviews are important and are very useful. Some can be misleading, but usually most critically acclaimed games with great scores deserve it.
I hope To play BOTW this year, because the review i read had the things I was looking for in an open world game.
I still see good reviews from people even on google. The negative reviews are usually short, not detailed enough or the most popular which is comparison to other Zelda games, which I don't care about. So reviews help me determine that
Someone like me with limited income reviews scores help me consider buying a game without taking time to read or watch reviews.
Most times I actually read or watch because if not I woulda have missed gems like Gravity rush 2. I read reviews to know if the game has elements I would find interesting. Don't have enough money to buy a game based on faith, many design decisions are very confusing and reviews help bring them out. Reviews are important and are very useful. Some can be misleading, but usually most critically acclaimed games with great scores deserve it.
I hope To play BOTW this year, because the review i read had the things I was looking for in an open world game.
I still see good reviews from people even on google. The negative reviews are usually short, not detailed enough or the most popular which is comparison to other Zelda games, which I don't care about. So reviews help me determine that
There are literally hundreds of new games released every month. No one has time to read reviews of each, let alone try them. Scores (and aggregators) serve as a great way of informing you of games you might enjoy that you otherwise wouldn't know about.
Obviously this thread is really about Death Stranding having an 80-something metascore, though.
Obviously this thread is really about Death Stranding having an 80-something metascore, though.
Scores are easier than reading the review, I hate this trend too.
I use scores and gameplay videos on YouTube. In the end it is just reference and wont make me skip a game unless the negatives are frame rate/technical issues.
Hell I like MG: survive 20x over BOTW and a ton of other high scoring games.
Hell I like MG: survive 20x over BOTW and a ton of other high scoring games.
OP
OP
I literally mentioned in the OP that the Death Stranding score is perfectly acceptable, and I don't know why people are freaking out over it.
When it comes to "standard" games, i.e. games which gameplay / story / ... is very clear to everyone (COD, AC, AAA Games in generall), review scores show me if critics generally like or dislike a game and if it's a good game. When it comes to more niche or outlandish games, and I consider Death Stranding to be niche, i look to a few reviewers, whose taste i know (doesn't mean i must have the same taste). From there i can deduct if I'm going to like the game or not. So far, that worked out pretty well.
I agree with the idea that the actual review should be taken into consideration, and not just the score.
I think summing up everything that is said in a review into a number can be helpful if you want to get a quick glimpse of how a particular person felt about a game, but if you're putting any actual weight behind what score someone gave something then that's all you're really looking at. A quick glimpse while missing all the actual context of how a person came to that number. Basically? I would say "uninformed."
I think summing up everything that is said in a review into a number can be helpful if you want to get a quick glimpse of how a particular person felt about a game, but if you're putting any actual weight behind what score someone gave something then that's all you're really looking at. A quick glimpse while missing all the actual context of how a person came to that number. Basically? I would say "uninformed."
I use a multitude of reviews and impressions for games I am really on the fence about.
There's certain games I know I'll enjoy regardless of the score but others, I like hearing from other people and how they feel about it especially if their tastes align with mine. Only time I'd 100% avoid a game regardless of scores if its an absolute disaster like Fallout 76 or something I have little to no interest in like sports games.
Ultimately, I'm fine with scores as long as the written review matches the score given.
There's certain games I know I'll enjoy regardless of the score but others, I like hearing from other people and how they feel about it especially if their tastes align with mine. Only time I'd 100% avoid a game regardless of scores if its an absolute disaster like Fallout 76 or something I have little to no interest in like sports games.
Ultimately, I'm fine with scores as long as the written review matches the score given.
On one hand, ya got folks saying they are giving it a low score so they get the press, or they unfairly didn't give it the chance you did. Demonizing outlying reviews as "squeaky wheel gets the ad sense".
Generalizing an entire workforce with numerical scores, plays down the written insight, and aligning with you hedged metacritic bets is awful.
You should empathize with a video game journalist that you'd get along with, who's interests in games reflect yours. And empathize with their assessment of a game to help you learn more and potentially spend your money to buy.
Generalizing an entire workforce with numerical scores, plays down the written insight, and aligning with you hedged metacritic bets is awful.
You should empathize with a video game journalist that you'd get along with, who's interests in games reflect yours. And empathize with their assessment of a game to help you learn more and potentially spend your money to buy.
