Lets write legit reviews on metacritic.

So tired of the ridiculous reviews on metacritic. Right now the game is sitting at a 7.3
There are plenty of 0 out of 10s based on nonsense just when Diablo 3 launched. Us as the fans need to form together. Lets score the game what we think it really is and write a legit review. There is no reason for the 0s being tossed around because of errors that were addressed and the sever capacity that is being dealt with and fixed.

Link to the page : http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/fi...a-realm-reborn

The last thing you want to do is get people to review this game right now. Pending you want a good one that is. The massive oversight of an AFK time out and server restrictions along with no Queue has set many players off. Although the game has good game play being unable to play it for most people makes it a bad game.

The lack of an AFK time out actually may have been overseen because of other things. In both FFXI and the original 1.0 of FFXIV, players are able to create bazaars on their player. (I believe EQ had this system, as well?) Other players are/were able to select this bazaar, and buy from them. Aside from this, the auction house/market system only allowed for a limited amount of sales at a time. So of course, players would bazaar items that they wished to sell further, while running about on the field or in town. Many times, people would AFK and just set their character outside the market wards, or some other more populated place. XI notoriously had the "Rolanberry Bazaar" as it was affectionately called, where people stood outside the zone line between Rolanberry Fields, and Jeuno, as to avoid heavy taxing in Jeuno on sales. THis could be done for hours or days, and it was just a normal part of the games economy system.

Of course, now we don't have that ability. It is no longer part of our economy. To be honest, it is not so much an intentional issue, as much as it just wasn't something brought up. I would have never thought about it. It didn't really come up until now, because of the extremely heavy traffic going on with the servers.

Uh... if we gang up and give this game which a lot of ppl struggle just to log on more score points, would that make the score biased?

The negative reviews are mostly saying they have never seen such poor handling of server capacity in their gaming careers. Why is this not legitimate feedback?

I did not write a negative review. But I have been playing MMO's since EQ1, and I agree that I've never seen server capacity handled quite this badly. No working login queue. No AFK timers. Friends are not even allowed to play with their friends!!!

Literally I have never seen a game tell players they cannot play with their friends.

I think the game is great, but you can't say those criticisms are unfair or unreasonable. I have already had two of my friends cancel because of this, and three or four more will do the same if they aren't allowed to play with their guild.

I don't find Metacritic a legitimate source to begin with. There is no differentiation between professional reviews and player reviews. Aside from that, the whole structure is highly prone to abuse as seen with countless other games/ movies etc. .

metacritic is the worst thing to happen to gaming the way the do reviews and such is just wrong. as a gamer i dont even take metacritic seriously

i will be giving this game a 5. thats all. fun when i can play.

Not going to happen. Server went down, a negative review appeared.

You're right, a rating of zero would be unfair. I gave it a 1/10.

Thanks for (not)playing and have a wonderful day!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shinebox

Not going to happen. Server went down, a negative review appeared.

---

A problem that got resolved in under half an hour. I suppose you also want SE to spoonfeed you news as well?

7.3 seems fair.

People care about metacritic?

Diablo 3 - Horrible Launch

Blizzard initially downplayed the problem, but as Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube filled with over-the-top rage (not to mention countless jokes) about not being able to log in, Blizzard quickly offered a formal apology. "Despite very aggressive projections, our preparations for the launch of the game did not go far enough," the company said. "We're continuing to monitor performance globally and will be taking further measures as needed to ensure a positive experience for everyone."

Just when Blizzard thought the problems were behind them, servers were again hammered on May 31, when a new patch rollout led to widespread login errors yet again. By that point, many players had already given up on a game that by most accounts failed to live up to a decade of heightened expectations. Though the game still has a devoted following, the pain of that negative first impressions seems to have taken its toll.

People who cry a lot are just bored WoW fans who couldn't Pew Pew their way to 50 in every class to have something to brag about to their buddies in the basement of their parents house. :D

Yeah 7.3 seems fair but to review a game without playing it is not. You had an error that was addressed and fixed but the game is a 0/10.
People give things 0s and don't even play the game OR will give it a 0 play the game love it and never change that score. To give any game a 0 is uncalled for. Mmo games always has some issues what ever it may be. They get sorted out we all play just fine.

