"In many ways, Metacritic is just a quick way to tell if a game is good or bad. But then you’d be basing it on a selective group of review scores. Is Metacritic withholding reviews that could negatively influence a game for publishers?"
GF365: "Here are our picks for the ten most underrated third-person shooters that you might not have played before or even known about."
Actually great list TBH I agree with all 10
I hope one day we get some remakes for the following
The saboteur(with a proper remake and quality of life features this game could be great)
Scarface world is yours
Binary domain ( such a great game with great story)
GUN(this needs a remake)
Space marine 40k(such fun time)
Would also like to suggest adding the mercenary series even the 2nd game which is disliked by many is a fun time
I recently finished Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine and found it to be very enjoyable.
The game respected the lore and the gameplay was quite decent.
The color palette was a bit underwhelming (backdrops and setting) and recycled but I think that it deserved better.
Here's hoping for an amazing sequel
Step into a dystopian world full of robots and cyborgs with Binary Domain – the sci-fi shooter game from Ryu Ga Gotoku Studio. Let's revisit this classic!
I personally enjoyed this when I played it. I know it wasnt reviewed well but f em
pretty solid third person shooter played from start to finish, also there is another great third person shooter game from that time and very unique called Inversion.
Contrary to other beliefs, the PC Gaming is home to many great hack and slash titles. The list will tackle them.
metacritic is bull.
they have Uncharted 3 at 9.2
when in reality its a 9.4 (n4g) no bs, all reviews count.
what i dont like is they pick and choose what review to put.
if i liked a game and ran the metacritic website and the game i liked was bad i could easily just put all of the 9/10 8/10 reviews and discard any 3/10 reviews.
metacritic is a joke.
This is a very good read.
I stop to "use" metacritic and gameranking long time ago.
If I need (and only if I need) a quick overview I just use only N4G for the metascore.
Metacritic, or rather, the way the public and the publishers interact with metacritic - is a huge problem for gaming going forward.
Follow the reviewers you like. If a load of critics hate a game it doesnt mean anything in regards to it's overall quality. We need to stop treating this stuff like everyone's being objective when comparing apples to oranges.
1) If site A gives 100% and site B gives 50% then the average should be 75%. Mathamatically speaking, in order to obtain an average you add all the scores together and divide by the number of scores involved. This is not the case, however, with Metacritic and their current policies. I'll tell you why.
With Metacritic, each review site is given a "weighted" value because "some critics consistently write better (more detailed, more insightful, more articulate) reviews than others." Secondly, each critic is "weighted" based on having "more prestige and respect in their industry than others."
In effect a 100% review from site A and a 50% score from site B doesn't always equal a 75% average. Therefore a score is based on factors outside a video game's actual quality. It is based from the quality of the review and the quality of the site that reviewed it. Metacritic holds their "weighted" policies to themselves. How that effects the score averages can only be determined by doing the math yourself. This factor is much overlooked yet has the highest concern for those evaluating Metacritic's reliability.
2)The score conversion. No need to cover this in detail. Basically Metacritic can convert letter scores in a number format based on 100%. Imagine a B- score converted to the article's 67% and have a situation where this reviewer is highly "weighted" in the overall average.
3) Number of reviews. This may, or may not be, out of Metacritic's control. The fact remains that the number of reviews can effect the accuracy of the overall score. Imagine 5 reviews on a game where another got 100 reviews. Of those 5 reviews, 4 are lowly "weighted", while the 5th was highly weighted and gave a score of B-. In effect they convert it to a 67% and have the weight of the other 4 sites combined.
Conclusion. There may be other factors I may have missed but this post is too long already. In conclusion I see Metacritic as an evaluator of quality reviews...not quality games. https://metacritic.custhelp...