People like them numbers. Personally, I like reading reviews but when it comes to choice, I'd rather have an extended look at the game. I always watch Giant Bomb's Quick Looks to see if there's anything interesting coming.
Reviews scores are for the uninformed and the uninitiated...and fanboys.
How anyone here on a video game forum depends on reviews for their purchasing decisions on a video game that they probably viewed a dozen articles and discussed in threads over months is beyond me.
Now if the game is from a small team or is unknown that is somewhat different, BUT no one ever goes "hey man check out this little indie game it scored a 9.5 on IGN" instead they say "I heard about this game that's about dealing with depression after the death of your parents, seems like it's cool."
How anyone here on a video game forum depends on reviews for their purchasing decisions on a video game that they probably viewed a dozen articles and discussed in threads over months is beyond me.
Now if the game is from a small team or is unknown that is somewhat different, BUT no one ever goes "hey man check out this little indie game it scored a 9.5 on IGN" instead they say "I heard about this game that's about dealing with depression after the death of your parents, seems like it's cool."
OP is correct
If you're the kind of person who will blind buy any AAA game with a meta score of 90 plus, and will rule out buying a game with a meta of under 80, but would also dismiss a shmup or visual novel or puzzle game with a 90 plus meta, then obviously you acknowledge the score alone isn't enough info to make a decision on, even if you have dumb rules tied to meta scores determining your personal purchases
Reviews scores were always dumb, but now they're used to find a meta score, they're a million times dumber
If you're the kind of person who will blind buy any AAA game with a meta score of 90 plus, and will rule out buying a game with a meta of under 80, but would also dismiss a shmup or visual novel or puzzle game with a 90 plus meta, then obviously you acknowledge the score alone isn't enough info to make a decision on, even if you have dumb rules tied to meta scores determining your personal purchases
Reviews scores were always dumb, but now they're used to find a meta score, they're a million times dumber
I love me a low metascore. A review should have no bearing on how well something is percieved to you personally. I watch trailers and garner information and ofyen make a decision before hand if I am going to purchase day one. If not bring on the low score and I'll pay less for it resultantly when I can. Hand on heart this gen some of the best games I've played have been free or cost far less than than original Price.
Transistor
Invisible Inc
Warframe
Rocket League
Helldivers
ME:Andromeda
Subterrain
To name just a few i liked the look if every one of these games but never bought any at launch and got half of them off PS+ or on huge discount.
Transistor
Invisible Inc
Warframe
Rocket League
Helldivers
ME:Andromeda
Subterrain
To name just a few i liked the look if every one of these games but never bought any at launch and got half of them off PS+ or on huge discount.
Review scores don't mean shit unless it's broken down by categories or something instead of just throwing a number at the end of 5 pages of text.
It's all a matter of opinions and you can't trust everyone since many reviewers can be biased favorably or negatively for personal or completely non-objective reasons.
It's just sad to see that some people let numbers dictate what they should like or hate.
It's all a matter of opinions and you can't trust everyone since many reviewers can be biased favorably or negatively for personal or completely non-objective reasons.
It's just sad to see that some people let numbers dictate what they should like or hate.
I haven't read a review in a long ass time tbh. If I wanna figure out my interest in something i watch gameplay videos and get impressions from people on Era and that's how I decide. That said money is limited and a game that scores a 90 on metacritic has a better chance of being liked by people than one that scores a 75 so the basic idea is solid. I dont know why its so controversial. People wouldn't put all this stock in scores if the scores often lead them to the wrong conclusion about a game.
I can't imagine working with hundreds of people for years on a project only for someone to sum up your achievement with.....it's a 7.
So yea,obviously read reviews....but it's easier for people on forums to just throw a number at something to make a point I guess.
Personally I only use reviews to see if a game is technically sound before buying.....my mind is usually made up long before release if I want to play it or not because I know what appeals to me and what doesn't.
So yea,obviously read reviews....but it's easier for people on forums to just throw a number at something to make a point I guess.
Personally I only use reviews to see if a game is technically sound before buying.....my mind is usually made up long before release if I want to play it or not because I know what appeals to me and what doesn't.
I have no concerns about the amount of readily available information needed to make an informed game buying decision. It hasn't been an issue for a long time.
Scores have been meaningless to me for a while now, I only read reviews to see if there are any gameplay or technical issues that might prevent my enjoyment. If the genre, look, and story appeal to me , I'll more than likely make a purchase.