Gamerrankings and Metacritic.

Its been on my mind for a while know especialy over the past several months, but im feeling more and more confused as to why they are considered UBER precise accurate definitions of a games worth. Most sites magizines are considered and labeled as ''bias'' or ''Unreliable'' but yet they are used to by those exact sites that average out the scores... now im no mathmatition but wouldn't a certain amount of ''bias'' reviews make the overall score about as accurate and as reliable as a paper based tire compound.I really am finding it hard to believe that these sites are even considered when it comes to system wars arguements as a way of owning another group of fanboys, I've tried and tried but now im tired of the whole concept of averaging scores using reviews; its really pointless.Remember ''one rotten apple spoils the bunch!''Gamerrankings and Metacritic.
*Bump*Surely there must be someone interested enough to impose some imput into the topic :Gamerrankings and Metacritic.
|wow, never thought of it that way...but fanboys will be fanboys
I think those sites will give you a rough idea if a game is OK but in my mind a lot of these games are highly overrated on average and they don't reach very far into the past. I think it only goes back about 10 years or so.
Simply put, it's the closest thing you'll get to accuracy. The scores may be off a little from ''bad apples,'' but for the most part, they are pretty close to what they deserve.
[QUOTE=''DeathScape666'']Simply put, it's the closest thing you'll get to accuracy. The scores may be off a little from ''bad apples,'' but for the most part, they are pretty close to what they deserve.[/QUOTE] I dont know... Im a perfectionist that suffers from ADD so that could be the reason why I find the whole idea of using math to average out opinions disturbingly annoying, precision + opinionated results = garbage; but hey thats just me.
I'd say that they're pretty accurate. I've alwaysed used Gamespot, IGN and metacritic to give me an idea of how good a game is.On a side note: Metacrtic is a horrid source of movie scores. It ranks everything extremly low. IMDB or Rottentomatoes are much better.
You should show us some examples of Gameranking's average score that you disagree with.
[QUOTE=''JiveT''] You should show us some examples of Gameranking's average score that you disagree with.[/QUOTE] You dont seem to understand... averaging out the scores is going to roughly give you a mid way point of all the reviews, but its the reviews them selves that are faulty therefore the site and score isnt not wrong its this whole idea of it being notified by being the best way of defieing a games ''actual'' score but when that score was created with damaged data from incorrect sources.Know I know some may say what sources but hey they are the ones that seem to thing that gamespot has and still is credible or magazines named by certain platforms.
GR is awesome its the most accurate site IMO



20opinions>>>1opinion
[QUOTE=''sadikovic''][QUOTE=''JiveT''] You should show us some examples of Gameranking's average score that you disagree with.[/QUOTE] You dont seem to understand... averaging out the scores is going to roughly give you a mid way point of all the reviews, but its the reviews them selves that are faulty therefore the site and score isnt not wrong its this whole idea of it being notified by being the best way of defieing a games ''actual'' score but when that score was created with damaged data from incorrect sources.Know I know some may say what sources but hey they are the ones that seem to thing that gamespot has and still is credible or magazines named by certain platforms. [/QUOTE] If you can't point out any specific examples then you have nothing to support your argument. Do you understand that?
[QUOTE=''JiveT''][QUOTE=''sadikovic''][QUOTE=''JiveT''] You should show us some examples of Gameranking's average score that you disagree with.[/QUOTE] You dont seem to understand... averaging out the scores is going to roughly give you a mid way point of all the reviews, but its the reviews them selves that are faulty therefore the site and score isnt not wrong its this whole idea of it being notified by being the best way of defieing a games ''actual'' score but when that score was created with damaged data from incorrect sources.Know I know some may say what sources but hey they are the ones that seem to thing that gamespot has and still is credible or magazines named by certain platforms. [/QUOTE] If you can't point out any specific examples then you have nothing to support your argument. Do you understand that?[/QUOTE] Oh lord...
Your argument is the old ''a cup of sewage in a barrel of wine is a barrel of sewage'' thing but it doesn't work that way in this case. You don't name the incorrect sources. No one says it is ''uber precise'' they just say it gathers multiple opinions then averages them. Come back when you pull a credible argument together.
[QUOTE=''JiveT''] Your argument is the old ''a cup of sewage in a barrel of wine is a barrel of sewage'' thing but it doesn't work that way in this case. You don't name the incorrect sources. No one says it is ''uber precise'' they just say it gathers multiple opinions then averages them. Come back when you pull a credible argument together.[/QUOTE] Goodluck.
I guess you are trying to speak with pictures (red x) I can't even see them when I cut and paste the link into a browser window. Still...it is less painful than trying to decipher your writing. ''its this whole idea of it being notified by being the best way of defieing a games ''actual'' score'':?
There are plenty of arguments against using GR: outliers greatly affecting scores, discrepancies in the number of reviews cited, t use of ''biased'' sites (PSM, OXM, religious sites opposed to violence, etc) and how they are only cited for certain high-profile games.Of course, this is SW, and valid arguments fall on the deaf ears of those screaming ''but GS is teh biased!'' I'm not saying I'm right, but I've only once had a discussion about these issues, and with just one GS user. Yet the superiority of GR seems to be one of those crazy SW ''facts''.
What I don't like is that people just look at the average aggregated score.... and that's it. Fanboys and publishers just can't be bothered to take the time to read the reasons behind the scores. It provides no motivation to go out and actually read the reviews that people spend time and effort to put together.That's why I like the letter grade or the pass/rent/buy recommendations. They give a very general idea of a game, but leave alot to be discovered on your own or by... *gasp*... reading.
[QUOTE=''Vyse_The_Daring''] There are plenty of arguments against using GR: outliers greatly affecting scores, discrepancies in the number of reviews cited, the use of ''biased'' sites (PSM, OXM, and Christian gaming sites biased against violence) and how they are only cited for certain high-profile games.Of course, this is SW, and valid arguments fall on the deaf ears of those screaming ''but GS is teh biased!'' I'm not saying I'm right, but I've only once had a discussion about these issues, and with just one GS user. [/QUOTE] After the whole Gerstmangate thing and the exodus from this site I was with the whole ''forget GS scores'' but we are on their website and this is a GS forum so it makes ''sense'' to use their scores.I think GR is only way off when a game is so under the radar it's not even reviewed by the big sites or very few sites total. Going by a single source has even more arguments against it.
[QUOTE=''JiveT''][QUOTE=''Vyse_The_Daring''] There are plenty of arguments against using GR: outliers greatly affecting scores, discrepancies in the number of reviews cited, the use of ''biased'' sites (PSM, OXM, and Christian gaming sites biased against violence) and how they are only cited for certain high-profile games.Of course, this is SW, and valid arguments fall on the deaf ears of those screaming ''but GS is teh biased!'' I'm not saying I'm right, but I've only once had a discussion about these issues, and with just one GS user. [/QUOTE] After the whole Gerstmangate thing and the exodus from this site I was with the whole ''forget GS scores'' but we are on their website and this is a GS forum so it makes ''sense'' to use their scores.I think GR is only way off when a game is so under the radar it's not even reviewed by the big sites or very few sites total. Going by a single source has even more arguments against it.[/QUOTE]I was in favour a new system of scoring after ''Gerstmanngate'' that involved voting on a list of sites to be used. I don't even know what we use anymore, GR won by a landslide in that stupid poll, but everyone still seems to use Gamespot.