Alan Wake Review Embargo Lifted - REVIEWS PAID FOR.

Status
Not open for further replies.
mindsale

mindsale

CAGiversary!
I was on Metacritic and was surprised to see Alan Wake reviews up - and more surprised to see an aggregate of 73. It had a 60, a 70 from Eurogamer, and then a paid-for 90 and 95. I hit refresh and the 60 review was no longer incorporated into the Metascore and it had several other 90's added. Its highest review is a 95 from GamingTrend - which, if you need to be reminded, is the same "publication" that gave Tony Hawk Ride a 92.
 
I might just be paranoid - hitting refresh is removing and adding reviews as Metacritic compiles them. IGN gave the title a 90 - but IGN is full of morons (consistently the second or third highest review for a given title). Giantbomb gave it an 80. Eurogamer a 70.
 
You could look at it the other way around with Eurogamer and Giant Bomb lowering the score to get more hits, but who knows. I do agree with you about IGN being full of morons since they gave Deadly Premonition a 2/10 >.
 
This game looks good.

Metacritic is the worst site on the internet.
 
Metacritic is an important aggregator for media - it ensures the cream rises to the top (although my girlfriend and I were watching HBO's Treme because it garnered an 89 and it's the most fucking tedious program I've had to endure). I've got nothing against Alan Wake (except that I do want less games to play in May - I've already pre-ordered 4 fucking games this month). My suspicions were caused by a disappearing low score and a high score credited to a reviewer that can be bought out for bacon grease. Alan Wake currently has an 83.
 
Read a review from a reviewer or reviewers that you tend to agree with and move on with your decision. Reviews are opinions and assigning a generalized number to them is one thing but another to compile these generalized numbers into an average and form an opinion from said number alone is dumb.
 
Giantbomb gave it a 4/5, not a low score at all - translate that to metacritic's 80 and people get all butthurt about it. It's the conditioning of elementary/high school grading - 70 is one point above failing, therefore anything close to a 70 isn't good. Think in terms of the whole 100 points and 70 is still pretty good.
 
I love Eurogamer... While I don't always agree with the reviewers, I do feel that their reviews are earnest, well written, and consistantly thorough. They also seem to lack that "paid for" stench that seems to lurk around many other big gaming sites. I'd say Gametrailers is my favorite site for pretty much everything gaming related; I love the visual stimuli their reviews offer.

That being said, I'm tempted to pick up an Xbox 360 for Alan Wake, just like I was when Fable 2 came out. I might just cave this weekend.
 
Relative to books, television, and movies, games are grossly overrated. That's why the distinction between a 75 and a 85 is that much more important. Most reviews are written in the grade school "a bad game is a D and proportionately a D is a 60/100" mentality - when a terrible movie is a 1/4 stars - or a 25/100. Reviews are opinions, but they're cultivated by people accustomed to rating media. I'm a sucker for them.
 
[quote name='Fortune_P_Dawg']I love Eurogamer... While I don't always agree with the reviewers, I do feel that their reviews are earnest, well written, and consistantly thorough. They also seem to lack that "paid for" stench that seems to lurk around many other big gaming sites. I'd say Gametrailers is my favorite site for pretty much everything gaming related; I love the visual stimuli their reviews offer.

That being said, I'm tempted to pick up an Xbox 360 for Alan Wake, just like I was when Fable 2 came out. I might just cave this weekend.[/QUOTE]


Gametrailers review went live - I watched it at 3am (EST) - it's pretty good. I love most of their reviewers - Miguel Lopez tends to to like everything he plays which is disappointing and Shane Satterfield plays so few titles he winds up liking more than he dislikes. But yeah - I absolutely agree about the visual stimuli - their reviews are so aritculate and illustrate their point with on-screen examples (if something's buggy or broken or whatever). Great site. [Accepts bag of cash].
 
It's possible for human beings to just disagree about whether a game is good or not. People read too much into review score trends.
 
I was expecting hard facts whenever I came into this thread. Please put a question mark in the thread title since you don't have any.
 
[quote name='ninja dog']thanks for letting me know reviews are up. Looks great! Way better than Uncharted 1 and 2.[/QUOTE]

What do Alan Wake and Uncharted have in common?
 
Screens look good, but actual gameplay video isn't as impressive. Lots of fog, lighting, and motion blur seem to be used to hide bland graphics... not to mention that animation looks like crap.

I'll still get it... but probably not anytime soon... or at full price.
 
