An enraged Uncharted 4 petition tried to get a negative review taken off Metacritic, which is why we should all stop paying so much attention to the site.
Maybe it true, but when the guy from website who just complain with no reason. That's where we question the person. Metacritic was a joke from past till this day.
Never mind the review itself. The fact there was no score but Meta gave one instead his highly unprofessional.
Metacritic did not make up the score. It was the score given to them by the Washington Post: https://twitter.com/metacri...
If that is the case then it is fine. How anyone would score U4 a 4/10 though is still quite unbelievable but that is separate. So WP gave a score to Meta. They should have stated this and show on their actual review unless they are gutless to do so.
If there was no score in the review itself to start with and then they provided MC with a score separately afterwards to make it count it doesn't seem right either. I agree though that MC is irrelevant and people should stop referring to it.
I understand that developers want to have the highest score possible everywhere, it surely motivates for the following project. This doesn't concern anyone of the gamers who are only there playing games.. Their reaction is pathetic and laughable.
Yeah seems like it wasn't metacritic who added it which is a relief. However I do agree with OB1. It was published on Washington post without a score. I disagree with then giving metacritic a score that you haven't published. Something else to add to the list of reason why I don't like metacritic.
Still not fine, the review shouldn't be counted due to its complete lack of any professional standards. Just like when doing a science study if you have a few data points that are so far off the rest and especially if you have an explanation for what went wrong to produce them (in the reviews case bias from the reviewer) you count them as anomalous (hate spelling that word... Or trying to anyway) results and don't include them in averages etc.
The author forgets that publishers are concerned with metacritic and base whether or not devs receive a bonus on metacritic scores. That's the real problem and that's why metacritic has to go.
i boycotted metacritic ages ago as all it does is fuel the console war and give ammo to the fanboys. its not hard to find a few sites that you trust and have similar tastes and standers to you. the only reviewer i use now is ACG on youtube. ive also noticed there're loads of legit critics which metacritic don't use and this isn't the first time this has happened horizon 2 got two really low scores which stopped it getting 90 that said i think its pathetic how some of the ps4 community has reacted to this
Maybe if he read the article in question, then the writer could have a good idea what's the fuzz is about. Just unfortunate that the current journalism we are being punished to read doesn't require the writer to go to the crux of the problem, you just blog it. Such an easy job, right, craveonline writer? And mind you, gaming is not a job, it's a hobby. BUT OFCOURSE, the writer have to say shit as if he knows us.
So what is the problem? The game currently stands at a 93 with the absolute majority of reviews being fantastic. And the fact that there is a petition to remove one, uno, review from Metacritic is why this and other articles are popping up. This is why these so called journalists are confused or dumbfounded. Because it makes absolutely no sense for all this fuss or concern over a game that is basically an A+ to be fought over one negative review. Maybe it's you who should read this article and see where this person is coming from. The overreaction is mind blowing and I seriously can't believe myself that this is even a huge topic.
You and this so called journalist completely miss the point. Not surprise you would.
If the review is satire then why can't Metacritic just remove the review and everyone can move on with their lives. There shouldn't even be the need for a petition to be started. Woops, we included a satire review, it's now removed, our bad. That should've been all there is to it.
The review didn't have a score yet Metacritic gave it one anyone. That's the problem, though it isn't surprising that you don't think it's a problem.
The problem is that there needs to be standards if you work for an editorial. It's not like he's some blogger on a no name website. As far as the game being at 93 it should be at 94 because ND worked hard to make U4 a great game to let some trolling as writer affect their work. As much as hate to say it a lot of people go to metacritic to see scores and it affects ND bottomline even if it's already scored pretty well. So if all of a sudden you get to tons of writers saying U4 is garbage are we suppose to agree even though I have been playing games since I was 5 and know the difference between a good game and a bad one. Damage control is unreal the fayboyism and trolling is out of control.
Where is it stated the review is satire? So metacritic gave it a score...and now it's a sinister 93. No, I actually don't think it's a problem. Besides Washington Post gave Metacritic the score to publish Please show me where the metascores will affect ND's bottom line? Please point to where going from a 94 to a 93 will cripple ND employees who worked so hard on the game and because of this score that Metacritic gave them Christmas will have to be postponed for a few years. "So if all of a sudden you get to tons of writers saying U4 is garbage are we suppose to agree even though..." But we aren't...seriously...what we are getting is tons of writers saying U4 is FANTASTIC. You all are taking one bad review and going completely off the rails with it. "I have been playing games since I was 5 and know the difference between a good game and a bad one." Then what's the problem?
https://www.washingtonpost.... Next to the author's name, it says "Comic Riffs". In other words, it's not a serious review, it's a comedy/satire piece. So, this one, uno, review isn't even a legitimate review. That's the problem.
