Why do metacritic users rate games so low?

What happened to the lounge?

Major game websites' ratings are being too lenient?

Entitled brats,trolls,and haters...

MC is generally a very bad place to use if you want to determine a game's quality,and personally,I consider it worthless...

Most users just use extremes,either a 0,or a 10...

People purposefully trying to lower the aggregate score.

Trolls/Entitled gamers/Some just plain don't like the games.tagyhag

you forgot fanboys :P

because people tend to rate the games they like with a 10 and a 0 if they didn't. Then when the site's algorithm outputs the average the score ends up really low.

Example:

You give a 0 to a game because you didn't like it and bam!, you just broke the system. Nothing wrong with the 0 but after 3 consecutive 10's there's a really low probability that you hated the game so much that you couldn't even give it a 1 or 2. But then again, you could say the same about the multiple 10's. Was it an honest 10 or just fanboyism?

(10+10+10+0)/4 = 7.5/10

You didn't like the game and you gave it a 4, which is really low by gaming standards but the rating system still gives a relevant number close to the real quality of the game if those 3 10's were honest. And by honest I mean that you really believe the game's worth a 10.

(10+10+10+4)/4 = 8.5/10

For the rating system to work people need to be honest and use the scale of 10 instead of just 0's and 10's but the game industry has way too many fanboys compared to any other industry and when we have idiots like LoosingEnds that have access to a computer then expect the worst.

Outbreaks of MASS butthurt (see: Dragon Age 2)

Because they are mentally disabled fanboys

Hipsters, fanboys, idiots, trolls, whatever you want to call them. It's a shame the internet is so full of what I just posted. It's like you can't look up anything and expect many serious answers.

Hyperboles. I've noticed that, in general, if someone likes something it's a 9 or a 10 but if he dislikes it it's a 2.

question. WHY DO PEOPLE CARE ?

if you like a game it shouldnt bother you what other people say. and if you are trying to decide if a game is good look at un biased gameplay with no or little commentary to make a decision. an arbitrary number should not mean crap to you.

People have ridiculously high standards.

What other people in this thread said.

That's why user reviews=lol

Because their checks from the publishers got lost in the mail.

Ummm they don't?

Jellousy & fanboyism.

I use user reviews here on GS a lot to make decisions about what games I want to buy.

Agree/disagree systems make it a lot easier to know what a solid review is. Which MC does have.

See a review that's biased and hypocritical? Rate it down and vis versa.

Trolls, haters and fanboys/girls

Hell when I hate a game I'll probably give it a 7.0 which in my book is terrible :p

Imagine offering a cow who never played gears of war a free little spot to score gears of war... now cut and paste this idea with lemmings and sheep and hermits on different exclusives... gamers want respect and legitimacy in our hobby yet isnt it funny we don't do a damn thing to earn it?TheEroica

User reviews don't only reflect the people's thought on "the game" but also the context in which the game is released e.g. excessive DRM, shady business moves, controversies.

It's ironic that you say that considering a person who actually cares about games would say the exact opposite regarding respect and legitimacy.

[QUOTE="TheEroica"]Imagine offering a cow who never played gears of war a free little spot to score gears of war... now cut and paste this idea with lemmings and sheep and hermits on different exclusives... gamers want respect and legitimacy in our hobby yet isnt it funny we don't do a damn thing to earn it?N30F3N1X

User reviews don't only reflect the people's thought on "the game" but also the context in which the game is released e.g. excessive DRM, shady business moves, controversies.

It's ironic that you say that considering a person who actually cares about games would say the exact opposite regarding respect and legitimacy.

Major game websites' ratings are being too lenient?

ghostofzabis

Whoa whoa whoa... a user review is fine... especially ones that are well written with clear analysis of the game... but i wasnt talking about a review. Im talking about the idiot troll who gives a fantastic game a score of 1.0 because its not on their system or just for the "lulz" or whatever... in that sense yes, im exactly right about not garnering respect when youre not taking the medium serious.TheEroica

The change in score of one person who's trolling is insignificant when you put in a pool where there are thousands of people voting. Talk of respect and legitimacy is nitpicking nonsense in this case.

AC2Diablo 3MW2DA2

These games got such low user scores because they all did something really bad. This is the respect and legitimacy you should be talking about.

[QUOTE="TheEroica"]Whoa whoa whoa... a user review is fine... especially ones that are well written with clear analysis of the game... but i wasnt talking about a review. Im talking about the idiot troll who gives a fantastic game a score of 1.0 because its not on their system or just for the "lulz" or whatever... in that sense yes, im exactly right about not garnering respect when youre not taking the medium serious.N30F3N1X

The change in score of one person who's trolling is insignificant when you put in a pool where there are thousands of people voting. Talk of respect and legitimacy is nitpicking nonsense in this case.

AC2Diablo 3MW2DA2

These games got such low user scores because they all did something really bad. This is the respect and legitimacy you should be talking about.

