I remember reading Metacritics on Battlefield: Bad Company 2 and similar, the ratings were so far off the chart that the writer of the review got flamed- I mentioned BF:BC2 because the guy gave game audio such a low rating when it's one of the best sounding FPS games to date (until BF3) and at the same time rated Call of Duty: MW2 so high it wasn't even funny (MW2 was the WORST of the CoD franchise), there was another game but I don't rememeber now where the write rated it so unfairly that posters flamed them. I can't take Metacritic seriously because reviews are being paid by publishers to say good things.

Originally posted by Valua

GW2 is probably one of the best MMO, but compared to some single player games its not special at all.

Who even uses single player games as a standard to judge MMOs?  Really.  

As for me, my Metacritic score was a 9.  I felt it deserved it.  I didn't do it because I want the game to succeed, I did it because I've already played it more than most of my Steam games and haven't even cut halfway through its total value.  That means a lot to me for a measly $60.

Originally posted by tank017

I like the game and it should get a good score..

 

but I take professional reviewers opinions with a grain of salt.

Ditto but the user score is 8.5 on metacritic which is pretty good . Compare it with WoWs user score of 6.8

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/world-of-warcraft

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/guild-wars-2

That speaks volumes as to which way the tide is turning .

Originally posted by roo67

Originally posted by tank017

I like the game and it should get a good score..

 

but I take professional reviewers opinions with a grain of salt.

Ditto but the user score is 8.5 on metacritic which is pretty good . Compare it with WoWs user score of 6.8

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/world-of-warcraft

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/guild-wars-2

That speaks volumes as to which way the tide is turning .

Aw, you really missed a trick on that one because if you had linked to http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/world-of-warcraft-cataclysm instead it only has a user score of 5.1 and really stuck it to those WoW guys!

Originally posted by StanlyStanko
The paid-review arguments are usually pretty juicy

'Course they are; there's no requirement for anything in the way of confirmation, honesty, integrity, fact-checking, editorial purview, or anything more than sufficient volume of hot air.

For either the reviewer or the accuser.  Just leveling a completely unsubstantiated charge is enough to convict.

Welcome to message boards, already in progress.

Originally posted by roo67

Originally posted by tank017

I like the game and it should get a good score..

 

but I take professional reviewers opinions with a grain of salt.

Ditto but the user score is 8.5 on metacritic which is pretty good . Compare it with WoWs user score of 6.8

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/world-of-warcraft

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/guild-wars-2

That speaks volumes as to which way the tide is turning .

Only thing i got from that comparison is that it is still a cool thing to hate WOW.

I would never ever take user score on metacritics seriously..no matter in which direction the score goes.  WOW is 8 years old by the way. And if anything its age is going against it more than anything else.

Originally posted by sonoggi
ROFL@" population is already dropping because we have no overflows"

You have no overflows because everyone is moving past the starting areas and arena net had to halt sales because they could not cope with the insane demand.Sorry bro but pop has nowhere to go but sky high

I am seeing some servers setting at medium population and for me overflow queue is very short now. I think now would be the time to start selling digital copies again.

Metacritic? I don't think I'd use Metacritic to reenforce any position I wanted to make. All someoen needs to do is say:

"But......But.....SWTOR"

And now automatically, your use of metacritic, regardless of how accurate and unbiased you think their review is, has the wind knocked out of its sails and now goes on the defensive.  And you have to start justifying Metacritic itself.

---

Originally posted by sonoggi
ROFL@" population is already dropping because we have no overflows"You have no overflows because everyone is moving past the starting areas and arena net had to halt sales because they could not cope with the insane demand.Sorry bro but pop has nowhere to go but sky high

---

Originally posted by Requiem1066

Should be a law against using metacritic, steam, xfire as any type of valid arguement .. I would only ever value something like metacritic if they didn't allow reviews until 2-3weeks after launch.

If you look at a lot of games on there  ,, people start to score the game 10/10 or 0/10 within hours of it going live .. and people hold value in it ? *shakes head*

Should  be a law? Someone needs a board break, holy cow.

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by DMKano

Originally posted by sonoggi

almost a 9:1 ratio lovers:haters

over 90% score by all but one professional reviewer

some of the highest user score in gaming history 

leaves other AAA MMO's in the dust when it comes to user score, professional review score, or both. study scores of Cataclysm, TSW, TERA, TOR, whatever. you will notice them all failing in either user review, or critic review categories (i.e. 50%  of reviews are mixed or bad, which is a big failure)

most importantly, my gf who has despised PC games all her life is now exploring Tyria with me every day. 