@Ziggurcat That is the section in the Washington Post that reviews Movies, Games and other forms of entertainment. If you click on that you would actually see that. It's not satire. He has reviewed games before and the review piece was submitted Metacritic by the Washington Post, they gave meta the score for them to print. https://twitter.com/Uzair42... @bruce755 "...the game was the highest rated original game of this generation, now it's not." Jesus...it's a ninty-friggen-three! Exactly what is bad about that?
There was no score to start with and it was added afterwards to make it count in MC. I don't think it's a huge 'problem' so to speak but the incompetence of journalists has been a growing problem for a while now and I'm happy gamers react to that sort of fishy stuff happening. Gaming journalist sadly have become used to be arrogant and use the 'it's my opinion and I share it' attitude to dodge any negative feedback they get. They basically make a livelihood from the readers and when they get overwelmingly bad feedback they are like 'how dare you giving bad feeback on our job?'. You also can see many sites putting the blame on gamers and listing a collection of obscenities from 'gamers' comments to dodge any issues. MC and that reviewer deserve all the backlash they get from gamers even if I agree it's no big deal at all. I find it more worrying when the media snap at gamers for being 'immature' or the like instead of acknowledging the right for readers to give bad feedback.
used as a marketing tool.. many have been brainwashed into thinking a game is as good as its meta score.. a collection of opinions doesn't change what they are, opinions. Whether they're paid to do it or not. how many of you have been burnt in the past? you go out and buy a game based on the raving reviews hype and marketing. You pop the game in trying your best to like it only to realise you're playing garbage.. at least, what you perceive to be garbage.
*Cough* mgsv *Cough*
Exactlly! Stop crying about one stupid review. Kids these days will whine about anything they dont agree with.
Metacritic is the biggest joke and plague in the industry.
I was trying to find this before and I finally did http://n4g.com/news/1656061...
@Rime Complain about the contracts being influenced by outside effects then. Do you know what an average engineer makes? Sorry if I don't lose any sleep over one of these guys not getting a bonus.
@G red I'm sure when someone goes out of their way to negatively effect your life/career you toss up your hands and say "oh well thems the breaks". Judging by the way you are in all the articles about this subject dropping comment after comment I'd say you would pursue those who wrong you with as much enthusiasm. Lets be real here when your peers in the review business give a game overwhelming positive reviews and you drop a stinker of a review like this person did, well you took the spray can and put the target on yourself.
As much as I don't pay attention to metacritics, in this case the review in question was satire. Their real score was actually 8-9/10, but somehow metacritics took the 4/10.
What I don't understand is why they (Meta) gave a 4/10 when the WP review didn't have a score. Does not make any sense other than creating controversy to get them more attention which illustrates the sad state of gaming journalism nowdays.
in this day and age where review scores do matter the publishers/developers care understand this fallout new vegas developer were gonna get their bonuses if the game gets 85/100 overall so when it got 84/100 they didn't get their bonuses so you want to tell me again how review scores don't matter if you are a hard working development studio and everyone gives you 9 and above and some give you low scores to write clickbait articles than gamers and developers have every right to be mad
So all reviewers should be giving out 9's and 10's because they need to worry about the developers bonuses? So many people like to say reviewers are biased or being paid off and yet now some folks are suggesting they have to score accordingly or it might affect a developers bonus...bonus!? Not regular paychecks, overtime, time and half and other perks these guys get...but BONUSES! How are we suppose to differentiate between troll reviews, honest opinions and an actual good or bad game? How about we blame who ever put that stipulation in an employees contract that their money would be effected by outside forces beyond their control. If a score of 93 doesn't get Johnny Keyboard who works at ND that Audi R8 then maybe ND isn't the heavenly place a lot of people make it out to be.
@showtimefolks "in this day and age where review scores do matter the publishers/developers care" of course they care, most companies want to have a positive image and welcome positive feedback. "understand this fallout new vegas developer were gonna get their bonuses if the game gets 85/100 overall so when it got 84/100 they didn't get their bonuses" what you are saying then is a conflict of interest. this means there is incentives to persuade scores because it is now monetary. this dates back to jeff gertsmann and how he got fired for giving a low score. reviews have become too political. "so you want to tell me again how review scores don't matter" this article is talking about gamers and you have yet convinced anyone why it matters so much in regards to gamers caring about review scores. "if you are a hard working development studio and everyone gives you 9 and above and some give you low scores to write clickbait articles than gamers and developers have every right to be mad" if youy are a developer of course you will be dissapointed to see low review scores and even angry and question reviews that are not fair. but again why are gamers getting mad about it, you didn't make the game so stop being so attached to something that you had no input in its development.
Sometimes reviews are just wrong. Quantum Break is better than what a few Sony reviewers claim.
Maybe but a 93 metacritic proves it's already inconsequential what happens. Most sites has it as a classic already. If people care so much it doesn't matter. Uncharted merely needed to prove it was high quality again. It's done that.
Its not the review. Its the fact Meta gave a score when the review didn't have one.
