The message you selected is no longer available for viewing.

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

Study confirms most gamers are sheep: Review averages directly influence sales.

#1GradyHooverPosted 10/5/2012 12:45:00 PM
By a HUGE margin, too. A game with an "average" score in the 90s on Metacritic will sell THREE TIMES AS MUCH.

http://penny-arcade.com/report/editorial-article/the-power-of-review-scores-why-critics-have-more-control-than-we-think1

This basically confirms that most people aren't even reading the reviews, which I think too many of us already suspect. People aren't reading the high review, reading the low review, and reading a few in the middle to try and get a sense of the game. They're not watching let's play videos and deciding if they're interested.

They're just looking at average review scores, and that's pretty sad.

You know, this is probably a good time for me to once again state how much I've LOVED some of the games that came out this generation that got well below the range of the 80s average.
---
backlogger.tumblr.com - The Backlogger, where I wade through an ever-expanding backlog of video games
#2kewldude475Posted 10/5/2012 12:47:25 PM
Read the comments on any Jim Sterling review, and it will confirm this.
---
Member of the V3Da master race.
PSN: kewldude475
#3GradyHoover(Topic Creator)Posted 10/5/2012 12:50:03 PM
Here's the best part:

EEDAR conducted a study with the Guildhall at SMU where they invited people who have never seen Plants vs. Zombies to come in and play the game. One group was shown reviews that rated the game highly, one group wasn’t shown any reviews, and the third group was shown reviews that gave the game a low score. The results were amazing.

When asked to score the game, the group that had read positive reviews, which gave the game a score of 90, themselves rated the game as an 85. The group without an review influence rated it a 79, while the group that had been shown the low review score of 61 rated the game a stunningly low 71 out of 100. By simply showing review scores to players before they tried the game, EEDAR and SMU were able to create a 14 point shift in the perception of the game.


That's right... just by reading a review, gamers tend to automatically agree with it. Before playing the game.
---
backlogger.tumblr.com - The Backlogger, where I wade through an ever-expanding backlog of video games
#4wstfldPosted 10/5/2012 12:50:56 PM
So people buy the best games? Is this a new thing or something?
---
Last Played: Batman Arkham City (9.5/10)
Now Playing: Counter-Strike GO, NCAA Football 2013, FIFA 13
#5wstfldPosted 10/5/2012 12:52:17 PM
From: GradyHoover | #003
Here's the best part:

EEDAR conducted a study with the Guildhall at SMU where they invited people who have never seen Plants vs. Zombies to come in and play the game. One group was shown reviews that rated the game highly, one group wasn’t shown any reviews, and the third group was shown reviews that gave the game a low score. The results were amazing.

When asked to score the game, the group that had read positive reviews, which gave the game a score of 90, themselves rated the game as an 85. The group without an review influence rated it a 79, while the group that had been shown the low review score of 61 rated the game a stunningly low 71 out of 100. By simply showing review scores to players before they tried the game, EEDAR and SMU were able to create a 14 point shift in the perception of the game.


That's right... just by reading a review, gamers tend to automatically agree with it. Before playing the game.

This is called anchoring. Not a new phenomenon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring
---
Last Played: Batman Arkham City (9.5/10)
Now Playing: Counter-Strike GO, NCAA Football 2013, FIFA 13
#6crazyman32Posted 10/5/2012 12:53:07 PM
kewldude475 posted...
Read the comments on any Jim Sterling review, and it will confirm this.


it is hilarious to see the destructoid troll fan base kiss Sterling's ass all the time and if you don't agree with him he calls you an idiot and he runs and hides.
---
PSN ID:gearhead32
I used to care but now I take a pill for that http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KaOrSuWZeM
#7KurizakaPosted 10/5/2012 12:55:27 PM
wstfld posted...
So people buy the best games? Is this a new thing or something?


So, they are the "best" games because of a silly score? People who only go by these scores are missing out on a lot of great games.
---
~Girl Gamer~
New account of a long time Gamefaqs user
#8TerotrousPosted 10/5/2012 12:57:36 PM
Well duh. Why do you think game companies work so hard to influence review scores?


Though it's probably only on mainstream types of games. A game like Culdcept could get 9.5s across the board and I doubt anyone would really notice.
---
http://terosclassicgaming.blogspot.com/ - Watch me beat "SNES F1 ROC 2 Race of Champions"
http://www.backloggery.com/tero - My backloggery
#9GradyHoover(Topic Creator)Posted 10/5/2012 12:57:59 PM
wstfld posted...

This is called anchoring. Not a new phenomenon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring


That's pretty fascinating... thanks for that.

wstfld posted...
So people buy the best games? Is this a new thing or something?


WHOOPS. You totally just fell for "anchoring."
---
backlogger.tumblr.com - The Backlogger, where I wade through an ever-expanding backlog of video games
#10ramseanPosted 10/5/2012 1:01:20 PM(edited)
Kurizaka posted...
wstfld posted...
So people buy the best games? Is this a new thing or something?


So, they are the "best" games because of a silly score? People who only go by these scores are missing out on a lot of great games.


The games that get high scores from the majority of reviewers also tend to be the games that people enjoy. Its not a conspiracy. Games that people like, get recommended to other people, oh how terrible something must be done. Some people need to remove their heads from their rectums occasionally.
---
Best games: Metroid Prime, Killer7, Enslaved, FFVII, Journey
Best bands: Skindred, InMe, QOTSA, The Libertines