Originally posted by The Rolling Cheese:Metacritic is inaccurate because people users can just form raids and 0 score bomb any game. You can do this because metacritic doesn't require you to own the game before reviewing. While critic score maybe bias, user score is almost always wrong.
Originally posted by Satoru:Users are by far not very good at reviews
Originally posted by Satoru:Users are by far not very good at reviewshttp://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/empire-total-war9.0 vs 6.8?http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/assassins-creed-ii8.6 vs 5.4?http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/call-of-duty-black-ops-ii8.3 vs 4.4?http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect-38.9 vs 4.6?
Originally posted by Gus the Crocodile:I'm sure if you wanted to you could show at least that "some users are not very good at reviews" by actually quoting some of them, but simply identifying a score disparity is not a demonstration of anything, except perhaps that different people think differently.
Originally posted by Satoru:The user scores I showed are the AGGREGATE user scores for the respective game. I was also careful to choose games that high numbers of reviews thus ensuring the average score had statistical meaning. Which means that users were in aggregate scoring games 30-40% lower than the average critic score. No particular user is at fault since the score disparity is across the entire user base that submitted a review. Thus quoting any particular user isn't relevant. it's also not relevant since the OP wanted 'user metascore' not 'user A's review of the game'.
It shows that user meta scoring is highly prone to review bombing.