Its called having the reputation to fix a mistake in journalism. A retraction! If you will if you are wrong! Not doing so hurts your reputation. Its not hard for Metacritic to do so if they would want to be taken with any real serious "criticism" reviewing processes. .if not why do it?
It doesn't matter. Uncharted blew up the gaming scene already. A single review doesn't effect a masterpiece.
well, this is something that will never change anyway. Decades have gone by and gamers still care about scores as much as we care about graphics. Although the Wapo UC4 stuff is bullcrap.
Perfect. I can not now nor will I ever understand why people care so much about metacritic or reviews in general since they are all just opinions anyway. Metacritic totals I find to be too high for most of those games in the 90s and too low for the games in the 70s and 80s. It all makes me laugh when people throw scores in my face to justify if a game is good or bad. Some of my favorite games ares middle of the road review wise and I could make a long list of over hyped mainstream trash that has scored highly. It's your opinion that matters in the end.
It is amazing how stupid these journalist are. The simple question is this. Should a journalist mistake be corrected?. Don't these people learn this in Journalism 101? If you made a mistake you correct it. The 4/10 is a mistake because that was not the score. Why?. Because there was no score. How hard is it to understand this?.
Did you hear? Craveonline.com preaches the gospel.
What this article is is further proof that alleged "journalists" don't perform their due diligence, and research the cause of the reaction to this metacritic score. Instead they'd rather post nonsense in order to generate clicks, fan the flames of some idiotic flame war, and paint the people who have legitimate complaints as "fanboys."
It has really proven how bad the state of journalism is now. Instead of addressing the actual issue which is Meta giving a score when there is no score. They instead try to cover each other asses by blaming fans that want fairness.
So many xbots trying their best to stand the high ground, but know damn well they would be doing the same exact thing had Halo 5 been a masterpiece; then smacked with a lame incorrect review that ruined the say 98%.
Umm no. Halo 5 was given a couple of low scores. I didn't see any petitions. Sure some Xbox fans were upset. Cause the game is the best in its genre, just like UC4. But you didn't see petitions going up. Whether the score was legit, a troll, or given by MC.
@DevilKinngre You're mean bro!
They should drop one off the top and one off the bottom every 30 reviews.
Coz some people really dedicate their time and mind to give other gamers a little bit of idea, but there are just some people who dont even have a single reason and hand a game 4/10 because of fanboyism. Its just insulting
Look UC4 is great, selling great, devs paid, Sony happy, and fans happy. Stop with this foolish petition over nothing.
Where is Adam Sessler . I would love to hear him do another angry rant about 'Metacritic'.
This whole debacle reminds me of the Dragon's Crown thing. For those unaware, that game also got tons of positive reviews on Metacritic, but Polygon gave it an okay review and people were pissed off. I can understand why people are pissed off, but just really? If anything, this satire review has shown your review will get the most clicks now because everyone is so angry. Even if the problem may be with Metacritic, the satire review still brought in more clicks now. If they remove the review, will it impact the overal score that much? People already know this game is good. One satire review on Metacritic will not change that.
Maybe they are just concerned about whats fair and whats right. If Meta would just do what was right and fix the mistake there wouldn't be a need for a petition in the first place.
People put too much stock into metacritic. It's like a stat website for fanboys to fight other fanboys. And when there is an unjust review people throw the biggest hissy fits and start petitions and whiny articles.
It is important to know that some developer gets paid a different amount of money depending on how well the game did on game meterics. Fallout new vegas is a famous case. It is important that things are done correctly and they are hold to high standards when there are millions of dollars involved.
I think that yes part of it is that but at the time, it looked like metacritic did randomly give it a score. Now apparantly the author actually did score the review but it was taken off on the Washington post because the review was freelance or something along those lines. In which case, the review was still published without a score, I still don't understand how it can be given one on metacritic. Anyway, it's less dastardly than it had seemed at first and at least the score accurately reflects what the reviewer wanted.
I'm just curious as to why the review has a score on Metacritic and not OpenCritic.
it's because it's such a ridiculously low score right? if people attacked the reviewer for giving the game a lowly 8.8, well good job that wouldn't happen right? because that would be kinda pathetic wouldn't it?
but you have to question that review that doesnt have a score, then they give a random number for metacritic.
Uncharted 4 is a terrible game worst game I ever played 10/10
Maybe because you have in some cases like media sites like [ xo.tv ] trying to pass themselves off neutral site and review games. When the head of this indie studio happens to post a review on a (playstation 4 )1st party Exclusive and posts that very review on here with the heading of. "Uncharted 4: A Thief’s End Multiplayer – A PlayStation 3 Game In A PlayStation 4 Disguise" One must wonder exactly why an indie studio head such as candlelight studios would be doing such a thing? Lmao.
Metacritic is sitting on this matter because it is giving them huge publicity. Hasn't anyone cought on to that. LOL.
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.