That being said, the playstyle of the Diablo games in general is very simple minded. I can't see how these types of games could captivate anyone's attention for very long.
Diablo 2 was only simple minded on the surface. Half the game was being able to plan and build a class such that it could withstand Nightmare itself. In Diablo 3 this planning ahead does not seem necessary.
Once again, metacritic has no impact on the sales of a game.
Who cares? The people has spoken, Diablo 3 is no good.
There was a thread here this afternoon with a poll by a poster on the fence about buying it. The poll showed that 80% of people that have actually bought Diablo III like it. The people have spoken. Diablo 3 is good.
It shows that 80% of the people that happened to stumble across that one poll and felt like answering it liked the game. Nothing more. Don't take even a few thousand votes here as indicative of the whole.
Once again, metacritic has no impact on the sales of a game.
Who cares? The people has spoken, Diablo 3 is no good.
There was a thread here this afternoon with a poll by a poster on the fence about buying it. The poll showed that 80% of people that have actually bought Diablo III like it. The people have spoken. Diablo 3 is good.
It shows that 80% of the people that happened to stumble across that one poll and felt like answering it liked the game. Nothing more. Don't take even a few thousand votes here as indicative of the whole.
a few thousand votes is a very big sample size
Of millions of purchases? On a forum where people have a tendency to mass blam or promote specific products?
Not really.
I'm not saying it's right or wrong. Personally I dislike the game because of certain design decisions, but feel overall it is fairly well made. I'm jsut saying for every forum poll that shows 80% of players loving it, I bet you can find one just as big saying the opposite.
Once again, metacritic has no impact on the sales of a game.
Who cares? The people has spoken, Diablo 3 is no good.
There was a thread here this afternoon with a poll by a poster on the fence about buying it. The poll showed that 80% of people that have actually bought Diablo III like it. The people have spoken. Diablo 3 is good.
The poll you are reffering to was spilt about dead even. But that doesn't matter. If you like the game then ignore what the majority is saying about the game.
No, the dead even split was on if someone bought it or not. The people that did buy it, 80% of them liked it.
The point is, the low metacritic score is almost definitely padded by people that didnt buy the game. If you didnt buy the game you can't make a fair rating (and this includes playing the beta)
So if someone bought the game and liked it their vote counts, but if they didn't like the game and decided not to buy it their vote doesn't count. Now if you didn't buy the game but liked it would your vote still count?
We need to clear this up, it use to be as long as you played the game at least a decent amount you had the right to review it.
Now it's a requirement that you must buy a game you don't like in order to give a review on it?
Awsome, talk about padding lol.
So wait.... does that mean there is a group of 1.4million people that own the game but not allowed to review it because technically they didn't buy it?
We need to clear this up, it use to be as long as you played the game at least a decent amount you had the right to review it.
Unless you got a free copy somehow, the only way you would have played the game long enough to be able to form a fair review is by bying the game. AFAIK the beta was capped at a very low level (13?) so no, just playing the beta doesnt count.
And the wow annual pass people bought the game, its part of the package.
So if someone bought the game and liked it their vote counts, but if they didn't like the game and decided not to
buy it their vote doesn't count. Now if you didn't buy the game but liked it would your vote still count?
We need to clear this up, it use to be as long as you played the game at least a decent amount you had the right to review it.
Now it's a requirement that you must buy a game you don't like in order to give a review on it?
Awsome, talk about padding lol.
So wait.... does that mean there is a group of 1.4million people that own the game but not allowed to review it because technically they didn't buy it?
What it looks like he's saying is that metacritic ratings shouldn't just be taken as gospel and for what's representative for the whole of the playerbase. As should be obvious when people put some thought and comparative scrutiny to metacritic user ratings.
Oh and not to beat a dead horse here, but I think you should change your title to:: "I agree with the 4chan users who review bomb metacritic and amazon"
IMo all reviewes ar ecompletely null until you have alevel 60 character with hell completed, beating normal or nightmare just doesn't' count.
lolwat
You realize that most professional reviewers within the industry aren't capable of finishing everything they play and write about, much less on multiple difficulties?
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
Metacritic usually manages to level itself out to an accurate score.