The change in score of one person who's trolling is insignificant when you put in a pool where there are thousands of people voting. Talk of respect and legitimacy is nitpicking nonsense in this case.

AC2Diablo 3MW2DA2

These games got such low user scores because they all did something really bad. This is the respect and legitimacy you should be talking about.

N30F3N1X

[QUOTE="TheEroica"]Imagine offering a cow who never played gears of war a free little spot to score gears of war... now cut and paste this idea with lemmings and sheep and hermits on different exclusives... gamers want respect and legitimacy in our hobby yet isnt it funny we don't do a damn thing to earn it?N30F3N1X

User reviews don't only reflect the people's thought on "the game" but also the context in which the game is released e.g. excessive DRM, shady business moves, controversies.

It's ironic that you say that considering a person who actually cares about games would say the exact opposite regarding respect and legitimacy.

Because gamers are mad all of the time. They scream and cry like babies because it's never good enough for them.

That's called being entitled.parkurtommo

It's their game so they can do what they want with it, huh?

The relation between companies and consumers doesn't end with the purchase of a game. Companies have as much right to do whatever the **** they want with their games as much as people have the right to say whatever they want about those games.

Saying "that's being entitled" is a double standard.

Yeah, as a victim of being constantly kicked out due to DRM, it was a pretty painful experience. However, objectively, those games are no where near getting 0-2 scores; those scores should be given to games that completely unplayable and are bad in every aspect (gameplay, design, sound, story).rjdofu

As I said before, user scores don't only talk about the game, but about the context of the game aswell.

A low score is a strong statement of disapproval. It's less useless than trying to talk to developers themselves, at least.

Giving Portal 2 a 0 because of the "shop" and "turn off your console" is not legitimate. It's petty.PannicAtack

Yes, it is. That's why Portal 2 still keeps a solid user score aswell. The games I mentioned before, however, don't.

Always online DRM for AC2, RMAH for Diablo 3, no dedicated servers for MW2, full change in direction from the first game in DA2, and how could I forget to mention, there's also the travesty that ME3's ending was and the whole controversy it spawned. These are all major middle fingers to gamers, not just petty squabbles.

Why do professional review sites rate games so high?

[QUOTE="rjdofu"]Yeah, as a victim of being constantly kicked out due to DRM, it was a pretty painful experience. However, objectively, those games are no where near getting 0-2 scores; those scores should be given to games that completely unplayable and are bad in every aspect (gameplay, design, sound, story).N30F3N1X

As I said before, user scores don't only talk about the game, but about the context of the game aswell.

A low score is a strong statement of disapproval. It's less useless than trying to talk to developers themselves, at least.

Why do you care?

It's just other peoples opinions, does it affect yours in anyway at all? No. So just ignore it?

But to answer your question, a lot of people on there are trolls or fanboys who rate down the games of the cometitive system. Usually it's PS3 because all people that don't have a PS3 want a PS3, but they can't so they have to make rate it's games lower to try and convince themselves they are happy with their system, but alas they are not.

Others are just people with really picky taste in games, kind of like Edge magazine. Pretty bias and they rate games very low.

Because gamers are mad all of the time. They scream and cry like babies because it's never good enough for them.

Wasdie

They're often trolls or angry fanboys trying to knock down the game's average.

Why do you take a review site's opinion seriously when they give Diablo 3 a 9.0, but you disregard a metacritic user as a troll when he or she gives it a 6?

Why do you care?

It's just other peoples opinions, does it affect yours in anyway at all? No. So just ignore it?

But to answer your question, a lot of people on there are trolls or fanboys who rate down the games of the cometitive system. Usually it's PS3 because all people that don't have a PS3 want a PS3, but they can't so they have to make rate it's games lower to try and convince themselves they are happy with their system, but alas they are not.

Others are just people with really picky taste in games, kind of like Edge magazine. Pretty bias and they rate games very low.

ShadowMoses900

hmm

Trolls/Entitled gamers/Some just plain don't like the games.tagyhag

Critics are expected to have a degree of objectivity. They are paid employees and need to come out with professional reviews. Users can post negative reviews on games they haven't even played. A dissapointed fanboy can give a game a 3/10... despite the fact that it's clearly not as terrible as that score would imply.Meinhard_X

But couldn't you conversely say that paid reviewers are held to obligations based on pleasing both their readers and the people who pay them, which in turn often leads them to giving inflated scores to games which are clearly not as good as the score would imply?

It's best to skip the average score and see what people are saying and, critically, how many people agree with those comments. If a lot of people agree with a review that says a game is 6.0 and virtually no one agrees with the 1.0, it's reasonable to say that the 6.0 is a fairer picture of the game's quality than the 1.0.

People slapping 10s, 1s and 0s on games can lack the maturity to make an informed decision beyond OMG this ROXXORZ/SUXXORZ (delete as appropriate).

Metacritic requires the viewer to actually filter and analyse the data for it to be of any use.