[quote name='ninja dog']thanks for letting me know reviews are up. Looks great! Way better than Uncharted 1 and 2.[/QUOTE]
Lol. It's not better than Bayonetta though. That game is GOTMillenia.
 
Eurogamer gives a lot of the big games lower than average scores. That's not any evidence of scores being paid for. It just means that there are a variety of opinions about the game, more than you usually see.

Don't take Metacritic's interpretation of what the letter grades mean as what everybody that uses that scale thinks it means. For examples, 1up hates the way their scores are calculated on Metacritic.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']Eurogamer gives a lot of the big games lower than average scores. That's not any evidence of scores being paid for. It just means that there are a variety of opinions about the game, more than you usually see.

Don't take Metacritic's interpretation of what the letter grades mean as what everybody that uses that scale thinks it means. For examples, 1up hates the way their scores are calculated on Metacritic.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. Metacritic can be alright to get a general idea of what a game is like, but for the best information, people need to read the actual reviews. This is especially true when a game is getting mixed reviews. People put way too much emphasis on the score itself.
 
[quote name='ninja dog']thanks for letting me know reviews are up. Looks great! Way better than Uncharted 1 and 2.[/QUOTE]

I hope that is sarcasm. No way possible that alan wake could be better than uncharted 1 or 2.
 
A review score is an entirely arbitrary number. Unless it's an unplayable beta-version mess, personal interests, experiences, skill and more come into play.

[quote name='dastly75']Read a review from a reviewer or reviewers that you tend to agree with and move on with your decision. Reviews are opinions and assigning a generalized number to them is one thing but another to compile these generalized numbers into an average and form an opinion from said number alone is dumb.[/QUOTE]

QFT


[quote name='mindsale']Metacritic is an important aggregator for media - it ensures the cream rises to the top (although my girlfriend and I were watching HBO's Treme because it garnered an 89 and it's the most fucking tedious program I've had to endure).[/QUOTE]

Doesn't this alone make you question loyalty to a score?

[quote name='diddy310']Giantbomb gave it a 4/5, not a low score at all - translate that to metacritic's 80 and people get all butthurt about it. It's the conditioning of elementary/high school grading - 70 is one point above failing, therefore anything close to a 70 isn't good. Think in terms of the whole 100 points and 70 is still pretty good.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='mindsale']Relative to books, television, and movies, games are grossly overrated. That's why the distinction between a 75 and a 85 is that much more important. Most reviews are written in the grade school "a bad game is a D and proportionately a D is a 60/100" mentality - when a terrible movie is a 1/4 stars - or a 25/100. Reviews are opinions, but they're cultivated by people accustomed to rating media. I'm a sucker for them.[/QUOTE]

There have been plenty of mediocre games in the 60-70 point range on all sites. Yes, not too many drop below unless they are unplayable, but that's part of the review criteria. The numbers are not exact. Many sites even note that unless a game is severely below standards of the generation, they tend to not get below this number. Again, content of review is more important. The numbers they use are created on their own scales.

[quote name='DarkNessBear']Lol. It's not better than Bayonetta though. That game is GOTMillenia.[/QUOTE]

There is a game that scored gangbusters and I just had no personal interest in. Review scores be damned if you just don't want to play it.
 
[quote name='DarkNessBear']Lol. It's not better than Bayonetta though. That game is GOTMillenia.[/QUOTE]


well, according to Metacritic, Bayonetta 360 is at 90, with Uncharted 1 at 88 and Uncharted 2 at 96. Uncharted 2's reviews were obviously paid for, so Bayonetta > Uncharted 2 as well.

Alan Wake is at 84, but Uncharted 1's reviews were probably paid for as well. So I think it goes Bayonetta 360 > Alan Wake > Halo series > God of War 3 > Uncharted 2 > Uncharted 1 > Killzone 2.
 
What's up with gamers and their paranoia over game ratings? All because you don't agree with a review, then it doesn't mean its been paid for.
 
It's the Prey syndrome. Thanks to IGN. I'm sure there's been other incidents, but it is out there. I personally couldn't give a shit. When I see a game that looks fun, I'll buy it. If it ends up being shitty, I'll sell it or trade it. If it turns out to be a classic, I'll keep it.
Simple as that. Reviews to me are just more information of that game, but I take it all with a grain of salt. I would have missed many good games if I listened to the review scores before playing.
Have your own minds and try the games yourself. Use the review scores and videos as a reference, not a decision.
 
[quote name='eddie291']What's up with gamers and their paranoia over game ratings? All because you don't agree with a review, then it doesn't mean its been paid for.[/QUOTE]


the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
bread's done
Back
Top