Gamers I ask you this, how important Metascores are to you? Is it a big deal or it isn't?

As the topic title says it all, I don't really take Metascores as seriously as I do just the games I follow during it's developments. Scores aren't very useful because they often distract from the content of the review. Metascore is thoroughly useless because there is no review content. I have played games like Quantum Break a Remedy Game got 77 Metascore which is low to some gamers but for me, I actually had fun playing the game then the score is letting on. Higher scores like Dragon Age: Inquisition sitting at 89 metascore, I didn't even like the game and I never finish it thus seeing Metas aren't set in stone for me personally.

I've never once checked a Metascore, mainly some gamers love to brag about them. The score doesn't tell me about the gameplay, it doesn't tell me about the graphics, it doesn't tell if the story is any good, it doesn't tell me if there are game breaking glitches. But seriously, anybody that let's the metascore affect their enjoyment of video games probably doesn't enjoy them as much as they think.

So gamers, how important is it for you?

I don't even follow games developpement. I'm often surprise this or that game is out because I've never heard of it and like it like that.

The only time I may listen to metacritic is if the game as really really abysmal score from everywhere.

It has some level of importance to me because when a game has near universal praise with a very high meta score then it signifies that the game is of pretty high quality. It may not always be a game that appeals to me but I can recognize the quality at least. The opposite is true as well. A very low scoring game signifies that a game has some problems but it won't automatically mean that I necessarily won't find some kind of enjoyment from it. The real issue is that people have a skewed view of what actually constitutes a bad score for a game because having a 70+ score isn't bad.

Zero importance.

Mostly cause what Score a game has, doesn't determine wether I will enjoy it or not. Therefor for me there is little point of it.

No, before getting a game, I read and watch reviews, videos to decide if it looks fun to me. For instance, The Order 1886 got a metascore of 63%, I'm sure a lot of gamers would steer clear of it but I think it looks like a good game with interesting setting and story. It's very short but the length of a game is not very important to me, especially when its price now drops significantly.

On the flip side, heavy hitters like Skyrim just don't interest me although it got a ton of GOTY awards and a 92% on matacritic.

No, the score be it one or a large number is just their opinion. When I look at a game review, I look at the rest of the reviews which is more important.

They're pretty important I guess. I don't play games under 60 with some exceptions.

They're important to me unless the game I'm looking at is a sequel to a franchise I love. I don't have time to play games that much so I would like my purchases to mean something. I'm lucky if I can beat 4 games a year.

Scores and reviewsee from actual players are of the greatest importance to me. A well written player review is of much greater importance than any score. I don't just want to know that you liked a game or not, I want to know why.

I like looking at them at a glance. Sometimes it can affect how much I look forward to playing a game. But of course a high rated game doesn't mean I'll like it, but I know my tastes well enough to ignore a game that may even get universally appraised because I know it's not my genre. I hardly ever take the time to actually read reviews. I just like the numbers and I'll take it into small consideration when playing a game. Rarely will it actually impact my decision to play a game. For instance, I'm still going to play Andromeda even though its scores are far below what I would expect of a Mass Effect game. At the same time my expectations are also lower.

not important, it's just an indicator of where things are leaning. Individual scores, specific scores of places that line up with my own opinions well, and things like that, are more important.

I don't really believe it does anymore. Just look at Pokemon Go.

it doesn't mean anything. Metal Gear solid V has 90+ metacritic score but The Evil Within is a much better game despite being a 68 .some publishers buy reviewers to boost their sales and most of reviewers don't dare to give some games lesser score than 9.(games like Zelda,GTA and Metal Gear Solid)

The score no but what a honest reviewer writes about the game, yes. But that still won't effect my final judgement in most cases. I still bought Mass Effect Andromeda despite the bad scores.

Zero importance outside of making people feel bad in System Wars.

Not really. It's just a collection of opinions which usually doesn't fit into my personal opinion. I love a lot of games that have a medicore rating and I though several of the high rated games are boring.

Yeah that's how I also see it as well, 70+ isn't bad and it doesn't tell the whole story ether unless you play it first hand.

Ain't that the truth lol.

Same here, I'm really enjoying myself with Andromeda and no regrets on my purchase.

