One of the biggest problems with user reviews is that there are no real guidlines as to what the numbers mean. They mean something different to everyone. I can't imagine giving a game a 1 unless it was somehow broken and wouldn't install/run. To me 2-3 are for bug ridden messes that may have "gamebreaking" bugs for some people, but it is at least playable in its current state. 4-6 are that "average" range 4 being a meh to 6 being "acceptable" 7-8 is a good game, 9 is an excellent game and 10 is a "perfect" game. The problem is that not many people will agree with my criteria, and I won't agree with theirs. At least with a professional review they tell me up front what the grading scale is and what the different levels mean.
For me those scores are perfectly reasonable and similar if not exactly how I would score a game. And really any rational reviewer with different ideas would only be a tweek or two away from from your criteria anyway so it wouldn't matter much. The real problem with modern professional reviewers is that 7 is deemed average not 5 so that bunches a high percentage of games in the upper band and of course the general public just see high scores and not the context for those scores.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Take a look at that review. It's the only review that person has done and it reads like something off the back of the box! They're not even trying to hide it..
lol
Someone remembers when this happened with dragon age 2?
Yeah
EA being EA
"It has potential" -Second most used phrase on existence "It sucks" -Most used phrase on existence
I would also put a lot more stock in user reviews (seeing as they're the market and all) than critic reviews. Critics are often paid to say nice things about big games these days, even if the game is terribad. :
MMO's played: Ragnarok Online (For years), WoW (for a few weeks only), Guild Wars, Lineage 2, Eve, Allods, Shattered Galaxy, 9 Dragons, City of Heroes, City of Villains, Star Trek Online (Got someone ELSE to pay for it), Champions Online (Someone else paid), Dofus, Dragonica, LOTRO, DDO and more... A LOT more. I've played good AND bad. The bad didn't last long. :P
I would also put a lot more stock in user reviews (seeing as they're the market and all) than critic reviews. Critics are often paid to say nice things about big games these days, even if the game is terribad. :
Reviews means shit
Good or bad
They are just made to see how popular a game is
"It has potential" -Second most used phrase on existence "It sucks" -Most used phrase on existence
Amazing that you can't even trust 90$ of the professional reviews on metacritic either. Games like Aion, Rift, Warhammer, LotR, etc, etc, etc...rarely if ever got anything less than 80 out of 100. Seriously....that is just...::shakes her head:: no wonder this genre is such a mess.
Take a look at that review. It's the only review that person has done and it reads like something off the back of the box! They're not even trying to hide it..
lol. That didn't make me want to play the game, but it did make me feel like giving the world a hug.
Take a look at that review. It's the only review that person has done and it reads like something off the back of the box! They're not even trying to hide it..
lol
Someone remembers when this happened with dragon age 2?
Yeah
EA being EA
I remember lol. They got busted so hard. Ah well, just another reason to ignore reviews completely.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
Amazing that you can't even trust 90$ of the professional reviews on metacritic either. Games like Aion, Rift, Warhammer, LotR, etc, etc, etc...rarely if ever got anything less than 80 out of 100. Seriously....that is just...::shakes her head:: no wonder this genre is such a mess.
As I said, the professionals get paid to say good things.
Sometimes I wonder if the 80-100 scale is their way of telling us that the game is meh or amazing without losing their paycheck due to being scathing.
81-85 is meh, 86-90 is okay, 91-95 is great, 96+ is amazing. Anything below 80 tanks.
Trouble is, that's so misleading either way :
I may be wrong, but this is how I feel about critic scores these days.
MMO's played: Ragnarok Online (For years), WoW (for a few weeks only), Guild Wars, Lineage 2, Eve, Allods, Shattered Galaxy, 9 Dragons, City of Heroes, City of Villains, Star Trek Online (Got someone ELSE to pay for it), Champions Online (Someone else paid), Dofus, Dragonica, LOTRO, DDO and more... A LOT more. I've played good AND bad. The bad didn't last long. :P
Amazing that you can't even trust 90$ of the professional reviews on metacritic either. Games like Aion, Rift, Warhammer, LotR, etc, etc, etc...rarely if ever got anything less than 80 out of 100. Seriously....that is just...::shakes her head:: no wonder this genre is such a mess.
They always review it too quickly without fully experiencing the game or tend to compare it to their favorite mmo on an unfair scale. Most of them have about as much objectivity in reviewing mmos as your average player. In other words: None...hehe
You simply cannot review an mmorpg the same way as you do a regular video game. Too many variables at play to churn out a review near as fast with an mmorpg. They do it time and time again though.
Although to be fair the few times I've seen sites wait to put out a review due to them wanting to give a "fair" assessment of the game the users of that site whine to no end or even start hurling insults at the sites for taking so long. Can't really win to an extent. Although to me it still pays to wait and give a proper, objective, and fully detailed review rather than the shit they normally put out.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
I can't think of anything I have ever gotten that I would rate a 0/10 ever. I read through a few of the 10s and 0s and they are just plain stupid.
