1,490 players reviewed this game as a 5.9

[Jxspyder]

I could say the same about you if you feel this game is great, right? I guarantee you're not 50 yet, or you just hit it and haven't been 50 for more than a week. I've seen the trend on the forums where the fans turn into haters very quickly after hitting 50.

 

Which again brings us to your lack of understanding of the word "fact."

[Ortof]

But but but...it won the Gamespy mmo of the year award, it must be good!

 

And over 200,000 people on facebook like the game. Inaccurate poll is possibly inaccurate?

[JustTed]

Gamespot User Score Average: 8.6

 

http://www.gamespot.com/star-wars-the-old-republic/platform/pc/

 

I assume you have some reason why your argument doesn't apply to numbers you don't like.

 

This post is on page one. It is not my post.

 

It's a knock-down argument. There's no way around it.

 

How did this thread get this far?

[Shingara]

Random reviews are random. Just like these forums, 90% of the peeps who love this game are on the game and 90% of the people who dislike it are complaining on the forums.

 

Such is life.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Shingara

[Comradebot]

Yep, I bet all those people who bothered to review gave honest ones.

 

 

 

Yup, no sarcasm here. None at all.

[thehiredgun]

Earlier this year I was fascinated by the SWTOR metacritic scores and while I agree that the scores are arbitrary and skewed, there is something to be said about how many reviews there are and how much variance there is between the user scores and the critic scores.

 

When I started to look at this data, I ended up creating a metric that I termed "relevance". This is what it looked like:

 

Relevence = Average(CriticScore:UserScore)*#ofUserRatings/1000

 

While this isn't very scientific, the hypothesis is that the number of user reviews when averaged with the critic reviews can give an idea of how popular or relevent the game is. This makes sense to me because if a game is popular, more people will be interested in talking about it.

 

Here is a comparison of some MMOs based on the "relevence" metric above as of Jan 15.

 

127.9 - World of Warcraft (all expansions included)

82.8 - Star Wars: The Old Republic

56.5 - Age of Conan

29.9 - Star Trek Online

27.0 - Warhammer Online

25.6 - Rift

24.5 - Global Agenda

21.4 - League of Legends

20.8 - Aion

20.6 - Guild Wars

19.6 - Lord of the Rings Online (all expansions)

15.2 - APB (All Points Bulletin)

14.0 - Champions Online

13.1 - Final Fantasy XIV

10.0 - City of Heroes (includes CoV)

9.4 - Final Fantasy XI

8.8 - DC Universe Online

8.3 - Vanguard

7.7 - World of Tanks

6.0 - Fallen Earth

5.9 - Eve Online (all expansions)

4.3 - Pirates of the Burning Sea

3.0 - Dungeons and Dragons Online

2.8 - Spiral Knights

2.8 - Everquest II

2.2 - Lineage II

2.2 - Forsaken World

1.6 - Dark Age of Camelot

1.5 - Vindictus

1.5 - Rusty Hearts

1.4 - Runes of Magic

1.2 - Anarchy Online

1.2 - Ultima Online

1.1 - Lego Universe Online

0.9 - Pirates of the Caribbean Online

0.7 - Allods Online

0.7 - Everquest

0.7 - Fantasy Star Online

0.7 - Perfect World International

0.5 - Asheron's Call

0.2 - Earthrise

 

Take what you will from this way of looking at Metacritic data. I found it interesting. I realize that the data is skewed by the release date of these games vs. the popularity of Metacritic at the time.

 

What it does tell me though, is that SWTOR is already far more relevent than all other MMOs other than WoW if you consider the number of ratings compared to the scores.

 

I'm curious what other's think of this data.

Edited February 8, 2012 by thehiredgun

[Kourage]

I like GameRankings myself:

 

http://www.gamerankings.com/pc/951199-star-wars-the-old-republic/index.html

 

almost an 85% which is higher than my grade but just by a bit. These professional review aggregation sites do a decent job of scoring games IMO.

 

As I said previously... based on 36 reviews.

[Guildrum]

Here's why.

 

You have people that have one issue or another with the game, they, instead of giving an honest answer of probably 3 or 4 (0 is meant for unplayable, blatantly broken and ridiculously unbalanced iirc), but they love use of hyperbole, so they go for the lowest option. 0

 

Then you have people that are having fun, they too love hyperbole, and despite 10 being meant for the BEST GAME EVAR, bug-free and overall entirely pleasing, they go for the highest rating THEY can give as well.