 

i encourage everyone to study the trends before bashing the game as sucky or whatever. you can, but your reasons will be very private and within a tiny minority. i think Metacritic trends speak volumes. 

Rift had the same high score after it launched both players and critics were above 90. Now its in 80s for both I think.

 

Give gw2 more time - it will be in the 80s for both after several months when people reach end game.

I agree. People are voting with their emotions right now. After a couple of months when they realised that there isn't much to do at lvl 80 they will come to their senses.

U mad at GW2 being a great game and players enjoying it.

Originally posted by sonoggi
ROFL@" population is already dropping because we have no overflows"

You have no overflows because everyone is moving past the starting areas and arena net had to halt sales because they could not cope with the insane demand.Sorry bro but pop has nowhere to go but sky high

Lets do this, wait a month, probably less,  then come back and talk about how the population isnt droping, and i was playing yesterday at primetime in some of the 40+zones  and couldnt find enough people to do some DE.

Originally posted by GeezerGamer

Metacritic? I don't think I'd use Metacritic to reenforce any position I wanted to make. All someoen needs to do is say:

"But......But.....SWTOR"

And now automatically, your use of metacritic, regardless of how accurate and unbiased you think their review is, has the wind knocked out of its sails and now goes on the defensive.  And you have to start justifying Metacritic itself.

about SWTOR/metacritic

I did not play SWTOR, but  afaik it was a nice game until you reached the endgame. Still, to reach this level, people played a game they enjoyed. If it means 50 hours of fun, why should they get bad review because of the endgame ? Do solo games lasting 20h~30h get a bad score because of their lack of endgame ?

If you have fun then give a good score. Just because a game is a MMO doesn't mean that you  have to play 300h to enjoy it. It was always the case, but GW2 revealed it to their audience.

Originally posted by Draemos

MMOs are long term games.  Any review of an MMO presented within the first month of release are next to useless for anything outside of simple impressions about graphics,  sound, etc.

 

I have absolutely zero respect for an MMO view that doesn't look at (and have experience with) long term viability, whether that review is positive or negative.  Reviewers who review them under the same criteria as single player games are just wasting my time.

I agree 100%. Unfortunatly all MMO's now are reviewed under the same criteria as a single player game.

There is not one professional game site that offers valid reviews because all those sites have other agendas, like advertising, or beta invites, none of which you would get if you posted anything negative.

Ive always said the best reviews now come from the players, It just takes some skill to wade through through the fanboy/hater posts, to pull out some usefull information.

Originally posted by toddze

Originally posted by Draemos

MMOs are long term games.  Any review of an MMO presented within the first month of release are next to useless for anything outside of simple impressions about graphics,  sound, etc.

 

I have absolutely zero respect for an MMO view that doesn't look at (and have experience with) long term viability, whether that review is positive or negative.  Reviewers who review them under the same criteria as single player games are just wasting my time.

I agree 100%. Unfortunatly all MMO's now are reviewed under the same criteria as a single player game.

There is not one professional game site that offers valid reviews because all those sites have other agendas, like advertising, or beta invites, none of which you would get if you posted anything negative.

Ive always said the best reviews now come from the players, It just takes some skill to wade through through the fanboy/hater posts, to pull out some usefull information.

well you are wrong, just because you played your old favorite MMO for years doesn't mean that it makes the MMO genre long term. massive, multiplayer, online game... long term ? no.

Originally posted by sonoggi

Originally posted by adam_nox

Not sure how she can quest with you when there's no quests.

 

Pretty much every major mmo release has had favorable reviews.  Having the bestest doesn't really mean much.

completely untrue. every major release has failed either the users, or the critics. 

Completely untrue. Not EVERY MMO has failed either the users or the critics. World of Warcraft in 2004 completely blew both users and critics away. Even GW2 pales by comparion. World of Warcraft received super high critic scores 90-95%+ (a lot of critics gave it PERFECT score of 100) and the users also loved it as well. User score was up there with critic score at 9 I think.

But I guess you were not playing MMOs back then so you have no way of knowing.

Can you also point me to those critic reviews which give it crazy scores cause I can see that IGN and Gamespot haven't given GW2 any scores.

Originally posted by TomBaker_fan

Originally posted by Requiem1066

Should be a law against using metacritic, steam, xfire as any type of valid arguement .. I would only ever value something like metacritic if they didn't allow reviews until 2-3weeks after launch.

If you look at a lot of games on there  ,, people start to score the game 10/10 or 0/10 within hours of it going live .. and people hold value in it ? *shakes head*

Should  be a law? Someone needs a board break, holy cow.

 

 

That be you :) If you took the Law comment as anything overly serious jeez .