Little Big Planet

[SmugFrog]

I would expect something like this about Halo, Metal Gear, or some other "big name" console exclusive. I mean, seriously, 1879 votes, with enough to bring it down to 6.1 out of 10? About Little Big Planet? Do people not like it, or are the fanboys out in force?

Some people out there obviously want the game to look bad. Metal Gear 4 has 1436 votes averaging to 9.0. That makes me kind of doubt it is fanboy rage.

For the record, the metascore on Little Big Planet (so far) is 95.

EDIT: Removed my own "conspiracy theory".

 

[smallharmlesskitten]

Xbox fanboys out in force I'm guessing

 

[Bulletinmybrain]

Xbox fanboys out in force I'm guessing

Or a prank by some dickhead with a lot of free time and leachable internet.

 

[silentsentinel]

Xbox fanboys out in force I'm guessing

Or a prank by some dickhead with a lot of free time and leachable internet.

Or maybe everyone is just stupid. I dunno.

 

[Hanji]

Could this possibly have anything to do with the "offended" Muslim community over a song?

No. It was like that before the absurd Muslim fiasco.

Since when were Metacritic user reviews important?

They're not. A Metacritic Staff Member made a special note on LittleBigPlanet saying they weren't. The phenomenon is still a curiosity, though.

 

[L.B. Jeffries]

Or maybe running around as a flammable sack person is kinda boring? C'mon, there must've been at least some doubt in your mind about this game. The only real test is sitting down with a controller and playing it yourself.

I mean, golly, I've never seen a video game be overhyped by the media before. That'd just be crazy.

 

[axia777]

Little Big Planet is not going to be a game that reaches it's full potential immediately. Since it is based heavily on user content it will take time to get that user content to a maximum point that the game is super ultra fun. Granted most of the content will be crap too. But the gems that shine from beneath the crap will be great. Kind of like how the normal games market is.

 

[L.B. Jeffries]

Or maybe running around as a flammable sack person is kinda boring? C'mon, there must've been at least some doubt in your mind about this game. The only real test is sitting down with a controller and playing it yourself.

I mean, golly, I've never seen a video game be overhyped by the media before. That'd just be crazy.

That might be slightly believable if the game was out yet. This 1879 people who have played the full game 2 weeks fbefore it was released.
You seeing the flaw here yet?

You're right, naturally, but I wanted to play Devil's Advocate. Declaring a negative score incorrect because it does not agree with Metacritic just irked me. Haven't we had enough games getting 100's to learn our lesson by now? I mean, deep breath here, the game might be boring. It's possible. They might be lying to you. It's happened before.

 

[Hanji]

Declaring a negative score incorrect because it does not agree with Metacritic just irked me.

The game might deserve an average of 95 and Universal Acclaim, or it might not. The point is that the user reviewers cannot possibly know one way or another, so the score has nothing to do with the game quality, and has no credibility whatsoever.

The score is not being declared incorrect because it disagrees with Metacritic.

 

[axia777]

Personally I am calling shenanigans on this whole thing! Lets wait till the whole game is out and fully released. Till then, STFU reviewers.

 

[L.B. Jeffries]

Declaring a negative score incorrect because it does not agree with Metacritic just irked me.

The game might deserve an average of 95 and Universal Acclaim, or it might not. The point is that the user reviewers cannot possibly know one way or another, so the score has nothing to do with the game quality, and has no credibility whatsoever.

The score is not being declared incorrect because it disagrees with Metacritic.

It's mostly the principle, not the actual circumstances that bother me. I don't pay attention to those scores much either. But lets say, hypothetically, all those reviews are by people who have legitimately played the game. So what? Is it going to stop you from buying the game? Does it even matter? Clearly a lot of people like the experience the game provides, it's crazy to think that any game is going to appeal to everyone. I just find the idea that even if dissent does exist that it's relevant because all people must like the game or something is wrong to be counter-intuitive.

 

[Hanji]

L.B. Jeffries: I agree with you, but the "principle" does not apply. The only reason the user average is being questioned is because the users cannot have possibly played the game, not to assure positive consensus.

If, hypothetically, the game had been released, and they all could have played the game as you say, you'd have a case. It'd still be curious though, as while reviews are often inflated, straight 9s and 10s for a 6/10 game is unnatural, if not unprecedented.

