Does Metacritic Really Matter Today

cageymaru

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
22,080
Metacritic has been around since the 1990's as a video game review aggregate site that compiles the scores from many reviews into a single Metacritic rating. It also allows internet users to vote on a score for a game. Metacritic scores mean a lot to the video games industry. Bonuses are paid or withheld based solely on the game's Metacritic score. A single point on the scale of 0 - 100 that Metacritic uses might mean the difference in a million dollar bonus for your development team. Publishers will fund a game and pump millions into it's development, and then kill it off if it's hired team of former video game reviewers say that a game is not likely to garner a high Metacritic score. Metacritic is big business nowadays; but is it still relevant to the gamer culture?

Many video game buyers rely on watching a video review from Totalbiscuit or a Let's Play from their favorite Youtuber to make a decision on purchasing a $60 game. Some print reviews have dumped their numerical score in favor of a pros and cons approach like Eurogamer. What the publishers know is that gamers are passionate; they act like they own stock in these development houses! So paying attention to the scores on Metacritic has been the main source of feedback for publishers.

Is this an unhealthy situation? Should publishers really treat Metacritic scores like the only truth out there? Do you use Metacritic still? I know I don't; Steam scores and feedback are way more important to me. For games not on Steam, I watch a review or come to our [H]ardocp gaming forums and ask others what they think of a title. What do you use to gauge a game by?


And then there's the bonus payments that those publishers give to game developers. Chris Avellone of Obsidian Entertainment claims that his team did not receive a bonus (rumored to be a million dollars) for completing the 2010 game Fallout: New Vegas because the game failed to clear the required review score threshold on Metacritic. He claims it missed the cut-off by a single Metascore point. "That's a real thing, and it still happens all over," says Kevin Dent, CEO at games business management consultant firm Tiswaz Entertainment and a longtime executive and investor in the industry. "You get bonuses based on sales, and you get bonuses based on Metacritic scores. An executive producer might get a bonus of around $100K, and a regular programmer might get something like $15K, enough for a car.
 
metacritic is pretty good. I go there to read the user reviews and comments mostly. I can't trust what the "official" reviewers say about anything because some of them clearly don't live in the same reality as others.
 
I don't even read user reviews. Truth is, I've grown to not care in the slightest what people think about games. Mob mentality is no joke. Daikatana and RAGE weren't bad games. Not at all. But the internet mob tore them to pieces.
 
I use them, as said I don't read reviews from journalists for games. I use metacritic and then twitch to see actual gameplay. In the end though, you really are trying to decide on a purchase based on what someone other than you thinks about it.
 
I have no use for reviews really. Professional and sure as hell not user reviewers.
 
Binary review sites (metacritic and rottentomatoes) are terrible for getting input on a movie or game. "Did you hate it? Yes or No" doesn't really capture the nuance of an opinion, and leads to an overinflation of the opinions on a lot of mediocre stuff. These sites are also cesspools for troll ratings to drive a game or movie artificially up or down. Twitch or YouTube playthroughs work a lot better (Almost as well as a demo, but we don't do those anymore).
 
dgz said:
I don't even read user reviews. Truth is, I've grown to not care in the slightest what people think about games. Mob mentality is no joke. Daikatana and RAGE weren't bad games. Not at all. But the internet mob tore them to pieces.
Click to expand...

Good point. I ignored RAGE for years because of the bad reviews. Then I finally played it and enjoyed the hell out of it.

That said, Metacritic's aggregate is still useful information once you toss out the highs and the lows, even though there are occasional exceptions and extremes skewed by troll culture and 12 y/o's on Reddit.
 
Derangel said:
I have no use for reviews really. Professional and sure as hell not user reviewers.
Click to expand...

For me the user reviews are worth far more than the actual pro reviews as they tend to be blatantly paid off or have some vested interest in it other than giving a real honest review.

I find the best practice is just to find an amateur reviewer or something on youtube or whatever that somewhat aligns with your own views and see what they think about a game, as well as checking out user reviews, especially the bad ones.

Then I make a decision to buy or not. Hopefully a return policy will save me if it turns out to suck.
 
I go more by word of mouth than by reviews. I've read and watched plenty of reviews that I thought were way off. But it's pretty rare that my brother or my friends recommend bad games.

I'm also totally fine waiting until games get really cheap on Steam. I have a huge back catalog of games to tide me over. It also usually means that I get to play a patched, more polished version with the DLC rolled into it. Early adopters really get screwed with games.
 
Last edited:
Danny Dawg said:
No use for reviewers. I make the call myself.
Click to expand...

Well everyone makes the call for themselves right, the point is using a review to influence your decision or not. Since most reviews come with gameplay footage I don't see why you would ignore all reviews for something you might be interested in buying.
 
I much prefer word of mouth. I never read reviews or keep up with the news on any given game. If my personal friends can vouch for a game on social media then I'm all up for trying that game out.
 
Metacrtic and Steam is one of two people either spoiled rotten kids writing reviews or gaming vets who have been waiting for the sequel to Duke Nukem Forever.
 
The best reviews you can get come from Amazon, Metacritic and Steam. Period. They are the final word. Oh the Cynical Brit is pretty damn good too.

Gamergate, paid reviews, etc. There is just too much risk with a typical website doing a review. You never want just one persons opinion, ever. You want the collective voice of an entire community people playing that one game you're interested in.
 
