For a long time now, actually. Yes, it's absurd that 75 is a bad score, but blame the system that hands out 80s to any decently competent game and reserves anything lower than a 60 for absolute garbage. Don't blame gamers who are simply noticing the pattern.Cassita said:
EA Dismisses Middling Medal of Honor Metacritic Score
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
From a game so promising on paper, to a sack of crap in practice.
Here's to realizing EA had it all right, back on the Genesis.
Here's to realizing EA had it all right, back on the Genesis.
For Pete's Sake. It's just an opinion and nothing more. There is no reason for EA to get all defensive and act like a small time promotion and complain about how unfair the reviewers are being to them.
Then again, this is an era where low scores have been the kiss of death for video games.
Then again, this is an era where low scores have been the kiss of death for video games.
"An EA spokesperson said that critic's scores were very subjective, and didn't translate directly to sales."
Well if that isn't EA admitting straight up that sales are more important than game quality, then I don't know what is.
Well if that isn't EA admitting straight up that sales are more important than game quality, then I don't know what is.
It's sad, but because these things tend to be reviewed by enthusiasts more often than detractors, we've gotten to a point of very inflated scores. Basically, 75 is the new 50. On this site, we get spoiled because there are so many differing points of view expressed... but on the internet-at-large, regarding video games, if someone likes it a little, they'll rave... and if someone really doesn't like a game, they're more likely to just say nothing.Cassita said:
That doesn't really parse at all. Gaming history is replete with titles that have received critical acclaim but poor sales. Ever heard of (or played) Psychonaughts? or PlaneScape: Torment? Two really awesome games that got great review praise, but sold extremely poorly (and hence were labeled commercial failures).Cassita said:
Frankly, I think a metacritic score is a perfectly valid way to judge a game. I can't really recall the last time (if ever) that an honestly "good game" was universally panned by the reviewing media. Also, 75/100 is a relatively low to mediocre metacritic score. Someone made the comment earlier about how this was in the top "quarter", but this is obviously not the case since the median review score for triple A titles certainly isn't 50 out of 100. Hell, I doubt the median review score for all titles metacritic aggregates is even that low.
Here, I will get all educational on you guys - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median
If we assume that the median score for a title like this from a publisher like EA is somewhere around the top quarter of the scale anyway, then then in contrast we'd easily say that this games real score is the "50 percentile", or squarely in "meh" territory. Most likely I think it falls below that because I doubt any smash hits have ever scored below an 80 or 85 aggregated metacritic score.
Really, the argument of not relying on critic scores is pretty weak. I know everyone likes to think that they're a special and unique snowflake, but sometimes (well, ok, most of the time) majority opinion on these matters is pretty close to correct. But hey, I applaud you for being a predictable contrarian. It really demonstrates how you don't follow the herd.
Ding ding ding, we have a winner.Cassita said:
It's because game reviewers currently have a severe case of the stupid.
Couple weeks back I was reading a review for a game and it gave an overall score of 10/10 AFTER scoring it low on storyline and medium on gameplay.
They scored it purely on it's name and the dev.
Can't remember the game right now but if I do i'll link to the review.
Wow, that's sad, if you only play games with a metacritic rating above 90% ...TurboPanda said:
If I look at my steam library, that would be 2 games out of 38 ... with the games behind me on my shelf, that would be max 4 or 5 games with a score of 90 or better...
I don't really trust any scores, they are somewhat good for orientation, but things like taste and fun can't be measured with a score.
(I was replying to someone else but)Still Life said:
Yet most reviewers give games glowing reviews based off how soon they get an advance copy. The video games media is just as corrupt as Faux News. It's about access not journalism. Most people will agree with me when I say GTA4 was not a 10/10 game, at best it would have gotten an 8/10. When was the last time someone saw a 1/10 game? It would have to be absolutely unplayable in any fashion and unfinished to get a score that low. Even Deadly Premonition got a 7/10 score (While not a bad game in any sense, it did look woefully below 360 quality) despite all its flaws.
The thing is 75 is pretty bad, seeing as the review scale is basically 5-10. 75 is exactly average. But there are so many better reviewed games to spend your 60 bucks on (for those who use reviews to decide their purchases). So these review scores sure don't help.
Edit: Ah, forget it! I really can't be bothered with it.
I can't afford this game, even though it does sound kind of interesting. I probably won't buy another shooter before Killzone 3. Depending on how poor I am, I might not even buy that when it's full price.
I can't afford this game, even though it does sound kind of interesting. I probably won't buy another shooter before Killzone 3. Depending on how poor I am, I might not even buy that when it's full price.
So IGN gave the game a 6/10 for a bad story, bad singleplayer, and some glitches.
Meanwhile, Modern Warfare 2 got 9/10 and it had the exact same problems.
Smells awful fishy.
Why you would even bother with any of these games when theres a perfectly good Bad Company 2 and Halo: Reach waiting for you is beyond me.
Meanwhile, Modern Warfare 2 got 9/10 and it had the exact same problems.
Smells awful fishy.
Why you would even bother with any of these games when theres a perfectly good Bad Company 2 and Halo: Reach waiting for you is beyond me.