 

Then you have people in the 4-8 range that give a more legit estimate of their views, but are drowned out by the last two. Overall, I would not be surprised to see it closer to 6 or 7.

[wifeaggro]

There is a real theorem that a random variable will reflect its underlying probability over a very large sample. In this case, we're using Metacritic's user rating of 5.9: http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/star-wars-the-old-republic/user-reviews

 

Putting 1500 random gamers to the test with SWTOR for a month and have them rate it on a scale of 1-10. You will very likely come up with an accurate measure of the game's worth based on that many reviews. That is what we have here and that is why user reviews are far more powerful and accurate than the skewed 'paid' reviews you'll see from sites like IGN, Gamespot, etc.

 

Swtor's real score (I think its a bit high):

 

 

 

5.9

 

You can always enjoy this visual representation of the above score as well:

 

EDIT: Its up to 1,546 ratings now, still at 5.9

rift had a extremely high user rating those that liked it gave it 9 to 10 those that didnt like it gave it 1 to 4 . The thing that is corelating is forum polls are matching the meta scores. The burn off typical for mmos could be quite high for TOR

[Bazouk]

But but but...it won the Gamespy mmo of the year award, it must be good!

 

yes, the year 2011. all 11 days it was available. that's just a mind boggling, astonishing feat.

[Pink_Saber]

yes, the year 2011. all 11 days it was available. that's just a mind boggling, astonishing feat.

 

So what's your point? That they should have got it for some other year?

 

They launched in 2011. The game had been in beta for (at least) months, so the reviewers had plenty of data on which to base an opinion.

 

I get that you think they made a bad choice, but they generally give "Best of the Year" awards to games that launched that year, and this one did. If you're trying to suggest that games that ship in December should be ineligible for GOTY awards, you're going to have to knock a hell of a lot of previous winners off the list, too.

Edited February 9, 2012 by Pink_Saber

[CelstialFury]

It should be noted that WoW has a 6.9 on Metacritic http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/world-of-warcraft

 

Now, I'm one of those people who hated WoW, but the point is, that the average ratings of this site seem to be very low.

 

I'd also point out the differences between the High critic reviews, and the low User reviews for SWTOR on Metacritc. They are looking at the game from completly different angles. The Critics are seeing it as an RPG that you can play with your friends, and give it high reviews because that is exactly what the game is, and exactly what it was intended to be. The users are seeing it as the next WoW/EQ/SWG/Jane's Fighter Planes/etc..., and giving low reviews, because that's not what the game is, nor what it was intended to be.

[Andryah]

the point is, that the average ratings of this site seem to be very low.

 

The real problem with user reviews at web sites is that they have no correlation factor (ie: a data method to normalize what the scores actually are saying).

 

By this I mean that they do not follow valid polling methodology at all, they are simply open loop poop and scoot environments, and what you get is what ever gets pooped out. And the more rabid the community at a particular site, the more absurd the poop and scoot results are. This is why the scores between sites don't correlate either. But they will generally mush up and come out at 5 +/-1.5

 

Now, if someone (a neutral 3rd party being optimal) were to hire a profesional polling firm to do a formal polling of the user base, you would get a result score that would be accurate within 0.1 on a score line of 1 to 10.

 

Bioware of course did polling all through their beta runs and I am sure gathered an excellent set of accurate measures on what works, what does not, what's liked, what's not, etc. But the results are held confidential by Bioware.

Edited February 9, 2012 by Andryah

[Andryah]

I'm curious what other's think of this data.

 

Excellent analysis you did there.

 

It shows that the game is second only to WoW in terms of relevance to the MMO community. For a brand new MMO, vs a 7 year old MMO, that is a very strong indicator of the "buzz factor" the game enjoys.

[Nozybidaj]

Swtor's real score (I think its a bit high): 5.9

 

That's a bit low. 7.5 - 8? That would probably be a realistic score. I'm certainly not happy with the game for specific issues, but overall the game isn't bad.

[ryathal]

Here's why.

 

You have people that have one issue or another with the game, they, instead of giving an honest answer of probably 3 or 4 (0 is meant for unplayable, blatantly broken and ridiculously unbalanced iirc), but they love use of hyperbole, so they go for the lowest option. 0

 

Then you have people that are having fun, they too love hyperbole, and despite 10 being meant for the BEST GAME EVAR, bug-free and overall entirely pleasing, they go for the highest rating THEY can give as well.

 

Then you have people in the 4-8 range that give a more legit estimate of their views, but are drowned out by the last two. Overall, I would not be surprised to see it closer to 6 or 7.

