Yeah, See, This Is Why You Can't Really Trust User Reviews
For the record, here at PSXE, we get a lot of really great user reviews. That says a lot about the community and at the same time, it proves that plenty of gamers are fully capable of providing their peers with accurate, informed breakdowns.
But for the most part, in general, I would not recommend taking user reviews as gospel. And I certainly wouldn't recommend taking their word over the word of professional critics. That may sound elitist but in reality, it's just a fact. There is a certain level of knowledge and expertise required, regardless of what gamers want to believe, and I address that to some extent in this forum topic, if you're interested.
Anybody can write a review of anything. Just because I can review games doesn't mean I can review music (at least, not nearly as well). I wouldn't expect anyone with a brain to take my opinion on a new album over the opinion of a Rolling Stone veteran. And sadly, when it comes to this industry, when there appear to be more immature individuals than ever before, it's almost never a good idea to trust random user reviews. Take the user review score at Metacritic for the recently released Call of Duty: Black Ops II: The average score is a 4.0. I mean...come on.
I'm fairly certain the game is better than a 4. The critic average sits at about an 8.5, which seems about right. But when you leave it up to individuals who clearly have only one goal - and that goal has nothing to do with assisting consumers - and that goal is essentially the mindset of a 5-year-old, the results are less than reliable. And that's putting it mildly. Some people out there can write great reviews but you know what? It's quite clearly a very tiny minority, as it is with just about anything else. I'm sure you think you can write a review every bit as good as one Roger Ebert pens, but FYI...you probably can't.
Tags: metacritic, user reviews, call of duty black ops ii, black ops, bo2 user reviews
11/14/2012 11:48:29 AM Ben Dutka
Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter
Comments (23 posts)
dillonthebunny
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 @ 12:43:59 PM
Reply
personally I feel if Metacritic took it away my life would not be impacted what so ever.
dillonthebunny
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 @ 12:46:21 PM
Reply
duomaxwell007
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 @ 1:17:27 PM
Reply
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 @ 5:27:06 PM
Knightzane
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 @ 2:42:56 PM
Reply
Also because i know theres smart arses on here, i realize i used a music critic as a reference but thats only because i don't look into names of game critics. The only critics name i know is ben and thats only because... well... He's ben. I think ben is the only critic i can actually respect because he does try to give a game a true score. I have also noticed tons of contradictions but they are still legit compared to every other critic. So no offense to ben, but he is the best critic and thats why i like this site so much. Oh, and the people who come here seem cool too. Well, most anyway... __________
Russell Burrows
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 @ 3:24:23 PM
Reply
xenris
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 @ 3:24:45 PM
Reply
For example look at Dragon Age 2. Everyone who loved DA1 that I know thought DA2 was a waste of time and a complete joke, myself included. But the critic review on Metacritic was and maybe still is around 8 I think?
In that case the user reviews much better represented what the game was like, and they had a less biased perhaps bought opinion. To this day I still don't know how that game got the scores it did, I mean I have an idea and it rhymes with ash honey.
As for the Black Ops 2 user score, I know most of it is trolling but I think it represents some truth as well. People are fed up with the franchise, and likewise are fed up that it seems to get free passes every year for not really trying that hard.
Call of Duty is something of an enigma, I have no idea how it gets the scores it does, year after year. Its like not ONE professional game reviewer doesn't like CoD? That seems suspicious when I know a lot of people who don't both in real life, on youtube and on message boards.
I have been playing the single player, and certain issues that people hated that were in warfighter are in BO2 but I haven't seen one reviewer bring them up they just pass over them. Maybe they are hidden better in BO2 but they are still there, things like if you try to run ahead or go where the game doesn't want you you die, enemies acting much like shooting galleries targets, waiting for your team at checkpoints where they move something or lift you up to progress the level etc.
I like BO2, much more than I thought but it is not innovative, not revolutionary and lacks some polish in certain areas. I would give it a 7 at most and remember that is a good score. Problem is no one is giving that, all the professional reviews are saying whoooaa CoD reinvented itself bla bla bla, and it didn't except for the new coat of paint. Multiplayer plays the same, and the same issues that have been there since MW1 are STILL there again no one cares.
Anyway I am interested to see what Ben gives this game.
Last edited by xenris on 11/14/2012 3:25:51 PM
bigrailer19
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 @ 10:52:17 PM
It's like the FF franchise. There's no doubt that FF13 is a good game, but it's not a FF game, so the fans are upset.
RE, Also a case of this. RE5 is a great game, RE6 is a great game, but the only thing closely resembling a RE game in either is the Leon campaign in RE6. Naturally fans are upset. Apparently with RE6 though so are the critics.
So no, the user reviews have bias, the critic reviews do not.
And for the record this happens to me all the time. Games change for the masses and I can't stand it! Socom did and it's frustrating to me!
xenris
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 @ 11:18:36 PM
If it didn't have bioware on the title I think we would have seen different scores. It reused so many assets, had a tiny world, hardly any loot, and the story was not really bioware quality in my opinion. Even on its own without DA:O to be compared to, DA2 for me was a mediocre game, and I strongly believe it only got by because of the name.
All I meant big railer was that the user reviews reflected some truth to how the game was received by fans of the series which if you sift through the troll ones you would see if you would or wouldnt like it.
ulsterscot
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 @ 5:56:34 PM
Reply
WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 @ 6:00:59 PM
Reply
Temjin001
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 @ 6:32:51 PM
Jed
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 @ 8:33:17 PM
Gamer46
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 @ 9:41:36 PM
Reply
Last edited by Gamer46 on 11/14/2012 9:43:47 PM
Coffeya
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 @ 10:30:12 PM
Reply

Call of Duty: Black Ops II









Highlander
Reply
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 @ 12:16:00 PM
Metacritic's problem is that it takes all comments, scores and reviews at face value. That's why I prefer not to look at the actual metascore from user reviews, but rather their distribution. When you see a review score distribution something like this;
5 ********* (30%)
4 ************* (40%)
3 ***** (18%)
2 ** (6%)
1 * (3%)
0 (0%)
You can be pretty sure that the game is a solid 4, or perhaps a 4.5. But when you see;
5 ****** (15%)
4 ************* (33%)
3 **** (10%)
2 ** (5%)
1 * (3%)
0 ************ (30%)
You can be certain that some gamers are deliberately trolling the user review scores, and it's pretty easy to tell that the game is still probably a solid 4/4.5 game that has attracted a few haters.
The actual distribution will vary, but any time I see a huge spike in scores of 1 or 0 that doesn't fit the rest of the distribution, I know that the low scores are unmerited.
Of course you might see something more like this;
5 (0%)
4 * (3%)
3 ** (6%)
2 ***** (18%)
1 ************* (40%)
0 ********* (30%)
That would be a fairly reliable indicator that the game is crap.
It's all about the distribution of scores.