Zero Bombers' Justification?

[AlpsStranger]

Okay, so I know a ton of you are itching to start making those extra Metacritic accounts to get those zero bombs in.

Note that I'm not talking about legitimate, thoughtful critiques or reasonable bad reviews. I'm not talking about a few paragraphs of reasonable complaints and like a 4-6 out of 10. I'm talking about stuff like.

"Got refund, didn't want Clash of Clans mobile kiddie anime pikachu **** amirite lololololololzzzzzzzz..." 0/10

The idea that the game is a zero out of ten is not the person's considered opinion. That would imply that the game is, for instance, worse than Big Rigs Over the Road Racing or Bad Rats. Deep down, literally nobody feels that way.

So what do you think the zero bomb justification of choice will be?

I'm betting it's 99% the "Cartooooooony" people and a few broken English complaints about some country not being in or being represented in a way they don't like.

People with more legitimate complaints ( AI Quality, for instance ) are probably going to leave legitimate low reviews, your 6/10 and 5/10s. I'm talking about the guys who make a dozen accounts and vote 0 with all of them.

The one thing I AM certain of: the user scores for the game will be low everywhere. If the game is good, bad, or in the middle, the user scores will be low.

 

[ExemplarVoss]

Nevermind, I thought this was about something interesting, like a lack of bombers in the AI stream.

 

[Promethian]

People with an intellect greater than newborn care about metacritic?

 

[AlpsStranger]

People with an intellect greater than newborn care about metacritic?

They shouldn't, but they do.

And the game took the art in a ( slightly ) different direction and made *gasp* gameplay changes. Therefore, zero bombs are inevitable. I'm just wondering what the primary rallying cause will be.

For Warhammer: Total War it was DLC prices, for instance.

 

[Acken]

More than wondering why people follow metacritic scoring, I am even more intrigued by people caring about the way other people chose to criticize a video game.

 

[DCParry]

People complain about professional reviewers and invest such an inordinate amount of time and rage on railing against unfairness and so on for freakin' GAME JOURNALISM. Game. Video game.

In my opinion, the user reviews on MC (and actually most other places, but I digress) are much worse. They are vapid, solipsistic rants that masquerade idiosyncratic desires as "objective" and "critical" issues. There is nothing wrong with vapid, solipsistic rants. I love them. They are not reviews. They should not be treated as reviews. They should not be treated as special or important or given any more consideration than something shouted from the street corner by someone handing out a poorly photocopies newsletter.

But, you know, its all about "ethics in gaming journalism"? Right?

 

[Zantetsuken]

Nevermind, I thought this was about something interesting, like a lack of bombers in the AI stream.

I agree, Zero Expolisions, Zero Stars



I agree with the OP though after reading through the post, even though there were zero explosions..

 

[GoodSarmatian]

The graphics will be the big thing, but we shouldn't underestimate the -isms. The game has Kongo, female leaders, and no Hitler. I'm sure there's going to be some zeroes because of "SJWs" and "political correctness."

People with an intellect greater than newborn care about metacritic?

Metacritic can be pretty useful if you ignore the zero-point-trolls and actually read the reviews.
Even a quick glance at the meta- and user score contains useful information. Since professional reviewers are usually very tolerant of technical difficulties and will only downgrade a high-profile game from 89 to 85, even if it's borderline broken (Rome 2), a difference of 2 or greater between meta and user score is a pretty good indicator that something was published a few months too early in the development process.

 

[Haggbart]

The funny thing with user scores is they seem to be way more forgiving if the game is from a small publisher and low budget.

Sure I get that people rally together to show dissatisfaction, but the issues are rather arbitrary IMO. In this case I guess we get a lot of the "This game still isn't Civ 4" 0/10

 

[Menzies]

People with an intellect greater than newborn care about metacritic?

Come on mate, that really isn't fair. Even my newborn son steers clear of Metacritic user reviews.