Edge Online is finally dead - The Bear and Badger

Tempy

IanHamlett wrote:

Tempy wrote:

I was talking about aggregating critic reviews as well, beyond a consensus of extremely low scores I find it a pretty pointless exercise - for explanation, see issue with RT.

You're missing a trick there. Just like I know that Jonathan Ross has a thing for Japanese culture, I can adjust for what an aggregate of the masses like. And the individual reviews are right there on the page so you can dismiss the guy that clearly didn't understand how to play Vanquish and the people that complain if a game is under 1hr per $.

I'm not missing jack tbh

Why would I adjust for 'what an aggregate of the masses like" when I can bypass that entirely with opinions from thoughtful individuals I've curated myself? It's not like, as far as I'm aware, you can just go on RT and remove opinions/scores until the rating then factors only the thought of those you give a shit about.

Vela

Metacritic is indeed shit, but in recent years, Edge reviews have lost a lot of their usefulness. Or maybe I just stopped caring so much about them, I dunno.

I get the feeling they kind of devalued their rating system an started to become quite forgiving for games that were incredibly rough around the edges too.

b0r1s

regmcfly wrote:

Boris - case in point. Deadly Premonition - generally low scores across the board. sterling gives it a 10. I know I want to play it because I get how sterling ticks and what he finds amusing etc, and it lines up with my own tastes.

I play DP, I like it.

Score on metacritic aggregated out at 68. Not low at all. Enough for me to then consider a purchase.

Regardless, my opinion stands. Aggregated scores can give you a steer. Conversely, single reviewers are individuals who can have bad days etc. there have been enough discussions around Edge historically making bad calls on games that a majority of people think differently.

I'm not trying to change anyone's opinion on this. I just disagree in taking one persons view on spending £30 to £50 on a game.

regmcfly

Id rather take one person I know and trust than give into a fucking hive mind mentality. Honestly, you wonder how people figured out what to read or listen to or watch 15 years ago when we couldn't aggregate and homogenise everything.

Bollockoff

Sterling's Vanquish review is a black mark on his professional career no question.

I use Metacritic as an index of review scores. I always ignore the user scores and average score and just click on the full links that look interesting.

Tempy

Bollockoff wrote:

Sterling's Vanquish review is a black mark on his professional career no question.

I use Metacritic as an index of review scores. I always ignore the user scores and average score and just click on the full links that look interesting.

Disagree wildly, even though I disagree with his review. I don't care if they're "wrong" or "right" in consensus. If they've consitebtky drawn their conclusions and backed then up, I'm interested, regardless.

regmcfly

Tempy wrote:

Bollockoff wrote:

Sterling's Vanquish review is a black mark on his professional career no question.

I use Metacritic as an index of review scores. I always ignore the user scores and average score and just click on the full links that look interesting.

Disagree wildly, even though I disagree with his score.

Good god. One review make the man? Rather judgmental. Everything wrong with the entire internet is happening in this thread.

Bollockoff

You'l all call foul if I said I was joking.

b0r1s

Why is it "giving in" Reg?

Isn't metcritic just another tool. You don't have to just look at the aggregate. You might find an up and coming reviewer who is spot on with your viewpoint, or not.

How is having more information available a bad thing?

It's up to you how you choose to use it.

Vela

Tempy wrote:

Bollockoff wrote:

Sterling's Vanquish review is a black mark on his professional career no question. I use Metacritic as an index of review scores. I always ignore the user scores and average score and just click on the full links that look interesting.

Disagree wildly, even though I disagree with his review. I don't care if they're "wrong" or "right" in consensus. If they've consitebtky drawn their conclusions and backed then up, I'm interested, regardless.

Exactly. I don't need a "correct" opinion, just an honest one.

Tempy

jeez-o my phone mangled "consistently" up a peach. Need my specs on.

regmcfly

b0r1s wrote:

Why is it "giving in" Reg?

Isn't metcritic just another tool. You don't have to just look at the aggregate. You might find an up and coming reviewer who is spot on with your viewpoint, or not.

How is having more information available a bad thing?

It's up to you how you choose to use it.

There's implicit judgment inherent in the tool, from colour coding reviews, to selective quotations. It's a baddie. Burn it down.

Diluted Dante

Tempy wrote:

The difference between them and TopHatMan is big. Even ThatFedoraOne built on writing experience, and it shows.

Who are these people?

Tempy

Totes Biscuit/Yahtzee

Bollockoff wrote:

You'l all call foul if I said I was joking.

Yeah but are you

mistercrayon

Yahtzee also Makes games which is good.

