Do you read scores or do you read reviews?

[Clive Woofer]

This is something I've seen happening more and more in general. People discuss review scores instead of the actual reviews, because they don't seem to understand the point of a review score. I just noticed the following comment on a MyGaming article (author name withheld);

80% is my meta-critic rating I use for deciding when something if worth full price. This is not. Will wait for a sale at some point.

And sadly, that's missing the point of review scores. One game that scores 80% is not necessarily better or more fun than another game that scores 70%. That's not the point of a score. A score is an indication of how well an individual game accomplishes what it set out to accomplish, not how well it compares to other games. People seem to have a very big misconception of review scores are supposed to represent and this is made worse by sites such as Metacritic, which bastardizes the concept entirely.

Without reading the contents of a review, a score is really worthless because you have no idea what thought processes led the reviewer to give the game that score. A score on its own is actually the most useless part of a review and should not be used as a baseline for anything, least of all a decision to buy a game or not (although extremely low scores might be an exception to the rule here).

Compare it to a school essay. Someone who wrote a brilliant essay, but with glaring grammatical errors might only receive 70% for it. Someone else with a lacklustre essay, but exceptionally good grammar might receive 90% for it. Without knowing the contents of either essay, would it be fair to just read the marks and assume the one is better than the other? You would have to understand why they received those marks before you can say one is better than the other. Similarly, with reviews if you don't read the review attached to the score, the score is not an accurate indication of whether a game is better than another or not.

 

[Crzwaco]

Nope don't look at score only. Normally check out video reviews and listen and see for myself while they play the game/review.

 

[czc]

Nope, don't look at metacritic at all. RPS does nice a wot I think without listing a score. There are also youtube videos. The time of metacritic should be over. Example, Obsidian didn't get paid properly because of the Fallout New Vegas Metacritic score.

 

[brendanvb]

Depends on the game for me. If I have a game pre-ordered, I just check the scores as reviews sometimes contain unmarked spoilers which annoys the hell outta me. Once I've completed the game, I go ahead and read reviews to see if they match my opinion of the game. If it's a title I'm on the fence about, I'll read a few reviews to see if it's worth risking my money on.

 

[Mephisto_Helix]

Well, I don't buy many games but when I did, reviews and scores from 'big' sites meant nothing. Rather used feedback and assumptions from plenty of gameplay vids

 

[DarthMol]

The only useful thing about Metacritic I find is looking at the user reviews. Obviously you have to discount the blatant trolls and fanboys but you can pick up how well received the game was by the people who actually invested time in the game, the scores are irrelevant but the comments can be quite telling. For that reason I really like Steam's recommendation system, it's from real gamers like one's self and not from jaded critics who've played it all or are bribed etc.

 

[Gouko_Tenrou]

If I only focused on the review score then I would've missed out a number of great games

 

[Hiro]

i look at things holistically. I check the Metacritic Reviewer scores, as well as the USER scores. Also read reviews from the eurogamer and sometimes Destructoid and Escapist

 

[Tom]

I does depend, but i normally know before seeing any reviews or score whether or not im getting a game... If im on the fence, i will read the review, but i mostly base reading the review on the score it got...

So if something peaks my interest and i go in for a better look and it has scores of below 60% I will usually ditch the idea of getting it... And i will look at 3 or 4 scores, so that's not saying 1 guy scores it low and that's it for me, i use multiple sources... So then if it has an average of above 60% il read a few reviews and see if they persuade me...

 

[Dohc-WP]

both ! i usually never check user reviews cause most of them are douches when it comes to reviewing titles

 

[Clive Woofer]

The only useful thing about Metacritic I find is looking at the user reviews. Obviously you have to discount the blatant trolls and fanboys but you can pick up how well received the game was by the people who actually invested time in the game, the scores are irrelevant but the comments can be quite telling. For that reason I really like Steam's recommendation system, it's from real gamers like one's self and not from jaded critics who've played it all or are bribed etc.

This I definitely agree with. Even though 1s and 10s from Metacritic users are useless, an excessive amount of 1s are usually an indication that there's a bigger issue with the game that the community is unhappy with, which you can then go investigate for yourself.

 

[to0kenZA]

The scores are not always a good indication. I'd rather research the game extensively by reading reviews, watching gameplay videos and getting opinions from people that have played the game. Even better, ask opinions from my online friends that have known me for years and know which type of games I like.

