I don't think many people here are trying justify the score itself, more so defending the idea that a low score review is just as valid as a high score. It's not a matter of "see, someone else thinks this game is mid too!", but rather just pushing back against the idea that the review should be immediately tossed out as "bad".
Low res jacket texture jump scare
No, you see, it IS an untouchable masterpiece. It's just that if all the reviews were glowing, Metroid would jump from 2-3 million sales to 15 million sales, and then it would feel less like a well kept secret how good these games are.
I’m not really justifying Steph’s review score, more saying that reviews of media are opinion pieces by definition, and metacritic trying to turn them into a dataset by leaving out any context, picking a random quote and adding mysterious weighting has always seemed odd to me. On top of that, I think it’s healthy to see outliers around any average score, be they above or below it.
Coincidentally, it always seems like fans of the property that know what it should be given, too!
wheredoyouthinkweare.gif
I agree, especially if people make it clear where they are coming from- perspectives from someone new to the genre can often flag up tired genre tropes and confusing conventions rooted in history and unquestioned through decades of incremental improvement by those used to them. It’s like, I love MonHun, but a review from someone who is new to it isn’t much use to me but might be extremely useful to a new player wondering if it’s going to be their next big thing or if they are gonna bounce off it. The thing is, this is vital context almost always listed at the start of a review, but people who only look at scores and aggregates miss it. Reviewers write reviews for their readers, not meta/opencritic’s or even Fami’s.
Pretty much sums up how I feel as well.
That thread is going on mute the second it pops up. Should probably mute this thread too with how the last few pages have gone tbh.
This is a lot of text to simply say "other opinions are fine, unless they go against the crowd. I don't like that."
Can't wait for the inevitable meltdown over a 6/10 review
Tears of the Kingdom indeed.
If a 95 metacritic score for metroid brought so much outrage with a 7.5 review imagine what'll happen when tears of the kingdom get's a metascore of 89.
I think even 93 or 94 would do the trick. "No way this game deserves the same score as Skyward Sword". I can see it, in this world we won't walk towards the future hand in hand.
Every high profile games review thread is exciting
They still are, I think!
This is my view on the matter. I generally like what they do because they’re one of the few to actually do it, but I wouldn't let that affect the score. All reviewers should should follow their example and discuss the more problematic matters bluntly.
I think we have the Tears of the Kingdom review thread title.
Nice. Haven’t followed the channel in a while, but that’s cool.
Literally what would be the point of reviews if everyone would just give it a random number based on no criteria. Y'all underplay how these review metrics affect industries. RT score affect opening and legs of a movie and MC affects sales for games. People can give wathever they want as a review, but people can also point them out on how their reviews are awful.
The pages are because of posts like this, not because of the review itself. Enough of this, one (1) singular different opinion does not constitute this consistent torrent of doomposting. The industry will be fine if a game scores 1 internet average point lower than before.
If no one is getting valid criticism for how awful their work is, then what's the point of public opinion.
Personally, public opinion in general can kick rocks.
The point is that there is disagreement here as to whether their work is “awful.”
That's ridiculous. You might as well ask "What is the point of all of these 9/10 and 10/10 reviews that are nothing but glowing and reverent for a twenty year old game with fresh paint?"
Studying in psychology and i honestly don't get how an ADHD diagnosis would give you a different perspective on a game. If you are not getting the help your body needs to balance it out, then it's unfortunate but how is this suppose to transcribe in a review ?
Thing is, as others have pointed out, they are always in that lower tier for every game. I don't care about Sonic Frontiers at all, but like what's the point. There is clearly a pattern here. I'm also not even a prime fan. I just always felt their reviews were dishonest and that's a shame when you're literally publicly reviewing games. Y'all need to step out of your bubble and think how these score affect the industry and someone's work. Working years on something for someone to write this half assed review and grade low scores left and right for clicks with arguments that come out of nowhere, it's a shame. But yeah let's defend them i guess ?
That's fair. Those Nintendo/PS/Xbox fan sites sometimes give bloated reviews to their favorite games. But one is blind passion and the other is sabotage for clicks.
Again, idc about the actual score nor am i a prime fan. No one talked about punishment. Professionalism is not something their site represents and at some point, if you have influence, you should take your work seriously.
It slipped in 2 places, corrected myself and clearly wasn't my intention.