Who gives a shit about metacritic user reviews. Or any user reviews.

Is spamming blind 10s by fanboys any better than spamming blind 0s by haters?

The more I read, the more I'm convinced 95% of you are quite legally retarded. What the fuck, guys?

So far, I like the game...when I'm able to get in. I'd give it a solid 7.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Payadopa

I don't find Metacritic a legitimate source to begin with. There is no differentiation between professional reviews and player reviews. Aside from that, the whole structure is highly prone to abuse as seen with countless other games/ movies etc. .

---

That color... my eyes... the pain...!

On topic: I don't mind scores too much for at a glance ratings. I don't get to choose too many games to play nowadays but when I do get interested in something I'll generally look at the review scores (after some light reading and gameplay vids) to find out whether or not something might be as good as it looks.

If I see a large number of 9's and whatnot, it's probably pretty good and I'll get more info and read the reviews. If it is getting 6's and below, I'll probably read the reviews to find out why it is so disliked. It's the 6+ category that gets scary.

I first started caring with movies. I don't rely completely on Rotten Tomatoes, but I absolutely started paying attention after The Happening. I went in to that movie driven purely off the trailers. Afterwards I jumped on RT to validate my thoughts and I succeeded. Was something like 15%. Spot on.

Wisdom of the masses.

I don't care for numerically scored reviews.
Games are far to complex and tastes far too varied to simplify on a graded scale.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gramul

I don't care for numerically scored reviews.
Games are far to complex and tastes far too varied to simplify on a graded scale.

---

This is why I'm glad the industry as a whole has been moving away from scores and into editorial content. Ignoring the fact that a score feels completely meaningless when you really get down to it (what's the difference between a 6 and a 7?), too many people just look to them as validation for their own beliefs anyway and get upset when the scores don't aligns with what they think. Sites like Metacritic perpetuate this problem, and because so many people still believe a numerical score holds merit, it has a serious impact on games that it never should and is easily abused.

Small rant aside, I like your posts. They always seem reasonable.

Personally, I think it's a little silly to give a game a 0/10 because you can't log on. That's not the game; it's the infrastructure. It's like rating a restaurant 0/10 because it was full and there was a super long line to get in, so you didn't end up eating there.

Metacritic is a stinking pile of....well you know how the rest of that goes and anyone who takes what is said there seriously should really learn to do their own research.

What is a metacritic?

Must be a dating site for judgmental people.

What is metacritic? In my 13 years of gaming I have never heard of such thing. Anyway I'd rate this game with an 8ish right now from what I have played through phase 3, phase 4 and Early Access, which could improve to 9ish once they address the errors, add pvp and such awesome updates.

People that rate a game as 0 because there are errors should keep away from rating. This game is nowhere near 0 or even 6... no game launch (some minority exceptions) have been 100% smooth. Is it frustrating? Indeed, but it will not remain like this for long, it is the main issue at the moment and is being addressed (atleast), I have seen games launch and take over a month to address serious issues...

Now, I won't vote because I could care less of what other people think of what I like to spend my time on. Even if they had it rated on 3 I'd still subscribe and play the game.

I feel that if they were appropriate compensation for not being able to play, like "cant get in the server for over 30 minutes? then this day is free", most of rage and complaints would cease.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Norbi

Personally, I think it's a little silly to give a game a 0/10 because you can't log on. That's not the game; it's the infrastructure. It's like rating a restaurant 0/10 because it was full and there was a super long line to get in, so you didn't end up eating there.

---

The restaurant analogy would be more accurate if you included the fact that you had already paid for the meal, and were then told that you wouldn't get your food until next week.

I think metacritic (along with other sites) should have an N/A score to be able to use in place of a numerical score for cases like this. Just have the score be something like "N/A - unable to access game, cannot review."