Should people take Metacritic seriously?

What are you shitpostinf about now faggot?

No they shouldnt. But not because of ARMS, but because of every single fucking game there. What a shit site.

It's only ok if it's Zelda or any Nintendo games, but only if is 90+. Other games from other consoles, even if they're above 99-95, it doesn't count, or if a Nintendo game is below 90

No, because the score is the least important part of the review.

Also they scale scores, which is retarded. A 2/5 is nowhere near as bad of a score as a 40% will be.

>>381658515
>this bait again
Even the people hyped for arms predicted a 75-80 metacritic score due to the lack of content, didn't stop them from playing it

File: 1497002350183.png (548KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

548KB, 960x960px

>>381658515

>>381658953
a 2/5 is literally a 40% you dumb fucking chimp

>>381658515
I haven't. I just play the game and make an opinion from there.

>>381659206
this, it's ok whem nintendo get a 90

>>381658515
I read a few user reviews and look at gameplay footage if I want to know about a game.
Metacritic can give a good indication but it's not 100% reliable.

Sometimes it's just funny to read 0/10 user reviews (eg. Company of Heroes 2, so many buttblasted russians)

Only when it fits my narrative kek

>>381659403
It's okay when anyone gets a 90, although usually its Nintendo who gets it. ARMS deserves a 77 due to the lack of singleplayer content

File: DC4vSUDUQAEnx4E.jpg (51KB, 663x432px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 663x432px

the game is flawed

>>381659653
>it's ok when anyone gets a 90
yea sure, just wait the nex ps4/xbone new game and look how it's ok

>>381659821
It's okay anon, the big bad shitposters can't hurt you from where they are.

>>381659821
I remember people cheering Persona 5's 90+? Only butthurt shitters are mad at 90+s for any game

Not once. Anyone pointing to metacritic to prove anything is either a huge casual who knows nothing about video games, or a shitposter. Take your pick.

I hope most of them re review the game after all dlc is out like splatoon.

>>381659798
>the game taking a long time to 100% is a negative

You need, at maximum, three +arms per character, and they're balanced enough that there's no rush to RNG your way to a specific set. You sound like those faggots who are mad they "have to" buy 10,000 loot boxes every overwatch event for their precious limited-edition skins.

>>381660257
Except this effects gameplay. The customization aspect is completely lost on competitive play since its just not realistic to expect every competitor to have unlocked all 570 ARMS.And Nintendo themselves ARE trying to push this as a big competitive thing.

>>381658515
>letting reviewers make decisions for gou, or even taking their opinions to heart

>>381659307
And idiots like you don't understand that on the scales themselves, a 40% and a 2/5 wouldn't be given to the same fucking game.

>>381660257
Completing challenges in games for unlocks is fun and adds to the game. RNG is not fun. With RNG, not only does it take too long, but you also don't have enough to do.

>>381659798
The buffs of arms in + variants are the same effects your get when you charge an arm.

100 uncharged
110 charged
110 + uncharged
110 + charged

"Oh so it just means players who have arm+ don't need to charge. Grind2win BS."
No. You don't get the elemental effect if you don't charge and charging is low effort/instinctive so if you're playing competitive the + gives no advantage. At all.

File: reviewers.webm (1MB, 720x404px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 720x404px

>Akklaim versus EGM
>Kane & Lynch versus Gamespot
>Gamergate
>webm of typical reviewer playing a game

There has never been a time when video game reviews should be taken seriously. There probably never will be such a time.

But go ahead, keep going there and giving them traffic, and keep watching game development be fucked because of it. Go on, I certainly can't stop you.

>>381658515
ARMS officially mediocre by BotW fanboy logic

>>381658515
No. Bioshock Infinite has 94 on Metacritic but its still a piece of shit.

>>381661023
It was a good game though. Only Rapture fags think other wise

>>381658515
I don't know about others, but i couldn't care less about what Metacritic says. They told me ReCore was a bad-mediocre game, it ended up being one of my favorites game from this gen.

>>381658515
I bought it day one but Arms is just lacking too much content for anything higher than 80 right now.

>>381658515
>b....but Metacritic scorers don't matter matter

Just a few months ago it did with Zelda. Amazing how fast that changed.

>>381658515
This game looks boring. Why even lost time discussing it? Just ignore it and move on.

>>381661378
THE FIRST CITIZEN KANE OF GAMING IN 2013
go away adam sessler, you have rails to snort and "nazis" to punch

>>381658976
Bullshit.
There was a thread the day before it launched. Most Nintendo fags were predicting 85 and up. I tried to point out Tekken a legit fighting game only got an 81, no chance Arms would get a better score than it.

File: indeks.jpg (9KB, 369x136px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 369x136px

You know,metacritic is a good site when it comes to movie score,but maybe they aren't profecional when they talks about video games?I dont know.I didn't play this game but i was in cinema on movie with score 35 on meta.It was right.xD

>>381658515
Not too much.

>>381658515
>arms
>77
It's a pretty mediocre game. Maybe even less than mediocre. A 50/100 should be enough.