Edmund Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Personally I'm still waiting for AngryJoe's review, if only because, Good or Bad, it'll probably be funny. Why would you willingly watch an Angry Joe review? Not trying to cause any problems, just... why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Improv- Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 If you read user feedback it's a 6.1 Which means it's only 1 point better than Duke Nukem Forever and 1 point worse than Warhammer Online. Only the most gullible idiot trusts metacritic user reviews. Haven for trolls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Godsfear Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 IGN reviews are useless. They gave Dragon Age 2 an 8.9 when it deserved a 6 at most. I only trust the metacritic user score now. That is the true source for understanding whether or not a game is up to quality control thresholds. Pretty much this ^ I don't care how much people think metacritic is skewed. It's not. If you average in all the user reviews you get a fair and balanced review for the most part. SWTOR is a 6.2 or so now? Sounds spot on. Metacritic customer reviews when averaged is more accurate than any one individual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob-ombaFett Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 (edited) Oh and don't forget this 5/5 from G4! They are in on it too those bastards! http://www.g4tv.com/games/pc/61502/star-wars-the-old-republic/review/ I stopped watching that channel when it changed from TechTV to G4. It makes techies and gamers looks like douchebags. seriously. Edited January 7, 2012 by Bob-ombaFett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daganox Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 We all know as serious gamers that you cant put anything of value in IGN's words as they "sell" their reviews to game company's and have been known to do it in the past- how you think they pay the bills? Look at some of the remarks- I don't even think they played the game- more then likely sat there typing what EA/Bioware rep was telling them down the phone to write- the proof is in the article with some really dumb remarks about the game we ALL know aint true. Even if this is true, PC Gamer gave it a 93% and even its metacritic score is near instant classic of 87%. Next rant please. -.- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditched Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 IGN is bad and so is gamespot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Improv- Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Pretty much this ^ I don't care how much people think metacritic is skewed. It's not. If you average in all the user reviews you get a fair and balanced review for the most part. SWTOR is a 6.2 or so now? Sounds spot on. Metacritic customer reviews when averaged is more accurate than any one individual. Yup! SWTOR is definitely in the league of Duke Nukem Forever http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/duke-nukem-forever If you trust metacritic user scores you are either incredibly gullible or one of the many trolls who make multiple accounts to flood a game with 0's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vekkth Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Pretty much this ^ I don't care how much people think metacritic is skewed. It's not. If you average in all the user reviews you get a fair and balanced review for the most part. SWTOR is a 6.2 or so now? Sounds spot on. Metacritic customer reviews when averaged is more accurate than any one individual. taking metacritic user reviews seriously is so dumb its beyond redemption. turn your face to the light before its too late. fanboi or hater, just use an effing common sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Improv- Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 taking metacritic user reviews seriously is so dumb its beyond redemption. turn your face to the light before its too late. fanboi or hater, just use an effing common sense. Remember when Portal 2 was at a 4.0? Metacritic had to step in and clean out the duplicate accounts which raised it all the way to the 8's. That's how bad metacritic user reviews are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kabhal Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 (edited) All positive reviews were bought and paid for. All negative reviews are completely honest and true. Blizzard makes millions. EA makes millions. I see no benefit in either company paying money for positive reviews. The risk/reward ratio is off the charts stupid. But whatever... EDIT: I need to invest in tinfoil futures apparently. Edited January 7, 2012 by Kabhal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfeisberg Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 So you agree that it's a 8.6 game? Cause that's what Metacritic says. And with all the bugs I'd say that's fair for the moment. No, he says it deserves a 6.1. He said he trusts Metacritic USER score, which the users gave the game a 6.1. Personally I don't trust metacritic user scores when it comes to games, far to many immature user reviews there, just can't take it seriously at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcburly Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Pretty much this ^ I don't care how much people think metacritic is skewed. It's not. If you average in all the user reviews you get a fair and balanced review for the most part. SWTOR is a 6.2 or so now? Sounds spot on. Metacritic customer reviews when averaged is more accurate than any one individual. nope because too many fanboys giving 10/10 and too many haters giving 0/10. haters show up on there more than anything so most likely more of those and very few reasonable user reviews. regardless the scores are just poor reflections and its usually just a pointless flame war. Especially with mmos, WoW fanboys really like to stick up for their game and go give zeros for any game that competes with it. In conclusion anyone that trusts user scores from metacritic for an MMO are WoW fanboys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scar Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Pretty much this ^ I don't care how much people think metacritic is skewed. It's not. If you average in all the user reviews you get a fair and balanced review for the most part. SWTOR is a 6.2 or so now? Sounds spot on. Metacritic customer reviews when averaged is more accurate than any one individual. Spot on? Which would make WoW a 7, BC a 7, WOTLK a 6.5 and Cata 5.5...that is if, of course, the users are always spot on. It's hard to take Metacritic user base seriously when it's so binary of a response (large portions being 10, or 0). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daganox Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Remember when Portal 2 was at a 4.0? Metacritic had to step in and clean out the duplicate accounts which raised it all the way to the 8's. That's how bad metacritic user reviews are. Pretty amazing that there are actually people out there so assinine as to actually have multiple accounts just to slam something with zero's in user reviews. I can think of about a million other things in life infinately more interesting to do with my time. This was an educating post! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TechnogeekSA Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Metacritic customer reviews when averaged is more accurate than any one individual. Personally, I'd argue the exact opposite. A self-selected group of individuals with no consistent scoring methodology across the population? The only thing less accurate is Andrew Wakefield. This isn't to say that the user reviews are entirely useless, but extracting useful data is more complicated than just glancing at the average score and calling it a day. At the minimum, you need to look at the negative reviews rated the most helpful and find out why the person is complaining. Are their issues problems that you would have? Do a single review's complaints appear in other reviews, or is it just one person with an axe to grind over something most people couldn't care any less about? If you've got ten thousand negative reviews all whining about the fact that you can't call yourself Darth Vader and run around committing gungan genocide -- well, as much fun as that might be, it's hardly enough to justify a 1/10 score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Improv- Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 (edited) Again, Portal 2 was at a 4.0 metacritic user score. Metacritic had to step in and delete many multiple accounts. That brought the game up to the 8's. Call of Duty no matter what you think of it should not be a 3.0 game. Duke Nukem forever is at a 5.8. You are telling me SWTOR is barely better than Duke Nukem Forever one of the worst games to release in the last decade? I can go on and on. Metacritic is a haven for trolls and hipster douche bags who have nothing better to do than give popular games low scores and niche games high scores. A game should not be a 0/10 ever. That means it doesn't even exist. The fact that it's a damn game in the first place makes it impossible for it to be a 0. And if you seriously think SWTOR is a 1-4 game you are delusional. If you are going to put this together with games like Earth Rise and Duke Nukem I don't know what to say. Metacritic even admits its user scores are heavily screwed up and are trying to find ways to stop it. Pretty amazing that there are actually people out there so assinine as to actually have multiple accounts just to slam something with zero's in user reviews. I can think of about a million other things in life infinately more interesting to do with my time. This was an educating post! I sort of feel sorry for those people that they have nothing better to do in their lives than sit in front of their computer making multiple email addresses/metacritic accounts just to give a game a 0. Sometimes they don't even bother changing the review text. They just copy and paste the same thing multiple times or word it differently. Edited January 7, 2012 by Improv- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TechnogeekSA Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 A game should not be a 0/10 ever. That means it doesn't even exist. The fact that it's a damn game in the first place makes it impossible for it to be a 0. To be fair, 0/10 is probably the appropriate score for Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHiddey Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Don't forget, to post a user review it's not even required to own or have played the game. You don't even have to take the trouble to read up about it or watch videos of it, or screenshots. Heck, remember when it was announced that the PC version of Modern Warfare 2 wouldn't support custom servers? People started posting ultranegative reviews because of that, slamming the game and in the same breath admitting they weren't planning on buying or playing the game. They shouldn't call them user reviews. They should call them "user opinions." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Improv- Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 (edited) To be fair, 0/10 is probably the appropriate score for Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing. Lol, speaking of big rigs. According to some people here SWTOR is only 2 points better than this game. http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/big-rigs-over-the-road-racing Yup metacritic user reviews sure are spot on! If anyone thinks SWTOR is only 2 points better than this... I am really at a loss for words. You guys should seriously just unsub lol. Don't forget, to post a user review it's not even required to own or have played the game. You don't even have to take the trouble to read up about it or watch videos of it, or screenshots. Heck, remember when it was announced that the PC version of Modern Warfare 2 wouldn't support custom servers? People started posting ultranegative reviews because of that, slamming the game and in the same breath admitting they weren't planning on buying or playing the game. They shouldn't call them user reviews. They should call them "user opinions." As soon as SWTOR, BF3, CoD, Portal 2, etc. all launched that VERY second at 12:01 am hundreds of people apparently managed to play those games within a minute and post an accurate review of 0/10. Edited January 7, 2012 by Improv- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daganox Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 professional reviewers use a system and measure the game carefully in several different dimensions but most importantly of all, have some modicum of quality control. Metacritic user review do not. And quite frankly, alot of the users that review games on metacritic do not deserve my attention in the slightest as they are usually crass, raging, angsty youngsters with only mischief on their minds, not accuracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daganox Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Don't forget, to post a user review it's not even required to own or have played the game. You don't even have to take the trouble to read up about it or watch videos of it, or screenshots. Heck, remember when it was announced that the PC version of Modern Warfare 2 wouldn't support custom servers? People started posting ultranegative reviews because of that, slamming the game and in the same breath admitting they weren't planning on buying or playing the game. They shouldn't call them user reviews. They should call them "user opinions." I refused to buy this game for the server BS they pulled, but I did not write a review. I just knew I wouldn't enjoy random hosting. (servers run by dudes downloading mp3's in the background suck) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deepmemories Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Which means it's only 1 point better than Duke Nukem Forever and 1 point worse than Warhammer Online. Only the most gullible idiot trusts metacritic user reviews. Haven for trolls. they have as many troll as fan boys, that point is void. Only gullible idiots would'nt see that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inhalcator Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 http://i.imgur.com/l2I8m.jpg That is all. Oh my. I love you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Improv- Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 (edited) they have as many troll as fan boys, that point is void. Only gullible idiots would'nt see that. It is EASIER to lower an average rating of something than raise it. It takes basic math skills to realize that and the haters/trolls outweight the fanboys. Edited January 7, 2012 by Improv- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deepmemories Posted January 7, 2012 Share Posted January 7, 2012 Lol, speaking of big rigs. According to some people here SWTOR is only 2 points better than this game. http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/big-rigs-over-the-road-racing Yup metacritic user reviews sure are spot on! If anyone thinks SWTOR is only 2 points better than this... I am really at a loss for words. You guys should seriously just unsub lol. As soon as SWTOR, BF3, CoD, Portal 2, etc. all launched that VERY second at 12:01 am hundreds of people apparently managed to play those games within a minute and post an accurate review of 0/10. Breaking news graphics does not make a game, WoW is living proof but a genious like you would see that aka fanboy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts