Opinions on how TCR & FG are dealing with AAMFP criticism

[Quizerno]

And? So people expected different things because of x and y (which I won't get into because this discussion is already tiresome)

And nothing. I was just stating what I thought.

and a massive amount of them are having fits.

Okay.

I've read the comments from people here and on websites and the only way the game would have gotten a better overall reaction was if they had done the same things as from TDD and called it a day.

Sorry but that's the truth, call me ignorant and arrogant. That's not to say that there aren't people who didn't like it for what it was but just that there were a lot of more people that hated because of what it was not.

Sure. Just shows how much they valued the mechanics in TDD, and disliked their removal.

So I ask again, and? Does linking the opinions of others do anything really?

I flat out admitted it doesn't. Hence why I brought up argumentum ad populum (the fallacy). I was just stating what the image DID prove rather than what it didn't.

I have never linked anyone's opinions, much less the conglomerate of opinions that is metacritic (the same place that shows how hilariously overrated a few games are), to back my opinion.

Yeah, I never said you did.

I just stated my opinion as it was and left it there. Why? Cause I don't rely nor give the same level of credit and attention a lot of people give to other people's opinions.

Yeah I figured, I was just stating facts. Didn't say they mattered.

But yeah, the image/reaction does answer a lot of questions after analyzing a few of the reviews and user ''reviews'' but not in the way the poster of those images intended.

That's what I was saying...

Perhaps, if you restrict yourself to just going by MetaCritic; there are far more professional reviews online than those listed on MetaCritic.

These are the scores currently listed in the Info Portal. I suck a maths so if someone could figure out what the mean score would be from all of these that would at least provide a more complete picture of the situation.

One of the reviews gave it an A and another gave it a B+, so I'm not sure how that would translate into a percentage haha.

I used horizontal rules to divide the scores into blocks of 10.

[SPOILERS]

Those numbers are from 90 different reviews, there are many more which don't provide "scores".

I don't really pay attention to the professional reviews (too much conflict of interest), I was only really talking about the user reviews. But your point still stands, not everyone is going to go to Metacritic.

[Cuyir]

@Quizerno:

I never implied that you had said I had brought other people's opinions to back mine up. I was using that to state a point, which you missed. You misunderstood me there and on some other points. But eh, moot because the reaction is what it is, regardless.

[Quizerno]

@Quizerno:

I never implied that you had said I had brought other people's opinions to back mine up. I was using that to state a point, which you missed. You misunderstood me there and on some other points. But eh, moot because the reaction is what it is, regardless.

You addressed me directly in a questioning tone. Sounding very accusing when I just made a small observation. Otherwise there was no need to respond to me just to make a point you were trying to make to others.

[Lazarus]

It does prove that AMFP is not as well regarded overall, I'm not one to use argumentum ad populum, but the evidence does stand to show that at the very least.

Perhaps, if you restrict yourself to just going by MetaCritic; there are far more professional reviews online than those listed on MetaCritic.

These are the scores currently listed in the Info Portal. I suck a maths so if someone could figure out what the mean score would be from all of these that would at least provide a more complete picture of the situation.

One of the reviews gave it an A and another gave it a B+, so I'm not sure how that would translate into a percentage haha.

I used horizontal rules to divide the scores into blocks of 10.

Spoiler below!

8.7/10
8/10
7.5/10
3.7/10
4/5
6/10
6.6/10
9/10
8/10
9/10

---

8.5/10
8/10
3/5
3.5/5
7/10
5.6/10
7/10
7.2/10
7/10
7/10

---

3/5
3.5/5
7/10
7/10
6.75/10
3/5
7/10
5/10
7/10
9/10

---

5/10
7.75/10
4/5
8/10
2.5/5
7.2/10
3/5
8.5/10
7/10
7.5/10

---

8/10
8/10
4.5/5
8/10
7.4/10
8.1/10
8/10
2.5/5
7/10
7/10

---

3.5/10
8.7/10
8.3/10
7.5/10
9.7/10
3.5/5
3.5/5
8/10
8/10
6/10

---

4/5
9.1/10
4/7
7/10
6.7/10
9/10
4.38/5
4/5
9/10
8.9/10

---

7/10
7.5/10
4/5
8/10
8/10
4/5
5/10
8/10
8.5/10
10/10

---

7.5/10
4.5/5
8/10
6/10
5/5
7.25/10
8/10
8.5/10
4.5/5
6.5/10

Those numbers are from 90 different reviews, there are many more which don't provide "scores".

7.3/10 I believe that is a C.
the fact that there is 90 is a wrong way of looking at that though because you have denominators of 5.

[Cuyir]

@Quizerno:

I never implied that you had said I had brought other people's opinions to back mine up. I was using that to state a point, which you missed. You misunderstood me there and on some other points. But eh, moot because the reaction is what it is, regardless.

You addressed me directly in a questioning tone. Sounding very accusing when I just made a small observation. Otherwise there was no need to respond to me just to make a point you were trying to make to others.

What you typed in response to what I thought of those posts is what I was talking about.

''It does prove that AMFP is not as well regarded overall, I'm not one to use argumentum ad populum, but the evidence does stand to show that at the very least."

To which I answered yadda yadda yadda, which led us to this, yadda yadda pt2 lol.

[Paddy™]

@Paddy
Err, if I'm correct, the mean score for all these 90 reviews is somewhere around 7.3 /10.

The score itself isn't the point I was making; the fact that there are 90 reviews from professional reviewers which aren't taken into account on MetaCritic's AAMFP page shows just how meaningless a MetaCritic score is. The existence of at least twice as many reviews elsewhere calls MetaCritic's value into question.

If it turns out that even with all 90 of those reviews taken into account the consensus is still around 7.3/10, it would be a happy coincidence, not evidence of MetaCritic's worth or prescience.

[NicoNico]

Hi guys,

@Paddy
Err, if I'm correct, the mean score for all these 90 reviews is somewhere around 7.3 /10.

The score itself isn't the point I was making; the fact that there are 90 reviews from professional reviewers which aren't taken into account on MetaCritic's AAMFP page shows just how meaningless a MetaCritic score is. The existence of at least twice as many reviews elsewhere calls MetaCritic's value into question.

If it turns out that even with all 90 of those reviews taken into account the consensus is still around 7.3/10, it would be a happy coincidence, not evidence of MetaCritic's worth or prescience.

Yes I know^^
I was actually curious of the score, but, yeah, MetaCritics or any other review shouldn't be an evidence of any kind. The most accurate review in the world is your own

[Alardem]

The problem is that, for every well-reasoned critique by professionals or posters like Fortigurn, there's 10 other stupidly low '0/10' scores by petty people who have no conception of how to properly assess a game. It's these thoughtlessly low scores that make the grading system questionable, and make the MetaCritic score so lopsided.

[Diango12]

@Paddy
Err, if I'm correct, the mean score for all these 90 reviews is somewhere around 7.3 /10.

The score itself isn't the point I was making; the fact that there are 90 reviews from professional reviewers which aren't taken into account on MetaCritic's AAMFP page shows just how meaningless a MetaCritic score is. The existence of at least twice as many reviews elsewhere calls MetaCritic's value into question.

If it turns out that even with all 90 of those reviews taken into account the consensus is still around 7.3/10, it would be a happy coincidence, not evidence of MetaCritic's worth or prescience.

I agree that Metacritic is not always a reliable source of gauging media reception, but it does have numbers, and it does aggregate sentiment. Someone else here made the point that 'only professional reviews are really valid'. This is a terrible opinion to have.

You have huge conflicts of interests in the review industry. Never mind the sycophants but you often have wide disconnects between popular review from players and 'professional' reviews from journalists. Colonial Marines got high marks from the professionals the first few days.

Rome Total War 2 right now has a meta score of 7.9 from the professionals but 2199 users currently have it at below 3.0. Why is this? The game is buggy, the AI is horrendous, and if you actually sat down and played it as if you were trying to enjoy it and not as a project to confirm a research bias than you would realize its an incomplete game. I would rather listen to hundreds of fellow consumers tell me "I did not enjoy this product, be careful" than a journalist explaining why the product design is an industry achievement.

The meta score for AMFP btw, is based on 520 user reviews, not 40. The current 5.6 in my opinion is deserved. Even though I gave it a 7.0, I understand that the game has a lot of shortcomings that may not be as easily forgiven by other players.

[Blue Machine]