"I put a 0 because all the fanbois are putting 10" and "I put a 10 bc of all the haters putting 0"
I bought rift played it to 35 and quit and haven't looked backed or reinstalled since I built a new comp, however I wouldn't give it a 0 just because I didn't make it to level cap. I played Fallen Earth to the mid levels and wouldn't rate it a 0/10 another game I didn't make to level cap.
Throw out all the 0's and 10's and give me the new calculations and then maybe we can discuss further about these "reviews".
And its only been reviewed by 228 out of the 1-2 million people who are playing it... get real.
What I don't understand is why Rift has a 7.2 rating on metacritic. I'd rate Rift a straight up 5, a truly mediocre MMO with nothing really terrible or great to say about itself.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
MMO's played: Ragnarok Online (For years), WoW (for a few weeks only), Guild Wars, Lineage 2, Eve, Allods, Shattered Galaxy, 9 Dragons, City of Heroes, City of Villains, Star Trek Online (Got someone ELSE to pay for it), Champions Online (Someone else paid), Dofus, Dragonica, LOTRO, DDO and more... A LOT more. I've played good AND bad. The bad didn't last long. :P
What I don't understand is why Rift has a 7.2 rating on metacritic. I'd rate Rift a straight up 5, a truly mediocre MMO with nothing really terrible or great to say about itself.
See now I don't think this is fair. I don't think Rift is a "great" game by any stretch of the imagination, but you have to admit that the class system was a bit innovative.
What I don't understand is why Rift has a 7.2 rating on metacritic. I'd rate Rift a straight up 5, a truly mediocre MMO with nothing really terrible or great to say about itself.
See now I don't think this is fair. I don't think Rift is a "great" game by any stretch of the imagination, but you have to admit that the class system was a bit innovative.
Okay, fair enough, but then SWTOR's rating shouldn't be sitting so low, either. Anyway, Metacritic is clearly borked. Star Trek Online is rated higher than SWTOR. Now that was a sad attempt at an MMO.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
Lol, really, who goes and posts a review of an MMO on launch day and expects to be taken seriously?
Anyone who gave a score today is bound to be on the extreme side. Either flinging faeces at it because it offends their delicate sensibilities, or rushing to "defend" it like it's some princess in an ivory tower.
I'll look at the user scores in a month's time and see what they're like. And even then, only for amusement.
The only score that matters to me on any game is the one I'd give it myself. And no, I wouldn't give it a 10. There is no ten, just like there is no zero, if we're being fair about things. I'd grade from 1-9 ans while for me swtor would be in the 7.5-8.5 range (depending on which planet I'm on, lol), I arrived at that score after 6 months of testing and a week of early access. But it's just my score and I don't expect anyone else to agree with me.
I liked it. Just because it doesn't fit your opinion, doesn't make it any less of a review - to the point of putting review in quotes as though it's a joke. It's a person's opinion, and far more in-depth than "your review is stoopid LOL".
Lol, really, who goes and posts a review of an MMO on launch day and expects to be taken seriously?
Considering the game hasn't changed that much since late beta and people have been able to play for 7 days before the game launched.... I think reviews on launch date are fine.
Comments
For me those scores are perfectly reasonable and similar if not exactly how I would score a game. And really any rational reviewer with different ideas would only be a tweek or two away from from your criteria anyway so it wouldn't matter much. The real problem with modern professional reviewers is that 7 is deemed average not 5 so that bunches a high percentage of games in the upper band and of course the general public just see high scores and not the context for those scores.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
lol
Someone remembers when this happened with dragon age 2?
Yeah
EA being EA
"It has potential"
-Second most used phrase on existence
"It sucks"
-Most used phrase on existence
The reason why Im not going to buy it?
The last time I played a AAA themepark I didnt say to myself...
"Gee, I just wish that this game would have "story-telling immersion" at the beginning."
I would also put a lot more stock in user reviews (seeing as they're the market and all) than critic reviews. Critics are often paid to say nice things about big games these days, even if the game is terribad. :
MMO's played: Ragnarok Online (For years), WoW (for a few weeks only), Guild Wars, Lineage 2, Eve, Allods, Shattered Galaxy, 9 Dragons, City of Heroes, City of Villains, Star Trek Online (Got someone ELSE to pay for it), Champions Online (Someone else paid), Dofus, Dragonica, LOTRO, DDO and more... A LOT more. I've played good AND bad. The bad didn't last long. :P
Reviews means shit
Good or bad
They are just made to see how popular a game is
"It has potential"
-Second most used phrase on existence
"It sucks"
-Most used phrase on existence
Amazing that you can't even trust 90$ of the professional reviews on metacritic either. Games like Aion, Rift, Warhammer, LotR, etc, etc, etc...rarely if ever got anything less than 80 out of 100. Seriously....that is just...::shakes her head:: no wonder this genre is such a mess.
http://www.metacritic.com/user/foilhat
http://www.metacritic.com/user/ChickenDeity
I don't care about innovation I care about fun.
ouch, it's really getting destroyed. no kidding. i would have at least given it a 7/10 for being average.
I remember lol. They got busted so hard. Ah well, just another reason to ignore reviews completely.
