What do you think about Metacritic?

[Condor219]

As has been said, it helps to get a general consensus. When new games come out, I take good scores with the bad. However, I think it really shines when trying to find games that you haven't played without explicitly searching for something.

In short: It can do a lot of reviewing in a real short amount of time, just don't put too much weight on the overall score or any individual review.

And the User Reviews suck.

 

[Kahunaburger]

It's useful. The regular metascore gives you a pulse for how games are rated (although take it with a grain of salt - compare, say, the metascore for Magicka and MW2. Generally speaking, add about 10% to scores of games made in places other than America or by indie/less-well-known publishers.) The user score is good for entertainment purposes.

 

[Formica Archonis]

1) It is impossible to summarize something as complex and textured as an opinion of a game as a single number. I can't rate single meals on a scale of 1 to 100, how could I rate something I'll spend 40+ hours doing?

2) If it's impossible once, trying to do it a hundred times and taking the average doesn't make it better, it makes it worthless.

3) Put five people in a room and you'll have six different opinions on a topic. Again, taking the average of these doesn't work because at least one of them is going to be a fucking moron and throw the numbers off [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderation].

4) User reviews involve large numbers of anonymous people with an audience [http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/3/19/].

5) Tastes are so subjective that the only way to trust a review is to find reviewers you always agree (or disagree) with and study their reviews.

6) At least one reviewer I respect have criticized Metacritic's methodology. No one I respect has ever stuck up for it.

So I pretty much ignore it.

 

[Happy Yay]

Hate it.
It's like democracy: everyone gets to be heard.
And there are some opinions that I just really don't want to hear.

Also it's plagued with 1 star protest votes, which I can't stand.

More true words were never said, Metacritic is garbage. Any site that ranks The Book of Eli over Sucker Punch can't hope to spawn anything good.

Metacritic is an aggregate score between a lot of reviewers. It seems that a lot of reviewers prefer the Book of Eli to Sucker Punch. This is an issue with you not trusting movie reviewers, (other than yourself it seems) not an issue with metacritic.

I always look at the metacritic score before I buy a game, as if so many reviewers dislike it as to put it lower than 70 or so it's probably not very good unless it's a niche game that I expect I would like but not many other people would. It's always best to be informed about games before you make a purchase and metacritic certainly helps with that. And I don't just like to look at the score, I also read a full review that rated it well and a full review that rated it poorly. User reviews I ignore.