I'm just really over spending money on shit games. So rather be safe than sorry .

 

[blaaislaai]

Don't let thirdparties change your view of a game. Rather judge for yourself.

 

[The Joker]

I don't bother with any reviews anymore, gaming or hardware related. Unfortunately we live in a world where publishers/developers/manufacturers just buy better reviews and scores. I usually check out YouTube game play videos before I buy a game.

 

[Clive Woofer]

Don't let thirdparties change your view of a game. Rather judge for yourself.

See, now this I don't understand. The point of third parties like reviewers is to give you an indication of whether you should buy a game or not. If we weren't supposed to put even a little stock in what reviewers or other players think, there wouldn't be a thriving review industry built on entertainment media.

I know I don't have the money to buy every single game released just to see if I'd like it or not, so therefore I make use of previews, hands-on impressions, livestreams and reviews to aid in my decision. By telling people to judge for themselves, you're essentially telling them not to make use of the vast variety of tools specifically intended to aid them in making a purchasing decision.

 

[hideinlight]

The only purpose of review scores is to check if the game is currently worth it's asking price.
70% means it's worth 70% of it's current asking price...

 

[to0kenZA]

See, now this I don't understand. The point of third parties like reviewers is to give you an indication of whether you should buy a game or not. If we weren't supposed to put even a little stock in what reviewers or other players think, there wouldn't be a thriving review industry built on entertainment media.

I know I don't have the money to buy every single game released just to see if I'd like it or not, so therefore I make use of previews, hands-on impressions, livestreams and reviews to aid in my decision. By telling people to judge for themselves, you're essentially telling them not to make use of the vast variety of tools specifically intended to aid them in making a purchasing decision.

I was just about to respond with exactly the same points.

Yes, ultimately you decide for yourself, but you just simply cannot always spend money on everything you "think" you might like. There's just too much variety and games that look like you might enjoy it, but end up being the opposite. If you do enough research from a variety of sources, and I'm not saying just one or two (I usually spend more time scrutinizing games than actually playing them, haha!) you get a much better idea about whether you would like it or not.

 

[Necuno]

I don't read or look... I watch:

This is something I've seen happening more and more in general. People discuss review scores instead of the actual reviews, because they don't seem to understand the point of a review score. I just noticed the following comment on a MyGaming article (author name withheld);



And sadly, that's missing the point of review scores. One game that scores 80% is not necessarily better or more fun than another game that scores 70%. That's not the point of a score. A score is an indication of how well an individual game accomplishes what it set out to accomplish, not how well it compares to other games. People seem to have a very big misconception of review scores are supposed to represent and this is made worse by sites such as Metacritic, which bastardizes the concept entirely.

Without reading the contents of a review, a score is really worthless because you have no idea what thought processes led the reviewer to give the game that score. A score on its own is actually the most useless part of a review and should not be used as a baseline for anything, least of all a decision to buy a game or not (although extremely low scores might be an exception to the rule here).

Compare it to a school essay. Someone who wrote a brilliant essay, but with glaring grammatical errors might only receive 70% for it. Someone else with a lacklustre essay, but exceptionally good grammar might receive 90% for it. Without knowing the contents of either essay, would it be fair to just read the marks and assume the one is better than the other? You would have to understand why they received those marks before you can say one is better than the other. Similarly, with reviews if you don't read the review attached to the score, the score is not an accurate indication of whether a game is better than another or not.

 

[Iam3G]

Don't let thirdparties change your view of a game. Rather judge for yourself.

I was just about to respond with exactly the same points.

Yes, ultimately you decide for yourself, but you just simply cannot always spend money on everything you "think" you might like.

I'm sorry, but I disagree.

Over the years, my tastes (and I'm sure many others' as well) have refined. So when I "think" I might like something, I usually do. My gaming library (as small as it is) is full of games I knew I would like, reviews aside.

-----

This is essentially one of those debates/arguments that will go round and round in circles. Both sides make valid points.

 

[bradbear117]

I read the reviews. The only score sheet I check are Gamerevolutions report card style score where its rated from A - F. Then they mark off the features or lack thereof with crosses and ticks. Pretty good system.

I also like Nags "Better Than Worse Than" system.