Yes and no, if I like the game I hope its done well because I want the series or franchise to continue on with more games in the future but I do not rely on the scores. Using Call of Duty as an example, they've been shoving space/futuristic warfare at us for the past three years in some way and now are noticing declining sales and being forced to change. The worst part about is that gamers can be swayed by reviews. I enjoyed Alpha Protocol very much and while it lacked polish, it was a solid game that could've been expanded upon and improved but the reviews killed it in the water.

Well it depends on a lot of factors.

Take the new Mass Effect for example, its gotten a mixed critical reception with average reveiws from the majority of critics, something like 5-7. Now that signals a mediocre to good game but far from essential or great. As a long standing fan of the series, I will still buy it but only after a price drop and after I'm done with my back catalogue of games. thus, I'm not too bothered about what the reviews say in this instance.

However, if I'm not a fan of a series or if I have never played it before, I do look to reviews for some guidance and they can provide that at times, especially those away from mainstream game sites where you can actually learn about the mechanics of the game and the controls and the technicality of it etc etc instead of this IGN/GS bs of how the game makes you feel. GTFOH with that crap. Although GS has been improving in recent months.

I will say that if theres a big new IP, regardless of reviews, I like to try them out and normally end up buying them when they haveb ig price cuts.

Somewhat important? The scores can be a deciding factor whether I get a game or not. Albeit there are alot of games that score very well I still wouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole.

@davillain-: I usually look at what's being stated than the score itself. If I see a 7 or under I expect a neutral criticism on the game, or a few to mention. And if that, I will look into the game further and decide for myself how much that/those negatives reflects my enjoyment of a game.

And same with the overly positives, though I've noticed games get reviewed (like Uncharted 3) and they do not mention the actual flaws with the game. Which to me terrible is writing, and a un-insightful perspective on the product.

I understand some games have an annoyingly loyal fanbase behind them, and some of them are in the media making these bad reviews. But if someone is reviewing a game, I want the flaws mentioned to me. Not sugar coated over.

But it has come to the point that Metacritic is sometimes the best way to do some research, on potential purchases when it comes to games. Just take the scores with a grain of salt and focus on what's being stated. The number is a very narrow guideline, and sometimes used to push hype or to be clickbait.

@davillain-:

Yeah, I'm really enjoying it myself, but I will say that some of the flaws that where pointed out by reviews are there, but it didn't ruin my overall experience.

The Evil Within got very mixed reviews, some gave it an 8/10, some gave it much lower. This is heavily due to the difficulty of the game, and with some of the reviews I read on Metacritic it's very apparent they didn't get far in the game.

To me The Evil Within is more enjoyable than Metal Gear Solid V, however it lacked the polish, and technical fluidity of a Metal Gear Solid game. It is also a new IP versus long-running-series-hype-train.

TEW is rumored to have a sequel in the works, so let's hope more give TEW the credit it deserves, certainly one of my favorites of recent years. But TEW did have a few rough-edges and I'm ok with that because what it did right was amazing.

If I'm interested in a particular game then I follow it's development to determine if I'll like the game or not I could care less about Metacritic score.

Metacritic scores are as important to me as Rotten Tomatoes; not even in my top 5 million things list.

I don't care. Not even slightly. I don't use the site.

@davillain-: I like the idea of metacritic but not the execution. I think having a large sample of opinions in one place is a good idea, but I also think that the weight of the written review itself holds more value than the score tied to it. I would like something like the review roundups they do here but with some extra analysis included that compared the opinions of the reviews. Think of it as a review of the reviews. It would be interesting to see where different reviewers agree or disagree. I think it would provide a better understanding of the pro's and con's for the reader who is interested in purchasing the game.

I like reading the reviews, see what others are thinking about a game. But will it deter or influence me on whether or not I shall get a game?? No.

Reviews can help me get over the fence though, if I find out a game has features I want.

I only buy games I know I'm going to like based on franchise, developer, previews, etc. so Metascores or any other review scores for that matter don't influence my decision.

Only the colour of the score for the game is really important for me, because it determines whether a game is getting positive, mixed or negative reviews in general. I don't really care that much of the score.

Critic reviews don't influence me too much but i will take notice of the user reviews.

Its the reason i haven't picked up ME:ANDROMEDA yet because its getting slaughtered by most of the user reviews