This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Why Metacritic and Critics in general are a asset to gaming.

#1maoriwarriorPosted 10/4/2012 6:35:08 PM
Now apparently the 360 GAMEFAQS board has a tendency to attack fellow users for their take on a video games critique score.

As a fellow and quite avid reader of critic reviews, I'll tell you why it is so crucial to us gamers to respect what is written-Good or bad.

As some of you may already know Metacritic is probably the internets best site thag aggregates all critic scores of music, movies, and video games.

So, maoriwarrior, Why is metacritic so important?

Since metacritic takes all popular review scores and averages them its a useful tool for gamers to see how a game is doing, ON AVERAGE.

My own technique to gauge whether or not a game is worthy of my purchase is for its metacritic score to be above 70.

Not all of us are rich, have a lot of time, or wants to spend countless hours researching a game. That's why metacritic or Gamerankings is so important.

Ok. So why are reviews so important?

Critics are payed to play, write, and review items or products.

Reviews Should not be taken as a final result.By this I mean, read the review as a summary. NOT as a opinion or fact, but as a summary. For example:

"In RE6 the camera is horrible."

Read the above sentence as "Ok, a complaint on the camera". It doesn't mean the camera sucks or its good, just as a minor complaint towards the camera.

So, with that out of the way lets look at the scores. Scores are their simply to display the critics FEELINGS towards the game. Without "feelings" towards the game us gamers can't gauge how the critic felt about the game.

So all in all, why is all this important?

Because developers, publishers, stores, and consumers alike can value feedback. Whether its for a purchase, a critique, or a celebration.

So next time you read a review, judge it based on the feeling towards the game. NOT as a fact or opinion.

This is how I feel. Thoughts?
---
GT: DiscipleOfFir3
"You ruined my momma's girl parts!"- Scooter
#2SunDevil77Posted 10/4/2012 6:41:43 PM
I read gamer reviews for the most part, and I don't let them decide the games I buy. I just like to read the pros and cons people put.

There are a couple of professional reviewers I've found share my style, so I read their reviews to decide WHEN I buy a game. I will get something I want eventually. No matter what.

My main point; Don't let reviews decide wether you buy a game or not. Games like Duke Nukem Forever get slammed because of expectations, but the game is a blast. People just WANT to hate it because it disappointed a lot of people due to the wait, thus a very low score for a very fun game.
---
When I eat, it is the food that is scared.
#3maoriwarrior(Topic Creator)Posted 10/4/2012 6:57:17 PM
SunDevil77 posted...
I read gamer reviews for the most part, and I don't let them decide the games I buy. I just like to read the pros and cons people put.

There are a couple of professional reviewers I've found share my style, so I read their reviews to decide WHEN I buy a game. I will get something I want eventually. No matter what.

My main point; Don't let reviews decide wether you buy a game or not. Games like Duke Nukem Forever get slammed because of expectations, but the game is a blast. People just WANT to hate it because it disappointed a lot of people due to the wait, thus a very low score for a very fun game.


This exactly. I mean, your saying exactly what I wrote about. Take the pros and cons or "Feelings" towards the game. EX: summary. :)
---
GT: DiscipleOfFir3
"You ruined my momma's girl parts!"- Scooter
#4Who knowsPosted 10/4/2012 6:58:36 PM
Its not an asset to gaming.

Its an asset to the consumer of games.

It is a detriment to gaming. Many publishers demand certain minimum Metacritic scores, and will cut future projects based upon them.
---
I once knew, but now I no know, so who knew who knows?
Times people have replied to my topics with Who Knows? 51
#5maoriwarrior(Topic Creator)Posted 10/4/2012 7:00:46 PM
Who knows posted...
Its not an asset to gaming.

Its an asset to the consumer of games.

It is a detriment to gaming. Many publishers demand certain minimum Metacritic scores, and will cut future projects based upon them.


Right. And who buys games?

The consumers
---
GT: DiscipleOfFir3
"You ruined my momma's girl parts!"- Scooter
#6SunDevil77Posted 10/4/2012 7:03:32 PM
maoriwarrior posted...
SunDevil77 posted...
I read gamer reviews for the most part, and I don't let them decide the games I buy. I just like to read the pros and cons people put.

There are a couple of professional reviewers I've found share my style, so I read their reviews to decide WHEN I buy a game. I will get something I want eventually. No matter what.

My main point; Don't let reviews decide wether you buy a game or not. Games like Duke Nukem Forever get slammed because of expectations, but the game is a blast. People just WANT to hate it because it disappointed a lot of people due to the wait, thus a very low score for a very fun game.


This exactly. I mean, your saying exactly what I wrote about. Take the pros and cons or "Feelings" towards the game. EX: summary. :)


Twas for the tl;dr crowd.
---
When I eat, it is the food that is scared.
#7zyxomma100Posted 10/4/2012 7:07:40 PM
From: Who knows | #004
It is a detriment to gaming. Many publishers demand certain minimum Metacritic scores, and will cut future projects based upon them.

This is quite unfortunate.

I could never base my buying habits like the TC does. There are so many games I've played that I loved that reviewed poorly, and some games I've played that I felt were absolutely abysmal that get a 90+ on Metacritic.
#8darkharePosted 10/4/2012 7:09:11 PM
if reviewers have to give a reason why their important to gaming then they most likely arent important to gaming, reviewers are imo the pox of the gaming hobby. you want to know what would be a asset to gamers and gaming? all games having demos.
---
all my posts are quality, its you reading them that dirties 'em up.
#9maoriwarrior(Topic Creator)Posted 10/4/2012 7:16:04 PM
darkhare posted...
if reviewers have to give a reason why their important to gaming then they most likely arent important to gaming, reviewers are imo the pox of the gaming hobby. you want to know what would be a asset to gamers and gaming? all games having demos.


They don't need a reason. I'm simply stating my side of the coin.

Reviews need to be read as summary or the feelings geared towards the game, not the score itself.
---
GT: DiscipleOfFir3
"You ruined my momma's girl parts!"- Scooter
#10maoriwarrior(Topic Creator)Posted 10/4/2012 7:18:08 PM
zyxomma100 posted...
From: Who knows | #004
It is a detriment to gaming. Many publishers demand certain minimum Metacritic scores, and will cut future projects based upon them.

This is quite unfortunate.

I could never base my buying habits like the TC does. There are so many games I've played that I loved that reviewed poorly, and some games I've played that I felt were absolutely abysmal that get a 90+ on Metacritic.


See, and I've never had that issue. I mean, almost never buy a bad game off of my system. But my system is geared for me and not really for anyone else.

I think people should keep doing what they do, just look at reviews under a different light. :)
---
GT: DiscipleOfFir3
"You ruined my momma's girl parts!"- Scooter