Diluted Dante

Ah. I watched some Total Biscuit videos once. I didn't really get it.

Yahtzee is pure entertainment. Is anyone seriously using him as a buyers guide?

b0r1s

regmcfly wrote:

b0r1s wrote:

Why is it "giving in" Reg?

Isn't metcritic just another tool. You don't have to just look at the aggregate. You might find an up and coming reviewer who is spot on with your viewpoint, or not.

How is having more information available a bad thing?

It's up to you how you choose to use it.

There's implicit judgment inherent in the tool, from colour coding reviews, to selective quotations. It's a baddie. Burn it down.

The fact that you know that means you know that you can choose to use it exactly as you want.

People constantly scream how the world is always a worse place, usually as they are getting older I might add.

Tempy

@crayun He's also still pedalling the same old review style which you think he'd be utterly sick of by now. Innovation eh.

Diluted Dante wrote:

Ah. I watched some Total Biscuit videos once. I didn't really get it.

Yahtzee is pure entertainment. Is anyone seriously using him as a buyers guide?

*siren wailing*

Buyer's guide, ruh-roh. That's a sticking point, even though a review is helping me decide whether to part with cash I'm loathe to read anything that's a buyers guide. I'm much more interested in what a person thinks about a game as to whether they think I should buy it.

And yeah, Yahtzee's opinion on games certainly factor as a canon in and of themselves. He's rigorously consistent and good at making his arguments. Just because they're purple doesn't mean they don't have any merit. Writing them off as 'pure entertainment' is a disservice to the robust deconstruction he frequently employs, shitty comedy be damned.

regmcfly

b0r1s wrote:

regmcfly wrote:

b0r1s wrote:

Why is it "giving in" Reg?

Isn't metcritic just another tool. You don't have to just look at the aggregate. You might find an up and coming reviewer who is spot on with your viewpoint, or not.

How is having more information available a bad thing?

It's up to you how you choose to use it.

There's implicit judgment inherent in the tool, from colour coding reviews, to selective quotations. It's a baddie. Burn it down.

The fact that you know that means you know that you can choose to use it exactly as you want.

People constantly scream how the world is always a worse place, usually as they are getting older I might add.

Oho the old man H argument. No, I just have a problem with globalisation of everything, and the sense of aggregating out your live so it makes the most people in the most time happy. It's why films are becoming so cookie cutter, and why we are lumbered with shootbros.

Also, probably to do with age, not, you know me being an English teacher and it being incomprehensible, but can you re-phrase your first point as I have no clue how to even begin to respond to it.

mistercrayon

I think I could cope with adhering to a shtick for a decent wage and freedom to do other things.

regmcfly

If you're suggesting that me being aware of its limitations makes it a better thing, absolutely not. The problem is that so many people use it as arbiter and don't consider that.

Dark Soldier

Well this went completely opposite to how I expected. Big tings.

Tempy

yes bruv

mistercrayon wrote:

I think I could cope with adhering to a shtick for a decent wage and freedom to do other things.

Dead at 50, self inflicted: "to my wife I leave my memoirs, to be printed in spite of The Escapist, who I damn with my last breath."

Dark Soldier

I haven't read a review in about five years, I go off this place/occasional Twitch vid, done me well so far.

Kow

Who are these unwashed masses who don't understand Metacritic like we do?

regmcfly

Joe Walmart

Tempy

Dark Soldier wrote:

I haven't read a review in about five years, I go off this place/occasional Twitch vid, done me well so far.

you're a good egg

Dark Soldier

Brb Isaac

Bollockoff

Tempy wrote:

Yeah but are you

IanHamlett

Tempy wrote:

Bollockoff wrote:

Sterling's Vanquish review is a black mark on his professional career no question. I use Metacritic as an index of review scores. I always ignore the user scores and average score and just click on the full links that look interesting.

Disagree wildly, even though I disagree with his review. I don't care if they're "wrong" or "right" in consensus. If they've consitebtky drawn their conclusions and backed then up, I'm interested, regardless.

What's the fucking use if they're just wrong. I could tear Dark Souls to pieces and back every point up but, if that's the only place you read about it, you'd walk away with a useless opinion.

There are a few problems with aggregated scores that were virtually non-existent before. Some reviewers give a low score because they believe the aggregate is too hight, some go against the consensus just to get clicks, the way the scores are averaged is sometimes questionable.

I still find them useful.

A few years ago I'm guessing you needed some qualifications in english and journalism to get near a mag. You might also have to either live near or be willing to move near the office. These days anyone with a webcam can create content. That obviously means the low bar is way lower but I never got anything like matthewmatosis review from a mag. Not once.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories