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

What are your thoughts about review score numbers?

#41HakaiVeilPosted 11/18/2012 5:16:24 PM
Ragnoraok posted...

as far as big reviewers like Ign go, you can pretty much expect the score they will give to big companies. I remember they gave MVC3 a 7 even though the game was straight barebones, yet they gave KOF13 the same score even though that game was more balanced, had more unique characters, and had much more content. They are on the payroll a lot of the times. You can tell how skewed they are based on the balance between pros and cons. For example, Skyrim was horribly reviewed with nothing but positives, but when actually playing, you find that most of the positives were blown out of porpotion and a lot of the issues(glitches, lag, sh**ty visuals, dated combat) were overlooked. Needless to say, hype is just as much of a factor for skewing reviews from big companies.

TC, the best reviews are player reviews, because they do not have an agenda and have little to gain from embellishing. For the most part the reviews will be how they actually feel.


This is so damn true.

The Skyrim review was vomit-inducing. Dark Souls got virtually the same exact rundown, but scored lower because it wasn't TES.

Really the only value of a review is to check actual issues. IE, bugs, glitches, etc. The rest is subjective as all **** and thus worthless to read about.
#42majin nemesisPosted 11/18/2012 6:05:46 PM
i just don't give a damn about review scores, i don't even know what scores did my games got and i don't care. And when it comes to reviews i will only read them if i'm really not sure about a game but for the most part i don't care either
---
Swann:This is the last time.I'm tired of running damage control every time he makes a mess
Campbell:Right.You're the control,and if that fails,I'm the damage
#43glory of power metalPosted 11/19/2012 6:39:06 AM
as far as big reviewers like Ign go, you can pretty much expect the score they will give to big companies. I remember they gave MVC3 a 7 even though the game was straight barebones, yet they gave KOF13 the same score even though that game was more balanced, had more unique characters, and had much more content. They are on the payroll a lot of the times. You can tell how skewed they are based on the balance between pros and cons. For example, Skyrim was horribly reviewed with nothing but positives, but when actually playing, you find that most of the positives were blown out of porpotion and a lot of the issues(glitches, lag, sh**ty visuals, dated combat) were overlooked. Needless to say, hype is just as much of a factor for skewing reviews from big companies.

That mentality can be directly disproved simply by how well various indie games have been reviewed. "They gave x game that I liked a bad score but y game that is similar a better score and it was made by a bigger company," is just simply subjective opinions. On the grand scale, lower budget games get just as much love as bigger ones.

The Skyrim review was vomit-inducing. Dark Souls got virtually the same exact rundown, but scored lower because it wasn't TES.

Skyrim got a 9.5 and Dark Souls got a 9.. is that really your argument?
---
QT x314159.
glory of power metal is an anagram of Lame Flowerpot Orgy. ~ kirbymuncher
#44RagnoraokPosted 11/19/2012 4:37:27 PM
glory of power metal posted...
as far as big reviewers like Ign go, you can pretty much expect the score they will give to big companies. I remember they gave MVC3 a 7 even though the game was straight barebones, yet they gave KOF13 the same score even though that game was more balanced, had more unique characters, and had much more content. They are on the payroll a lot of the times. You can tell how skewed they are based on the balance between pros and cons. For example, Skyrim was horribly reviewed with nothing but positives, but when actually playing, you find that most of the positives were blown out of porpotion and a lot of the issues(glitches, lag, sh**ty visuals, dated combat) were overlooked. Needless to say, hype is just as much of a factor for skewing reviews from big companies.

That mentality can be directly disproved simply by how well various indie games have been reviewed. "They gave x game that I liked a bad score but y game that is similar a better score and it was made by a bigger company," is just simply subjective opinions. On the grand scale, lower budget games get just as much love as bigger ones.

The Skyrim review was vomit-inducing. Dark Souls got virtually the same exact rundown, but scored lower because it wasn't TES.

Skyrim got a 9.5 and Dark Souls got a 9.. is that really your argument?


once again, that is bull. Ask anyone who purchased Vanilla MVC3 on launch. That game was so unbalanced, had miniscule modes, the roster was small and disappointing, and the online was trash. How on earth can ANY reviewer give that game a 7, which means it is decent? Since it was a highly anticipated Capcom game, and they were more than likely paid off, it received 2-4 points higher than what it deserves. Then a game that actually had a lot of content and balance, KOF13, comes out and gets the exact same score, but one of the cons is something as dumb as cheap bosses, even though the review for MVC3 revealed a little of the cons. Lower budget games get scores lowered in accordance to their budget, and do not get as much love.

Noway in HFIL is Skyrim worth anything more than an 8, and that is being liberal. The fact IGN gave them such a high score shows how poor, uninformed, and misleading their interview was. What is the point of an review if the reviewer is just going to drool over the game and not give constructive criticisms?
---
PSN: RichYungThaBest
"What's the point" "There is no point" "Ahh, That's the point"
#45glory of power metalPosted 11/20/2012 6:34:59 PM
once again, that is bull. Ask anyone who purchased Vanilla MVC3 on launch. That game was so unbalanced, had miniscule modes, the roster was small and disappointing, and the online was trash. How on earth can ANY reviewer give that game a 7, which means it is decent? Since it was a highly anticipated Capcom game, and they were more than likely paid off, it received 2-4 points higher than what it deserves. Then a game that actually had a lot of content and balance, KOF13, comes out and gets the exact same score, but one of the cons is something as dumb as cheap bosses, even though the review for MVC3 revealed a little of the cons.


If vanilla MVC3 is Fate of Two Worlds, its aggregate score on Metacritic is an 84% with 56 reviews, with IGN coming in at an 85% for it. KOF13 has a 77% with 26 reviews, IGN at 7. I don't smell any tampering there, seems as though everyone is on the same page.

Lower budget games get scores lowered in accordance to their budget, and do not get as much love.

Lower budget games are generally rated lower, and yes it's because of their budget. That's because it takes money to make a game. Money gets you a larger team, better resources, additional testing, and the best developers and producers for hire. Why would videogames be any different than every other entertainment medium known to man?

Noway in HFIL is Skyrim worth anything more than an 8, and that is being liberal. The fact IGN gave them such a high score shows how poor, uninformed, and misleading their interview was. What is the point of an review if the reviewer is just going to drool over the game and not give constructive criticisms?

Skyrim's aggregate score is a 92% with 16 reviews. IGN gave it a 95%. One reviewer agreed with you that it was an 80%, and one was thinking more along the lines of 70%. The other 14 apparently really liked it.

So to wrap it up and reiterate a few things: IGN is always right on cue with the overall consensus of how good a game is, they give very generous high scores to indie releases, and they can be quite harsh on DLC for AAA titles. Studios with less money make games with more flaws because they can't afford to fix those flaws.

Now, I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying all evidence I've seen points towards it. If you know of major release titles that spent a lot of advertisement money on IGN and released a game that was rated excessively higher by IGN than it's aggregate, point me to it. From your examples so far it just seems like the only issue is that you have a hard time accepting that a lot of people enjoyed certain games more than you did.
---
QT x314159.
glory of power metal is an anagram of Lame Flowerpot Orgy. ~ kirbymuncher