Metacritic has released their stats for the first 6 months of this year and when compared to last year the results are quite astounding.
Last year the top scoring game for the first 6 months was Street Fighter IV which scored a respectable 94%… Personally I find that far to high for a simple fighting game (with a deep fighting system) and feel the reviews were biased by the fanatical support the series has.
But I guess the same could be said for many other genres and games… however the first 6 months of this year have been great across virtually all genres with 7 title scoring 90% or more and 3 scoring over 95%.
The three being
Red Dead Redemption – 95%
Super Mario Galaxy 2 – 98%
Mass Effect 2 – 96%
On the opposite side of the scale there have also been far fewer duds released with 25 titles receiving a score of 49% or lower in the first half of last year compared to 15 this year.
So are games just getting better or are reviewers starting to become overly generous?
Source: Metacritic
Last Updated: July 5, 2010
RSA-Ace
July 5, 2010 at 10:55
It’s the reviewers. A change needs to be made in the whole process. Some reviewing standards would be great as well.
If you have to have a score though think I prefer the symbol (A+ B- C etc) standard. When you play a game there is no way to say 96% or 95%. But to call it A+ is easy. It also stops the whole 100% complaints when people think you mean the game is perfect.
Geoffrey Tim
July 5, 2010 at 11:04
I’m inclined to agree. I really dislike the numerical scoring system for games. It’s really just an arbitrary, meaningless number.
The problem lies in that for some, the scoring scale starts at 70, so anything that scores that is “bad”. How the ffing eff is 70 bad?
Parker
July 5, 2010 at 11:28
The standards have become too high of late. A few years ago any game that got a 90 had to be a masterpiece. Nowadays reviewers seem to be handing them out. The only exception would be EDGE Magazine. A good game from them gets a solid 8, like Red Dead Redemption. They don’t rest on their laurels, they demand innovation and creativity. It has to be something truly special to get more than 8.
RSA-Ace
July 5, 2010 at 11:53
Edge scoring system does seem to be the only good one left. But the problem is I almost always disagree with there reviews so I can’t use them.
It’s all about finding a review site which has similar opinions as you. Kind like trusting a friend when he says the game is good. He has similar gaming taste so you trust his opinion. There aren’t too many sites which I find trustworthy.
Gavin Mannion
July 5, 2010 at 12:41
Personally I disagree, I feel the reviewer should take the time to really give a game a valid score and stick with it. Then ignore the torrent of abuse that heads their way.
The symbol system is fine but it was just invented to hide from the fanboys who abused reviewers over exact scores in my opinion.
mitas
July 5, 2010 at 16:26
ign hands out 9’s like candy , personaly i feel reviewers
dont go deep enough into a game , Eg ; a game that should take 15 hrs to complete , by the time the reviewer gets to about 12 hrs , he has formed a oppion . where if i had my way , especily wen a game can be played through multpile times , should in fact be played through multiple times in order to gain the whole picture and not just a brush through the game as if it where tiresome experince ( however if it really is , they should state it )
thats just how i feel , i like the Lazy reviews because they tend to inform you of what to expect , and not give you the whole history.