Nashligo said:
Binary review sites (metacritic and rottentomatoes) are terrible for getting input on a movie or game. "Did you hate it? Yes or No" doesn't really capture the nuance of an opinion, and leads to an overinflation of the opinions on a lot of mediocre stuff. These sites are also cesspools for troll ratings to drive a game or movie artificially up or down. Twitch or YouTube playthroughs work a lot better (Almost as well as a demo, but we don't do those anymore).
Click to expand...

It's only binary if you treat it that way. I go to metacritic, and sort reviews by score, and then read only the negative ones. That usually gives me a good idea of what problems are being commonly reported.
 
chuck_ said:
For me the user reviews are worth far more than the actual pro reviews as they tend to be blatantly paid off or have some vested interest in it other than giving a real honest review.

I find the best practice is just to find an amateur reviewer or something on youtube or whatever that somewhat aligns with your own views and see what they think about a game, as well as checking out user reviews, especially the bad ones.

Then I make a decision to buy or not. Hopefully a return policy will save me if it turns out to suck.
Click to expand...

Oh please. User reviews are just as biased and untrustworthy. Beyond that most users wouldn't know their ass from a hole in the ground when it comes to actually analyzing a game properly or writing out their opinions in a way that makes them worth a damn. The vast majority of user reviews are worthless dribble made by people responding solely to how a game made them feel or how pretty it was or their horrible lack of understanding of the industry or design concepts. Then there is the mob mentality applied to game reviews as well as dumb ass review bombing or review boosting campaigns that further muddy the waters. Both kinds of reviews are equally worthless in their own unique ways. Though I'd trust a "professional" reviewer who's opinions I've followed enough to get a feel for their personality and likes or dislikes compared to my own more than some random internet user writing their own review.

Following only people that agree with you and have you exact tastes is a terrible idea. All you do by doing that is create an echo chamber that does nothing but make you feel validated by your own tastes and opinions instead of allowing yourself to branch out and develop a deeper understanding of your own likes and dislikes and the limits to which both of those spread. You will also easily miss out on games you might otherwise never realize you'd enjoy because your echo chamber gives you tunnel vision. I've always found more value in listening to people I disagree with and have wildly different tastes than my own vs someone who is just going to repeat what I already know.
 
I care more about the user reviews on metacritic than the critic reviews on metacritic. In fact, if I could find a game that had 1's on Metacritic but 10's by users, I would almost for sure go out and buy that game because I know for movies that score 1 to critics and 10 to users, the movie is 99% of the time fucking awesome. Critics are douchebags.
 
I prefer demos. If there isn't one then I take a friend's opinion into consideration. Last resort is a review from [H] users.
 
I don't pay much attention to reviews, other than what users here on [H] post in the gaming forums. Otherwise, I watch gameplay on Youtube to see if it's something that would interest me.
 
dgz said:
I don't even read user reviews. Truth is, I've grown to not care in the slightest what people think about games. Mob mentality is no joke. Daikatana and RAGE weren't bad games. Not at all. But the internet mob tore them to pieces.
Click to expand...

While I don't agree with your taste in games, I do agree with your overall sentiment. It's really hard finding a good game unless you know a person or even reviewer shares similar taste. I've been personally burned too many times by even sites which have too many users. I ask for a game, saying I like A, B, C, and dislike X, Y, Z, and half the time, someone suggests X, Y, or Z. And god forbid you browse a site with voting, where people don't comprehend the concept of opinions.
 
It's a tool just like any other review or review site. A logical person should be able to make an educated decision based on aggregate reviews. I've never used it as an end all be all, but many times I've held off and been rewarded by not spending money on shit (or waiting until it is very cheap).
 
Also ignore the guy here who buys literally every single AAA game that comes out and declares it the best game hes ever played. I bet somebody here knows who Im talking about.
 
Last edited:
I don't think I have ever used metacritic.
I havn't read any reviews since EGM was a thing back in the 90's.

When I look at reviews on [H] I just look at the pictures and skip to the end of the article for the conclusion.

Ever since twitch I watch whatever game I am interested in for a couple hours with various streamers. If the gameplay looks solid and consistent in the game I want I will buy it. If the game has issues with one streamer and not another I may hold off until some patches come out and then revisit and watch the game at a later time to see if it is worth a purchase.

The only games for me that have warranted a day one purchase in the last 10'ish years has been the Souls games. It's this type of gameplay I enjoy the most.
 
dgz said:
I don't even read user reviews. Truth is, I've grown to not care in the slightest what people think about games. Mob mentality is no joke. Daikatana and RAGE weren't bad games. Not at all. But the internet mob tore them to pieces.
Click to expand...

What the fuck planet are you on?


I played rage on it's launch night. It was utter garbage.
 
Haven't read a single "pro" review for game for over 4 years now.

Check out youtube let's play and decide is how I do it primarily.

Also read through Steam reviews & discussion.
 
I check to see if a game is good, not what Metacritic says.

Considering over 70% of "Game review" sites are nothing but SJW's pushing agenda's, Metacritic scores mean nothing.

If you want to know what people really think of a game, wait till a week or two after release and check out 4chan/8chan.
 
viscountalpha said:
What the fuck planet are you on?


I played rage on it's launch night. It was utter garbage.
Click to expand...


RAGE isn't bad, it's just not what was promised.

We were promised this huge open world awesomefest and we got nothing like that, just a by-the-numbers linear progression shooter, which is fine and all but they should have marketed it like that.

Also once you learn headshots are worthless and shotgun rules all the game become an absolute cinch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top