 

the extreme good and extreme bad cancel eachother out pretty much, you realize that the given score compare to where you feel is should be is only .1-1.1 away from your given score right?

Edited February 9, 2012 by ryathal

[Andryah]

the extreme good and extreme bad cancel eachother out pretty much,

 

Only if they are equal in quantity and numerically opposite in the same magnitude. At metacritic, a cursory reviews shows that they are not.

[ryathal]

Only if they are equal in quantity and numerically opposite in the same magnitude. At metacritic, a cursory reviews shows that they are not.

 

you are assuming all 0s and 10s are not honest reviews.

[Jxspyder]

That's a bit low. 7.5 - 8? That would probably be a realistic score. I'm certainly not happy with the game for specific issues, but overall the game isn't bad.

 

Which is why you go with Gamespot's user reviews....of which there are 800 more people who voted, at around 2300, and an average of 8.2.

 

So I guess it just depends on what site you go to.

[SirSlayAlot]

2mil subs divided by 1550 ratings = 1.3% representation.

 

Pretty conclusive.

[Improv-]

2mil subs divided by 1550 ratings = 1.3% representation.

 

Pretty conclusive.

 

No one even knows how many of those people even played the game.

 

Considering you have scores of

 

"0/10 LOL Wow Clone LOLOLOLOL"

 

About 500 of the damn scores are trolls with one sentence reviews giving it a 0/10.

[Bewoulff]

Sound pretty well right, the game does some things really well and other things really poorly.

 

Your perception of TOR is going to depend on your gaming and MMO priorities.

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^This!

 

So many people compare this game to WoW. "Oh, WoW did this really well, so TOR should too!" What people don't realize is WoW fails on so many levels. They've never played any other MMO to compare! I played FFXI since it launched in the US and THAT game does so many things better than WoW (and some stuff that it doesn't do so well) and yet, I never heard people complain about WoW.

 

I went from FFXI to WoW and a cohesive story is what REALLY turned me off. TOR has that, just like FFXI did. I'm so glad I didn't get sucked into WoW. It's really let me enjoy TOR for what it is.

[Jxspyder]

2mil subs divided by 1550 ratings = 1.3% representation.

 

Pretty conclusive.

 

I'm curious as to your mathmatics. If we take 2 million subs as your base number, 1% of that would be 20,000, not 2,000. 1550 ratings would be .0775%. Aside from your abysmal math skills, what about your statement is remotely conclusive?

 

FYI, Metacritic isn't the only user review site on the interwebs. Gamespot has 2457 user ratings, with an average of 8.5, and .122% representation. Or nearly double the representation of Metacritic. Which still isn't conclusive of much of anything. Other than conclusively dismissing your conclusion as a pile of, well pick your extrement. Horse, donkey, cow, giraffe, whatever.

Edited February 9, 2012 by Jxspyder

[Kalfear]

Metacritic is useless.

 

Yup but so are Gamespot and Gamespy and all them!

 

The ONLY real score that could be accumulated would be Bioware doing ingame (1 account 1 vote) polling and combine it with exit polling (account cancellation) at the time.

 

But even then its a snap shot of the moment.

 

In Beta (close to end) I gave game a 7.9 personally but much of that score was me convincing myself Bioware would take the feedback and act on it.

 

That didnt happen, in fact many of the issues went the opposite direction of my (and those on beta boards and in game on general chat) feedback it seems.

 

At this moment in time Id personally say 5.9 is about right (at the high end of the scale. any score between 4-6 would sound about right to me).

 

In 4 months as my 6 month sub gets closer to ending, it might rise to 8s or 9s if I feel Bioware on the right track with direction. It might also drop to 2 or 3 if I feel Biowares done nothing since now to address REAL ISSUES or is going in a direction I dont approve of.

 

Scores are worthless, players talk by subscriptions.

 

The REAL Telling of the tale will happen around the 7 month mark when the first 6 months (plus 1 free month) come to a end.

 

Thats when there is going to be a giant drop off if the subscribers are dissatisfied.

or

Thats going to be when the player base gives Bioware a giant thumbs up and vote of confidence in their direction.

 

I wont lie, personally I expect it to be a negative responce, based on all I see right now. I HOPE AND PRAY it a positive responce as this IP has so much potential its not even funny. But I dont think it will be based on what Ive seen thus far by Bioware/EA regarding TOR (and regarding the handleing of the Dragon Age and Mass Effect titles).

 

I expect the worst but im hoping for the best right now.