Why Metacritic Doesn't Matter

There is a prevailing theory that review scores affect sales. It is certainly true that there is a high correlation between aggregate review ratings, like those found on; games rated over 90 percent tend to record higher game sales than their lower scoring peers. The question that was posed to the developer panel at DICE Summit 2009 was whether they designed games with reviewers in mind. The answer was an overwhelming no.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
360degrees3583d ago (Edited 3583d ago )

and at a 6.3 based off of 79 User votes

Halo 3 is at a 94 based off of 86 reviews

and at a 7.2 based off of 1948 User votes

So if you use metacritic strictly for an informative overall average then its fine, but if you simply base your purchase off of reviews then you are not a true gamer

Timberland2K93583d ago

this does not justify there 7 for killzone 2. Its just not exceptable. To add to that a solid game that goes many steps above the rest of the pack deserves at least a 9

FantasyStar3583d ago (Edited 3583d ago )

Give me a quarter everytime I see someone use this word to justify their ideology. Only overzealous gamers care about a Metacritic score comparison of "Who's **** is bigger?".

pswi603583d ago

"Another problem with Metacritic scores, says Bilman, is they aren't weighted. Reviews from Time Magazine are treated the same as some kid's blog. A low score from a "couple weird sites" can significantly drag down average review scores."

wow. again, Edge gets basic facts wrong to push it's own agenda.

Edge: 0
Metacritic: 3
Killzone 2: 92

just go away Edge, stop trying to cover up your mistakes with more mistakes.

soxfan20053583d ago (Edited 3583d ago )

A better way to judge a game's Metacritic rating is to do what they do in the Olympics - drop the highest and lowest scores, and average the rest. There are always biased judges in olympic gymnastics and figure skating events, and by eliminating the highest and lowest scores, a judge who is biased for or against someone won't be able to affect their overall score.

In the case of Metacritic, with so many scores, it would probably make sense to drop the 5 highest and lowest scores. This way, sites that might be biased for or against a particular game cannot beef up or drag down a worthy games rating.

infamousinfolite3583d ago

the way I see it is that some or most people give their opinionated reviews like their likes and dislikes instead of giving a review based on all areas that a game should meet or surpass.

For example: the kz2 demo in my book is a ten. the controls are easy to pick up the movement is easy the feels real in every aspect. Also the fps cover system real puts you into the game. Realism = check, graphics = check plus gameplay = check controls = check Story = check voice acting (from the demo) = uh check

Trebius3583d ago (Edited 3583d ago )

Metacritic does provide an excellent service, and the reviews are all weighed in, i dont care what anyone says because MC says it themselves, the bigger more well known reviewers carry more weight than the rest.

I dont agree that youre not a true gamer if you base your purchase on reviews. I for 1 am not the richest man by any means, so I turn to reviews to get an idea of what a game is like, or Ill just do my own research and check out videos and what not.

If someone needs to see a few reviews before he makes a purchase and wastes his time/money, that's great. You dont go out and buy a car without doing some research first, then ultimately test driving it.
I would even wait for a friend to get the game and let them tell me their opinion on it...or see it myself if possible...the point is, you can still be a gamer and base a purchase on a few reviews.

To me a "True Game" is a rare breed. There are people out there that only just started gaming when this next gen started or when the PS2 was released. Those arent true gamers, you're NOT a true gamer if you've never played your own NES, SNES, Genesis, Saturn, so on and so forth. You need to have gone through all the Gens to be a true gamer...all we have now is a bunch of 14 year old kids with 360s and PS3s that think they're True Gamers.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3583d ago
FantasyStar3583d ago (Edited 3583d ago )

Why people continue to care about Metacritic is beyond me. Constantly comapring reviews and singling out review hubs for stupid reasons. OMFG! Edge gave KZ2 a 7! STONE THEM! GameInformer gave KZ2 a 8.75! STONE THEM!


Fontaine3583d ago

Metacritic is good to have an idea of what the quality of a game is.

factory3582d ago

as long as game developers are willing to dump total shovelware on an unsuspecting public, there will be a need for metacritic and reviews of videogames and other products with a price tag attached to them.
turning point
shellshock 2
some recent examples..
it is a service to the public to write reviews of products and then it is up to the public or individual user to then put the appropriate amount of weight behind those reviews
i use metacritic as a guide, nothing more and nothing else.all it is for me is a grouping of opinions in one convenient place

nightelfmohawk3583d ago

...but I don't think that's what it's supposed to be about anyway. At least the guy who runs the site (forgot his game) even says there's never been any proof that high metascores lead to high sales. It's a better tool for consumers, IMO, who can compare scores across a range of sources of "e-Journalists."

When used in conjunction with user reviews posted on other sites, it can give a buyer a better idea of whether he or she should buy a game, IMO. In the end, a magazine's review really isn't any more credible or valuable than a user review posted on, say,

Chaoticsoulx3583d ago

and maybe even find a new good site to go too, i mostly just read ign's review, and eurogamer, and gametrailers(for the video review, i don't care what their number score is). and that's pretty much it, metacritic is just amusing.

Show all comments (27)
The story is too old to be commented.