All the 0/10 Nerdrage reviews because the couldnt log in at midnight, ARE valid reviews. If Bliz wanted to avoid this, they shouldnt have made it online only, or should have made more stable servers.
These are also balanced out nicely by all the 10/10 fanboy reviews having a nerdgasm because the got to play
Then the rest of them are actually "real" reviews
It all balances out in the end......
Cluck Cluck, Gibber Gibber, My Old Mans A Mushroom
Metacritic is the biggest joke on the internet. Half of all user reviews should be dismissed out of hand because they are massively biased one way or the other and either give games a 0 or a 10. As a result, no one should take those reviews seriously.
And my God... are there any released games that people on this site actually DO like!? Seriously you guys... it seems like the only activity many of you genuinely enjoy is trashing games on internet forums. It's sad...
I like TERA and Leauge of Legends.
I DONT like TERA, or League of Legends.
See it, all balances out in the end.....
Cluck Cluck, Gibber Gibber, My Old Mans A Mushroom
I'm having a hard time finding one "User Rating" I don't disagree with other than Dead Island that I believe should have been a 5.8 instead of a 6.8, but that's because I'm a BIT more critical about zombie based games than others in its genre !
Don't worry about any of this If YOU enjoy the game at the end of the day. However, just realize that after everything is said and done Diablo 3 was not the game it should have been. For the fans ....
I tend to agree, Diablo III's 87 is pretty accurate.
Comments
Diablo 2 was only simple minded on the surface. Half the game was being able to plan and build a class such that it could withstand Nightmare itself. In Diablo 3 this planning ahead does not seem necessary.
a few thousand votes is a very big sample size
Of millions of purchases? On a forum where people have a tendency to mass blam or promote specific products?
Not really.
I'm not saying it's right or wrong. Personally I dislike the game because of certain design decisions, but feel overall it is fairly well made. I'm jsut saying for every forum poll that shows 80% of players loving it, I bet you can find one just as big saying the opposite.
So if someone bought the game and liked it their vote counts, but if they didn't like the game and decided not to buy it their vote doesn't count. Now if you didn't buy the game but liked it would your vote still count?
We need to clear this up, it use to be as long as you played the game at least a decent amount you had the right to review it.
Now it's a requirement that you must buy a game you don't like in order to give a review on it?
Awsome, talk about padding lol.
So wait.... does that mean there is a group of 1.4million people that own the game but not allowed to review it because technically they didn't buy it?
Unless you got a free copy somehow, the only way you would have played the game long enough to be able to form a fair review is by bying the game. AFAIK the beta was capped at a very low level (13?) so no, just playing the beta doesnt count.
And the wow annual pass people bought the game, its part of the package.
What it looks like he's saying is that metacritic ratings shouldn't just be taken as gospel and for what's representative for the whole of the playerbase. As should be obvious when people put some thought and comparative scrutiny to metacritic user ratings.
IMo all reviewes ar ecompletely null until you have alevel 60 character with hell completed, beating normal or nightmare just doesn't' count.
Oh and not to beat a dead horse here, but I think you should change your title to:: "I agree with the 4chan users who review bomb metacritic and amazon"
Shadow's Hand Guild
Open recruitment for
The Secret World - Dragons
Planetside 2 - Terran Republic
Tera - Dragonfall Server
http://www.shadowshand.com
lolwat
You realize that most professional reviewers within the industry aren't capable of finishing everything they play and write about, much less on multiple difficulties?
"This is life! We suffer and slave and expire. That's it!" -Bernard Black (Dylan Moran)
Metacritic usually manages to level itself out to an accurate score.
All the 0/10 Nerdrage reviews because the couldnt log in at midnight, ARE valid reviews. If Bliz wanted to avoid this, they shouldnt have made it online only, or should have made more stable servers.
These are also balanced out nicely by all the 10/10 fanboy reviews having a nerdgasm because the got to play
Then the rest of them are actually "real" reviews
It all balances out in the end......
Cluck Cluck, Gibber Gibber, My Old Mans A Mushroom
I DONT like TERA, or League of Legends.
See it, all balances out in the end.....
Cluck Cluck, Gibber Gibber, My Old Mans A Mushroom
I tend to agree, Diablo III's 87 is pretty accurate.