#1 Edited by Jayge_ (10221 posts) -

I don't think I've ever seen a GB score on Metacritic before, but the good ol' idiots who decided to convert 1UP's Grade scale to numbers took it upon themselves to do the same for GB. I noticed it while looking at the Fable II page. So, time to watch average games trickle even lower, and developer's bonuses shrink even smaller, as yet another scoring method gets converted (wrongly) into numerics and unbalances the average yet again. Oh joy. Also, they're listed as giving 100 for Dead Space. wat. How unprofessional does that look o.0

#2 Posted by Demilich (2599 posts) -

Has been for a very long time sir.

#3 Posted by HandsomeDead (11863 posts) -

And therein lies the problem with Metacritic and such.

#4 Posted by Kush (8889 posts) -

They have been on metacritic for a while now...

#5 Posted by breton (1437 posts) -

Or, y'know, not attempt to convert them at all.

#6 Posted by Demilich (2599 posts) -
Tarsier said:
"They should make the 5 count for 95 and the 4 count for 85  and the 3 count for 65 and the 2 count for 45 and the 1 count for 25."
That's... Just stupid...
#7 Edited by pause422 (6190 posts) -

They've been there for a bit now, and yep..already several 3/5 games meta critic rated for them like 60s or something making them seem even shittier, so its already begun, but will only get worse. I really hate the people that just rely on metacritic and think its the end all be all of game scores and actually means shit.

#8 Posted by MB (12525 posts) -

This could be good for traffic, though...Metacritic user sees a score of 60 or 100 and says "WTF!?!?!" then clicks through to the site. It probably doesn't work like they, but hey, don't poke holes in my theories damnit.

Moderator
#9 Posted by Kush (8889 posts) -
Tarsier said:
"They should make the 5 count for 95 and the 4 count for 85  and the 3 count for 65 and the 2 count for 45 and the 1 count for 25."
That makes absolutely no sense.
#10 Posted by MB (12525 posts) -
Kush said:
"Tarsier said:
"They should make the 5 count for 95 and the 4 count for 85  and the 3 count for 65 and the 2 count for 45 and the 1 count for 25."
That makes absolutely no sense."
Agreed, everyone knows that the 5 should count for 94.3 and the 4 should be 87.6.  Duh.
Moderator
#11 Posted by Kush (8889 posts) -
MB said:
"Agreed, everyone knows that the 5 should count for 94.3 and the 4 should be 87.6.  Duh."
I was actually thinking that the 5 should stand for 94.2 and the 4 should stand for 87.7, but I could be talking out of my ass on that one.
#12 Posted by brukaoru (5079 posts) -
Demilich said:
"Has been for a very long time sir."
Yep.

HandsomeDead said:
"And therein lies the problem with Metacritic and such."
I think it would be better if GiantBomb wasn't listed on there. Or maybe they could list it as a "read full review" and not add it to the overall score.
#13 Posted by Milkman (16851 posts) -

Giant Bomb has been on Metacritic since before the actual site even launched.

#14 Posted by ryanwho (12082 posts) -

The good thing about converting shit it numbers that isn't meant to is 50 becomes average again. Maybe if more people do this we'll be using the full fucking scale again and idiots conjecturing the 'objective' greatness of something with a 9.7 average over the game with a 'mere' 9.3 will have to find something better to do like maybe cut their wrists. Then again, Metacritic gives 1up's A and A+ games 100s so maybe if they keep acting retarded nothing will change.

#15 Posted by MattyFTM (14395 posts) -

Metacritics rating system sucks. They even say "For those critics who do not provide a score, we'll assign a score from 0-100 based on the general impression given by the review." How the hell can they do that? Assign a score to a review that has no score!!! It's stupid, and it is why metacritic should not be trusted with anything.

Moderator Online
#16 Posted by pause422 (6190 posts) -
brukaoru said:
"Demilich said:
"Has been for a very long time sir."
Yep.

HandsomeDead said:
"And therein lies the problem with Metacritic and such."
I think it would be better if GiantBomb wasn't listed on there. Or maybe they could list it as a "read full review" and not add it to the overall score.
"
Yeah but that would make sense wouldn't it? Metacritic is retarded so, making sense definitely isn't gonna be their approach.
#17 Posted by ryanwho (12082 posts) -

I'd be more inclined simply not to trust people who give metacritic validity. I think its important that stupid people have devices out there that make it more obvious they're stupid via association so I'm glad the site's around.

#18 Posted by Demilich (2599 posts) -
ryanwho said:
"I'd be more inclined simply not to trust people who give metacritic validity. I think its important that stupid people have devices out there that make it more obvious they're stupid via association so I'm glad the site's around."

Does that mean you're even more inclined not to trust people who give individual reviews validity? Logically it does, which means you trust no one here.
#19 Posted by ryanwho (12082 posts) -
Trust no one.
#20 Posted by Kush (8889 posts) -
ryanwho said:
"Trust no one."
I don't trust you.
#21 Edited by Demilich (2599 posts) -
Kush said:
"ryanwho said:
"Trust no one."
I don't trust you."
I +1'd you because I trust that you do not trust him.

I don't trust you either.

-1'd myself.
#22 Posted by Geno (6477 posts) -

Metacritic just doesn't work because every site has a different grading scale which mean different things. It's good for getting an overall idea of scores, but not as some objective standard. It's probably better just to pick 2-3 review sites that you respect and trust, and just use them.