I believe this topic was more in the vein of: "Huh? That's weird..." than "Smite the dissenters!"

 

[GloatingSwine]

Unmoderated review source in worthless votes shocker!


In other news, water stronly suspected to be wet.

 

[Jumplion]

Heh, I made a game out of stuff like this.

You take a really good (or really bad) game, look at the user reviews, and find the lowest (or highest) possible score you can find.

It's halarious to read their reasoning, I found a 2.5 for Halo 3 and a 0.0 for MGS4.

 

[SmugFrog]

Could this possibly have anything to do with the "offended" Muslim community over a song?

No. It was like that before the absurd Muslim fiasco.

Well, so much for my conspiracy theory! I didn't see when the reviews started in comparison to the news release.

This could start a whole other topic. Why is it so many people don't trust ANY review of a game? Are you telling me you run out and buy any game that looks good? You people must have a lot of money to waste!

I always conduct a bit of research about a game I'm interested in to see how it stacks up to everyone's expectations. Obviously, everyone's opinion is going to be different, but when it comes to gameplay, bugs, graphics, those sort of things; I have a pretty good idea how much I like a game based on reading the reviews.

I don't go looking at a site like Amazon.com, or any other site that sells games, for a review. I've found that most Metacritic user scores are within a point or 2 of the Metascore. I like the Metascore since it just averages other reviews of the game, so you get a general idea of the game - the user reviews don't mean much to me, but like I said, they're usually pretty close.

Why the hate towards LBP? Are that many people getting that pissed off about it? Are people going into restrooms pulling their hair out going ANNNNNGGGGHHH!!! and carving "Little Big Planet Sucks!!!" and carving the obligatory penis drawing into the wall while they're at it? WTF man? I have a hard time believing it's just fanboys when other games on the site aren't showing the same amount of hate.

I absolutely hate it when people start scoring a game they've never played, just based on how it looks. I hate when sites have ignorant 1 word reviews with a minimum score for a game that's not even out yet! Makes me want to go carve up a restroom wall... UNNNNNGGHHHH FANBOYS!!!

 

[ElArabDeMagnifico]

Since when were Metacritic user reviews important?

Someone answer this question, because it's on my mind too.

 

[Flour]

Since when were Metacritic user reviews important?

Someone answer this question, because it's on my mind too.

I tried to answer, but after thinking about it for a few minutes typing different answers and deleting them, I think the only honest answer is:

Never, unless you're a fanboy [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ReviewsAreTheGospel]

This could start a whole other topic. Why is it so many people don't trust ANY review of a game? Are you telling me you run out and buy any game that looks good? You people must have a lot of money to waste!

I always conduct a bit of research about a game I'm interested in to see how it stacks up to everyone's expectations. Obviously, everyone's opinion is going to be different, but when it comes to gameplay, bugs, graphics, those sort of things; I have a pretty good idea how much I like a game based on reading the reviews.

Researching a game yourself > reviews or promotional videos.
Buying a game based on reviews is dumber than buying a random game.

Why a lot of people don't trust reviews? Simple.. Find a "professional" or user submitted and uncensored negative review for any Mario, Zelda, Metal Gear, Metroid, Halo or any other "big name" game.

Professional reviews are that way because those websites and game magazines need early game copies so that they can get some advertisement money.(low score = no early copy, usually a low score = no copy at all)
User submitted reviews will be censored or deleted, and if the person submitting it has included an email address, it will be spammed with worthless messages which say that person's opinion is wrong, viruses will be sent, and there will be at least one death threat.

 

[SmugFrog]

Researching a game yourself > reviews or promotional videos.
Buying a game based on reviews is dumber than buying a random game.

This is my point though. You can't just look at a box and think, "Wow, this look great!" then buy it. Well, I guess you could, but you're not doing "research" by just looking at what the company wants you to see. We could look at screenshots and gameplay videos all day long - but that is not going to give us an idea of how much fun it is to play that game or how many bugs it has.

If you're not looking at any reviews, then what the hell are you basing your purchase on?

 

[Cinder Block of Oppression]

I think it's people who don't appreciate the casual gaming genre.

Actual reviewers aren't so biased.

 

[haruvister]

I doubt it's a thousand militant Muslims, TBH. It's a far more savage and numerous form of fundamentalist: the FANBOY.

*ducks and covers*