Is Metacritic Important?

CCC Says: "Metacritic, for those who don’t know, is a review website that aggregates reviews scores from both amateurs and critics alike for movies, games, music and TV shows. Each score, appropriately named “the Metascore”, is the conglomeration of user-submitted comments associated to any given piece of media. Each person can leave their own comment on a given slice of media as well as their own score on said media. The result of hundreds of submitted scores amounts to a single average, the Metascore."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
gametangents1078d ago (Edited 1078d ago )

In my opinion, user scores are more representative of gamer sentiment than other scores. Granted some are nonsensical such as those that give 0's, however, I have found through my many years of gaming that the 0's are needed to balance out the nonsensical 10's. 10s should be reserved for the absolute best games of each genre every year and not just given out like candy. Further, we all know there is a lot of impropriety in the professional realm of game reviews because there is a conflict of interest between reviewers and the companies that provide them a paycheck. Bottom line, the 0's balance out the 10 and associated conflict of interest. People need to realize that user review scores need to be viewed as a true bell curve and should not see them like school grades which are abstractly chosen. On a bell curve, the 50% mark is usually still within average. Meaning, that a 5/10 is actually an average game. in Fact 3-7 is all average. 8 is above average, 9 is amazing and 10 is the best of the best (for a specific time period).

Foehammer1078d ago

I personnally go by the main score, it's done by industry professionals (supposedly). Most are similar with some score way off for click bait.

The user review is a total waste in my opinion. While I appreciate that some take the time to truly score things like graphics, control, sound, gameplay, etc...too many fanboy losers just slap a score of 0 or 10. It becomes more of a vote than a score, a popularity contest, ergo useless.

MRMagoo1231078d ago

IMO I feel number ratings should be removed from reviews completely, I think a review should consist of the reviewers experience with the game, followed by a pros and cons, then a if you like this game you would also like....

And thats it, no numbers at all.

gametangents1078d ago

But that is what reviews are supposed to score are they not? Since we do not trust the pro's anyway (for various reasons), then all we are left with is sentiment and an objective write-up. The pro scores are meaningless to me for that reason. I might read their articles to get a sense for the game but I do not trust their scores because they are indeed in conflict with their paychecks.

That is not to say that user scores are objective. But the user scores give you a very important piece of data; general sentiment. If a bunch of gamers think a game stinks it will get more zeros than tens and the score will reflect that and vise-versa. Given a large sample size, it is always more accurate than any pro review as to whether or not an average gamer will enjoy said game and to what extent.

You just need to remember that metacritic is a bell curve... it is not a "school grade." There is a large deviation in the definition of "average" on a bell curve. As I have stated before in other posts, people need to realize what the stats mean and they need to read it properly.

The metacritic user score is very powerful as long as you remember that "average" on a bell curve means 3-7 (most of the time). If a game scores higher than 7, it is truly an great achievement and a 9 is amazing. Can we say the same for the "pros" who give out 8's, 9's and 10's like free candy? Nope.

Just my opinion anyway.

mikeslemonade1078d ago

Gamerankings is better. It has a more accurate score. User score is irrelevant because that skews the score to more hype and casual perspectives. The critical score analyzes the game at a consensus and analytical perspective.

Foehammer1078d ago (Edited 1078d ago )

I agree with reading a review for input, and understand bell curves, but the math for averages doesn't work out even given completely matched fanboys, example:

An outstanding game deserving of a 9

8 users score it a 9
1 fanboy a 10
1 fanboy a 0

Game gets a 8.2, lower than it deserves.

Now throw in a larger hating fan base (like here).

7 users score 9
1 fanboy a 10
2 fanboys a 0

game gets a 7.3, way lower than it deserves.

gametangents1078d ago

That is precisely how its supposed to work... in your example however, the sample size is much too small to be relevant and in that example the score is meaningless even if it were a 9 (it would be an irrelevant 9 due to low power). But lets say a few hundred averaged to 7.3. That would tell me the game is slightly above average and is not really a 9 for most people. Seriously, I have not played a game that deserves a 9 since Skyrim and I am sure there are many that will disagree with me. But that is the point isnt it? Crowd scoring is an equalizer between my (or one) opinion and what most people think. That does not mean I go out and buy a game the crowd loves. I certainly have no interest in online shooters nor will I ever like them regardless of scores nor do I like artsy games but the key is I RESPECT other peoples opinions and I respect that they disagree with me. It does not invalidate the score if it is different than what I perceive.

Interestingly, metacritic scored Skyrim at 8.4 which is close to where I would be and by a bell curve scale, it means the game is better than amazing to most players. Knowing, how hard it is to score a 8 (by your example), it shows just how big of a feat it is to get an 8 and how powerful the sentiment really is. The score is working as intended.

Foehammer1078d ago


I used a small number for ease, but one could just add a zero to all the numbers and the result would be the same.


solar1078d ago

it is only important if you want to prove a point. same with VGChartz. that site was labeled "rumor" since ive been on this site. until, you want to use it for your own argument.

gametangents1078d ago

It is also important for predicting future interest from a business perspective. I can state many examples (last one I tracked was of CoD) of metacritic user scores that predicted the sales of the next game.

BlackWolf121078d ago

How can a user score EVER be considered genuine?

You don't need ANYTHING to prove that you played the game, just log in, type something, and bam, a review which is taken as freaking fact.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1078d ago
Batzi1078d ago

Nope. Same goes to any other review based site.

ThinkThink1078d ago (Edited 1078d ago )

I think that the critic portion of metacritic is helpful as a starting out point but I think it's important that everyone is encouraged to think for themselves. I use metacritic as a way to temper my expectations or give me a general ball park of what to expect going in.

Quicktim31078d ago

its only important if you yourself make it important.

that being said, i actually dont trust main review sites as much as i used to, some shady things going on behind the scenes that are being brought to light atm.

so metacritic sometimes is a breath of fresh air just to see what most everyday useres think.

games like destiny is looking like a 7/10.

no_more_heroes1078d ago

Not to me, it isn't. Never seen the point to it.

Show all comments (32)
The story is too old to be commented.