The April Fool's joke about "Metametacritic" brings up a good question: Should game critics be evaluated on their performance?
Can gamers have an opinion of a reviewer's review, critique and writing skill? I was told that you aren't even allowed to have an opinion on the ME3 ending situation (Told by journalists and critics to shut up and take the game how it is. Oh and to not get a refund on the game) so idk. It'd be interesting seeing how it would work though.
No it would be dumb as hell
How could you actually review a reviewer? How could you grade their performance? AN authors writing style, be it in a book or a review, is a very subjective thing. For example I like lenghty reviews that break down almost every element of the game into separate pieces, while other people prefer their reviews short and sweet, always sticking to the major points. Reviews are already a subjective thing because while one person might like a game the next person may not. Adding reviews of reviewers into that mix would be just daft, in my opinion. Now, a simple site where people can vote for their favorites and have a running board of the most popular reviewers, that, I think, could work.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.