Enter a whole new realm of challenge and adventure.
gamerankings is where the real revewing is at, and from the above post I havent seen any mmo score in the 90s ever, EVER, its like a rare phenomina.
As I said, the professionals get paid to say good things.
Sometimes I wonder if the 80-100 scale is their way of telling us that the game is meh or amazing without losing their paycheck due to being scathing.
81-85 is meh, 86-90 is okay, 91-95 is great, 96+ is amazing. Anything below 80 tanks.
Trouble is, that's so misleading either way :
I may be wrong, but this is how I feel about critic scores these days.
MMO's played: Ragnarok Online (For years), WoW (for a few weeks only), Guild Wars, Lineage 2, Eve, Allods, Shattered Galaxy, 9 Dragons, City of Heroes, City of Villains, Star Trek Online (Got someone ELSE to pay for it), Champions Online (Someone else paid), Dofus, Dragonica, LOTRO, DDO and more... A LOT more. I've played good AND bad. The bad didn't last long. :P
They always review it too quickly without fully experiencing the game or tend to compare it to their favorite mmo on an unfair scale. Most of them have about as much objectivity in reviewing mmos as your average player. In other words: None...hehe
You simply cannot review an mmorpg the same way as you do a regular video game. Too many variables at play to churn out a review near as fast with an mmorpg. They do it time and time again though.
Although to be fair the few times I've seen sites wait to put out a review due to them wanting to give a "fair" assessment of the game the users of that site whine to no end or even start hurling insults at the sites for taking so long. Can't really win to an extent. Although to me it still pays to wait and give a proper, objective, and fully detailed review rather than the shit they normally put out.
1. For god's sake mmo gamers, enough with the analogies. They're unnecessary and your comparisons are terrible, dissimilar, and illogical.
2. To posters feeling the need to state how f2p really isn't f2p: Players understand the concept. You aren't privy to some secret the rest are missing. You're embarrassing yourself.
3. Yes, Cpt. Obvious, we're not industry experts. Now run along and let the big people use the forums for their purpose.
I can't think of anything I have ever gotten that I would rate a 0/10 ever. I read through a few of the 10s and 0s and they are just plain stupid.
"I put a 0 because all the fanbois are putting 10" and "I put a 10 bc of all the haters putting 0"
I bought rift played it to 35 and quit and haven't looked backed or reinstalled since I built a new comp, however I wouldn't give it a 0 just because I didn't make it to level cap. I played Fallen Earth to the mid levels and wouldn't rate it a 0/10 another game I didn't make to level cap.
Throw out all the 0's and 10's and give me the new calculations and then maybe we can discuss further about these "reviews".
And its only been reviewed by 228 out of the 1-2 million people who are playing it... get real.
What I don't understand is why Rift has a 7.2 rating on metacritic. I'd rate Rift a straight up 5, a truly mediocre MMO with nothing really terrible or great to say about itself.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
It's all just an unreliable matter of opinion.
MMO's played: Ragnarok Online (For years), WoW (for a few weeks only), Guild Wars, Lineage 2, Eve, Allods, Shattered Galaxy, 9 Dragons, City of Heroes, City of Villains, Star Trek Online (Got someone ELSE to pay for it), Champions Online (Someone else paid), Dofus, Dragonica, LOTRO, DDO and more... A LOT more. I've played good AND bad. The bad didn't last long. :P
See now I don't think this is fair. I don't think Rift is a "great" game by any stretch of the imagination, but you have to admit that the class system was a bit innovative.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
I do like how it is balancing out. You have to admit a 5 rsting is about all the game deserves.
In my review I gave it a 5.
My Impression of SWTOR <<< clicky
Oh obviously
..Cake..
Okay, fair enough, but then SWTOR's rating shouldn't be sitting so low, either. Anyway, Metacritic is clearly borked. Star Trek Online is rated higher than SWTOR. Now that was a sad attempt at an MMO.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
I couldn't stop laughing at that "review".
I don't care about innovation I care about fun.
Oh we all really care about what makes you laugh.. so please give us more: care to write your own review?
..Cake..
Lol, really, who goes and posts a review of an MMO on launch day and expects to be taken seriously?
Anyone who gave a score today is bound to be on the extreme side. Either flinging faeces at it because it offends their delicate sensibilities, or rushing to "defend" it like it's some princess in an ivory tower.
I'll look at the user scores in a month's time and see what they're like. And even then, only for amusement.
The only score that matters to me on any game is the one I'd give it myself. And no, I wouldn't give it a 10. There is no ten, just like there is no zero, if we're being fair about things. I'd grade from 1-9 ans while for me swtor would be in the 7.5-8.5 range (depending on which planet I'm on, lol), I arrived at that score after 6 months of testing and a week of early access. But it's just my score and I don't expect anyone else to agree with me.
I liked it. Just because it doesn't fit your opinion, doesn't make it any less of a review - to the point of putting review in quotes as though it's a joke. It's a person's opinion, and far more in-depth than "your review is stoopid LOL".
Considering the game hasn't changed that much since late beta and people have been able to play for 7 days before the game launched.... I think reviews on launch date are fine.
..Cake..