Movies do the same with advertising it has a certified fresh rotten tomatoes score
First post nailed it, again.Can't wait for Studios closures due to not getting the Metacritic "Must Play" bonus.
Yes, this travesty. Just look at all that trash in listed in the OP. Clearly metacritic is an awful metric by which to judge games.
Spiderman, horizon, and a ton of other games are in the trash then.
Bonuses being withheld if one potential troll review gives a or 3 or 4 and holds a score from 90 is shitty.When people get so invested in a MetaCritic score they go on dozens of pages arguing about whether a game should be 89 or a 90, when developer's bonuses are withheld because they were 2 points away from a 90 (on a 100-point scale, which means they missed the mark by 2%), when posters use the MC score to prove a point, yes it is trash and awful.
Because the dev team can't control sales very well, but they have more control (albeit not absolute, particularly if it's an experimental or divisive concept) over the quality of the game, which MC scores usually roughly represent. You have exceptions like the Wonderful 101, but it's generally a decent metric of quality.First post nailed it, again.
I can't believe there's still cash bonus on MC/GMRK score. They should check sales, not scores.
Put all the bagdes you want, just use another term. Even RT avoids expressions so derogatory for those not getting any recognition.
And the two yellow reviews both complained the game was "too difficult" as reasons to take the metacritic down. Unbelievable
this happens already with score requirements for bonusesCan't wait for Studios closures due to not getting the Metacritic "Must Play" bonus.
As one of the biggest gaming websites turns away from scores to join other publications, Metacritic doubles down on EXACTLY why scores are bad.
When people get so invested in a MetaCritic score they go on dozens of pages arguing about whether a game should be 89 or a 90, when developer's bonuses are withheld because they were 2 points away from a 90 (on a 100-point scale, which means they missed the mark by 2%), when posters use the MC score to prove a point, yes it is trash and awful.
Yep.Seems flawed when the Xbox version of Nier: Automata is a Must-Play, but the PS4 version isn't.
PC versions of both Celeste and INSIDE aren't Must-Plays, however the console versions are... I could go on.
lol Metacritic can go fuck itself.
This will just fuck over more studios, like what happened with Fallout: New Vegas
There's an argument for both. If everything is just based on sales, then we could see fewer experimental games with everyone just chasing the mainstream.First post nailed it, again.
I can't believe there's still cash bonus on MC/GMRK score. They should check sales, not scores.
Thank god for opencritic cutting through the bullshit and giving us the real scores oh wait they're virtually indistinguishable from MC scores.Metacritic is horrible. They selectively weigh certain publications higher than others, and omit respectable reviews for the sake of it.
Their scores are manufactured...and even the scores themselves are nebulous and vary for each reviewer.
I really wish they would get rid of score aggregates and focus exclusively on aggregating links to reviews. They're actively hostile to the game industry and tactics like employing a hard cutoff of 90+ only make it worse.
Nope, if consumers didn't lived or died by it then none of this would've happened.
Look no further than all the review thread people are making over here or the importance Rotten Tomatoes is given.
Thankfully more website are getting rid of scores which is pretty great.
dude. nailed itCan't wait for Studios closures due to not getting the Metacritic "Must Play" bonus.