Metacritic has recently changed how user reviews work, adding a wait period of over a day before the average visitor can add their two cents. This follows a huge score war in the user reviews for The Last of Us Part 2.
The concept of the Metabomb has amused me since the early 2010s, but while it can be amusing, it can be a little bit alarming as well. With the delay, Metacritic hopes it can better weed out trolls and get good faith reviews.
Good luck with that!
Anyway, let’s chat about it.
#Metacritic #Reviews #GameReviews #TheLastOfUsPart2 #TLOU2 #GhostOfTsushima #Nintendo #UserReviews #ReviewScores #GameReviews #Criticism #Controversy #XboxOne #PS4 #NintendoSwitch #PC
Source: https://kotaku.com/metacritic-will-now-make-users-wait-36-hours-before-pos-1844421321
You were right Jim, “ingenuous” is the antonym of “disingenuous”. Yes, I had to Google it to make sure, but there you go.
Steam handles review bombing the best. Rather than trying to hide or obscure, they tell you “there has been a recent influx of off topic reviews, click here to exclude them” and it’s all solved like that.
Also how do we know any of the so called “professional critics and Journalists” put any time into the game? They could have just played for an hour and said “i’m giving this game a 0/10 or 10/10”.
Steam has, by far, the best user review system. You can see how much time the reviewers spent playing the game.
With scores generally dropping over time, I’d expect it to get rid of some early positivity bias rather than negative review bombing.
“If you insult product I like, you insult me. Conversely, if you enjoy product I don’t, that also insults me.”
-Modern Review/Media consumption culture
2:50 FFX battle music
I sometimes worry I’ve gamed to much when I can recognise nearly all video game music used by various youtubers on various game talk videos.
On steam I can see exactly how many hours someone has on a game making those reviews more trustworthy. On metacritic I don’t know if anyone in the user reviews has played the game so I choose not to trust any of them. If metacritic can find a way to confirm that a user has played a game (maybe by linking their PSN/Xbox Live account) and only allow those confirmed users to review it then the user review section on metacritic would hold some actual merit.
“Listen up wankers!” Is such a powerful energy to bring to the first 2 seconds of a video
“There’s never a gap in my vocabulary!”
That made me laugh so hard, thanks Jim 😀
Ehh it feels like something the Triple-AEeeeyyy industry is loving. a 36h window to try and shovel shit knowing most user cannot retaliate to launch problems or their tendency to bribe/pressure good little review sites into making fake glowing reviews for them.
But yeah Metacritic really is only used for tracking the well. “Meta-score”. Only thing it ever managed to do remotely well. Steam Reviews and Discussions have proven far more valuable in getting an idea at how good a game truly is and if a game’s multiplayer component is healthy in playercount.
I’d rather see a bunch of “game has lesbian 0/10 or 10/10” than not being able to see “game snuck in some dodge AF grind half way through the game that funnels you to the MTX store”. At least if I see 90 average on critic review and 2 on the user side I can quickly deduce, “there’s some outrage here, let’s find out more”.
Jim: “If a reviewer gives a game a lower score than other reviewers, fans will dog pile onto the reviewer for “Driving down the metacritic score””
Me: “Speaking from experience there Jim. Zelda fans aren’t even the worst”
Took a break from grinding in FFX to watch this.
I thought I was losing my mind for grinding too much when I still hear the battle theme with the game already closed.
“The law requires a five day waiting period.”
“Five days?! But I’m mad now!”
“10s and 0s are the only thing that matter on meta critic” odd I remember a particular 7 that made alot of fuss in the game community rofl
“Genuine, Jim. It’s genuine. GENUINE! OH MY GOD, IS HE TROLLING ME?!” – Me at that 4:30 mark haha
I just think that the AAA publishers are actively using these “controversies” to capitalize on it anyways, and haters and praisers are just cogs in the machinery at the end of the day: “Yes, put this in the game. People hating it will stir interest and thers will be people defending it and everyone will talk and buy it to “despise” the others, so it’s a win-win scenario for us!”
“Review bombing is bad unless it’s for a reason that I too am angry about!”
Come on now Jim lol