#23 Posted by ryanwho (12082 posts) -

I've been backstabbed I can't believe it. But I can, cus I don't trust you, but I shouldn't believe it cus I also don't trust myself not trusting you.

#24 Posted by breton (1437 posts) -

I don't like this thread.

#25 Posted by RHCPfan24 (8609 posts) -

It has been there for awhile and there scores shouldn't be there considering they rate with stars.
 breton said:

"I don't like this thread."
Me neither.
#26 Posted by OmegaPirate (5522 posts) -
Careful guys we are awfully close to dividing by 0 here
#27 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -

I wish someone would take Metacritic up by the collar, give it a giant wedgie, and kick it into a bed of venomous snakes.

#28 Posted by Cogito (174 posts) -
Kush said:
"MB said:
"Agreed, everyone knows that the 5 should count for 94.3 and the 4 should be 87.6.  Duh."
I was actually thinking that the 5 should stand for 94.2 and the 4 should stand for 87.7, but I could be talking out of my ass on that one."
Actually I think all 5 scores should stand for 3.1415926 , you know, because any site that doesn't grade with that number is stupid   *sarcasm*.
#29 Posted by Vaxadrin (2297 posts) -

So you're whining about Metacritic, but wouldn't you have had to be browsing Metacritic in the first place to see that?

#30 Posted by Hamz (6846 posts) -
OmegaPirate said:
"Careful guys we are awfully close to dividing by 0 here"
Oh shi....lets not do that, please god lets not do that at all.

I honestly don't know what to think about the way MetaCritic has dealt with the conversation of 5 stars to points. I suppose 5 stars does mean a score of 100 when you think about it as 5 stars is the highest possible score a game can get on GiantBomb...

But in all honesty i rarely notice or use metacritic scores.
#31 Posted by Vaxadrin (2297 posts) -

None of it adds up because a 7/10 on IGN might be an 8/10 somewhere else which might be 3/5 stars here which might be a 5/10 somewhere that uses an actual 1-10 scale.

Essentially what I'm getting at is fuck people who care about review scores.  Go cry in the Fable 2 review comments section.

#32 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
Vaxadrin said:
"None of it adds up because a 7/10 on IGN might be an 8/10 somewhere else which might be 3/5 stars here which might be a 5/10 somewhere that uses an actual 1-10 scale.

Essentially what I'm getting at is fuck people who care about review scores.  Go cry in the Fable 2 review comments section."

Jayge isn't whining about review scores, he is pissed about them. Metacritic innacurately translates numbers and he's angry that developers are penalized for poor ratings on Metacritic. I agree.
#33 Posted by Vaxadrin (2297 posts) -

It's not "inaccurate", it's math.  Blame the developer & publishers who place importance in Metacritic.

#34 Posted by BiggerBomb (6944 posts) -
Vaxadrin said:
"It's not "inaccurate", it's math.  Blame the developer & publishers who place importance in Metacritic."

Oooooh, I spelt something wrong after a 6 hour day of school. Oh geez...
#35 Posted by ryanwho (12082 posts) -
Vaxadrin said:
"It's not "inaccurate", it's math.  Blame the developer & publishers who place importance in Metacritic."
Its inaccurate and its math. And. Inaccurate math is useless, and even accurate math applied to represent something wholly interpretive is asinine and backwards enough as it is without being inaccurate about what its recording to begin with. (See again, A and A+ equaling the same score).
However, considering how shitty most game sites are in the way of navigation, if you're looking for links directly to specific reviews metacritic is useful in that one way.
#36 Posted by Vaxadrin (2297 posts) -

Well, 100 point review scales are asinine and backwards.

#37 Posted by Dalai (7034 posts) -

Review scores are great and all... but maybe people should actually read the reviews before getting their panties in a twist.

#38 Posted by Systech (4078 posts) -

They have actually been on there for a while now, but it's cool though.

#39 Posted by Jayge_ (10221 posts) -
BiggerBomb said:
"Vaxadrin said:
"None of it adds up because a 7/10 on IGN might be an 8/10 somewhere else which might be 3/5 stars here which might be a 5/10 somewhere that uses an actual 1-10 scale.

Essentially what I'm getting at is fuck people who care about review scores.  Go cry in the Fable 2 review comments section."

Jayge isn't whining about review scores, he is pissed about them. Metacritic innacurately translates numbers and he's angry that developers are penalized for poor ratings on Metacritic. I agree."
This. I do think that developers and publishers grading bonuses and shit on the Metacritic average is stupid; it gives it a huge weight that it doesn't deserve. I personally browse it just to see an aggregate of most reviews to peruse over; but the fact that Cnet (obviously aware of their daughter site's importance) fucks with shit like 1UP or GB's scale like that is a dick move.
#40 Posted by clarke0 (1077 posts) -

I hate Metacritic and I actually started a thread about this issue a long time ago. The star system DOES NOT fit into a 100 point scale... and the 100 point scale is useless now anyway. You know, since anything below 8.0 is "crap".

#41 Posted by Verdugo (2001 posts) -
OmegaPirate said:
"Careful guys we are awfully close to dividing by 0 here"

What other impossible things can we accomplish with this thread?
#42 Posted by Jordan23 (1000 posts) -

GiantBomb is the shit!

Pretty soon, Jeff and Ryan will buy themselves Ferrari's cruising throughout California.