Metacritic user score is looking good so far

Might as well toss my half-groat out there:

Bulletin Boards / Missions? 7/10. They really do get better with higher faction rep, but in the end it's all for naught if dozens of people completing dozens of missions for a faction goes totally unnoticed by the wider game's simulation.
Exploration? 3/10. Truly heartbreaking for me. I thought I'd get my own starship Enterprise based on the descriptions in the design docs and what I ended up with is going "bong" a few times and watching a widget spin for 15-30 seconds.
Mining? 5/10. Without something to break the monotony of having to run into every. single. piece. of. ore. each of which is already a mere fraction of a cargo item, it's going to annoy far more people than it satisfies. Give us slow moving pick-up drones at least.
Trading? 7/10. Given time for the prices to work out and the NPC trade algorithm not flooding stations, it'll do. More station types with varying needs would be enjoyable, though.
Outfitting? 8/10. Compared to what it was, it's a lot nicer now. Again, having no specialized stations or corporate HQs makes everything feel very generic.
Graphics? 10/10. Not the UI specifically, but the graphics in general. This is a stunningly beautiful game, and a testament to what can be done with boring real world data to make a truly exceptional experience.
Sound? 9/10. I like almost all of it, except the now very crabby, petulant computer voice.
Combat? 7/10. Against NPCs it devolves into jousting more than I like, but it's still fun. More weapon variety would be nice even if in the end it was reduced to just DPS numbers.
Multiplayer? 3/10. Even now I'm lucky if the person in my Private Group remains visible after a certain amount of time, let alone actually doing anything with him. I really only do co-op stuff online so of course this is just my narrowly focused opinion.
Social? 2/10. Social? There's not enough here to be social about yet.
Piracy/Bounty Hunting? 6/10. Maybe when those missions work like they're supposed to I'll think more highly of it. Bounty hunting is fun enough, piracy has been more of a take it or leave it for me.
Smuggling? 3/10. Find a platform with a black market. Mission accomplished with zero risk.

Overall: 7/10. There's a lot of room to make this a fantastic game, and I think they will make strides toward that. Without changing some major structural features that I don't think they'll change, however, I don't think it's going to ever be what I wished it was when I first bought Premium Beta.
 
I gave it 9 on the basis that it will be a 9 at some point. Also as my learned colleague above put it, to balance out the rage reviews.
.
I think objectively we all know this is about a 5-6/10 at this point. unfortunately, for every person posting a zero rating because they've spat their dummy out, someone has to post a 10 to level the playing field.
.
I'm particularly enjoying the meta-game of rating positive reviews as non-helpful going on. There must be some REALLY aggrieved people bouncing up and down at their keyboards right now.
 
I think objectively we all know this is about a 5-6/10 at this point. unfortunately, for every person posting a zero rating because they've spat their dummy out, someone has to post a 10 to level the playing field.

You've summed up exactly the problem and why some level of 10's are a necessity....

Though I would argue an objective 5-7 would be a reasonable range :)
 
Last edited:
Ok those of you who gave this a 10/10 or a 9/10 please answer me this.

What did they do REALLY WELL with this game? I mean outstanding 10/10 and no more work is necessary? Its perfect.

Bulletin Boards / Missions?
Exploration?
Mining?
Trading?
Outfitting?
Graphics?
Sound?
Combat?
Multiplayer?
Social?
Piracy/Bounty Hunting?
Smuggling?


Which one of these would you consider 10/10?

The nub of the issue is (like with all such "scores") what is it scored against? In the field of massive open world space trading/combat etc games with a nostalgic history and fond memories from the 1984'ers - it's at the top of the pile. Scored as an MMO it's somewhere else, scored as an indy title it's in another place.
 
Which is exactly why Metacritic users scores are essentially useless. If you're talking about "KWAiRT" did you read why he gave it a 0? I certainly wouldn't have, but that's my opinion. Do you think Elite truly deserves a 10 right now in its current state?[/QUOTE

I dont think you understand why i gave it a 10 do you? I will explain. I was making a point of how metacritic is not the be all and end all of ratings as a person gave it a zero even though it was about 2 hours after release so i gave it a 10 to even out his nonsense score. I did not state at all that it deserves a 10, i dont even like rating things with numbers as it dosent do a product full justice.
 
Metacritic is pretty useless for non-professional reviews.

It's certainly more of a popularity contest gauge than it is a review site, but "professional" reviews are far, far worse if you know how the industry operates.

Polygon and Gamespot are among the worst of those, but they're all pretty awful. I don't mean to derail the thread here, I just wanted to point out that "professional" reviews are pretty useless in their own right.
 
I dont think you understand why i gave it a 10 do you? I will explain. I was making a point of how metacritic is not the be all and end all of ratings as a person gave it a zero even though it was about 2 hours after release so i gave it a 10 to even out his nonsense score. I did not state at all that it deserves a 10, i dont even like rating things with numbers as it dosent do a product full justice.

No, I do understand. You replaced a nonsense score with another nonsense score (I guess) thinking that it averages out to be not nonsense when really it just doubles down on the nonsensical nature of the site in general.
 
It's certainly more of a popularity contest gauge than it is a review site, but "professional" reviews are far, far worse if you know how the industry operates.

Polygon and Gamespot are among the worst of those, but they're all pretty awful. I don't mean to derail the thread here, I just wanted to point out that "professional" reviews are pretty useless in their own right.

You find reviewers who share your taste in video games. Then read their reviews on said games to help you make an informed choice. You don't count how many "stars" a game gets...scores are pointless and don't mean anything.
 
It's certainly more of a popularity contest gauge than it is a review site, but "professional" reviews are far, far worse if you know how the industry operates.

Polygon and Gamespot are among the worst of those, but they're all pretty awful. I don't mean to derail the thread here, I just wanted to point out that "professional" reviews are pretty useless in their own right.

This kind of mindset works on both ends and hence contributes only to the problem.
 
I think we should all go there and make a review http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/elite-dangerous
Useless or not, it's part of the game that is at stake there and judging by the growing number of "0" i think the release of ED upset some

When you pull a stunt like the No Offline one and then play hardball about refunds then that's going to happen. I'm holding off on a review there because I want to give it time to deliver more. At the moment i'd give it a 5. It just feels months from release state.
 
A single linear scale when judging a game has no meaning and should be avoided. Whether it's 0-100%, 0-10, 0-5 stars, or whatever else, it's vastly oversimplifying and more and more sites and journalists are dropping this outdated method.

Metacritic needs to disappear in its current form. Lots of people simply write "I'm giving this a 0 (or 10) to balance out all the fanboys (or haters)." This is not a review, informed opinion, or even sensible. If I gave it a '6', it's a '6' compared to what? Would I reserve '7' and over for truly exceptional games, or only give '10' for those? Perhaps I reserve '10' completely because that's 'perfect'? If a game is amazing but has a very serious bug, do I drop 1 point? 2? 3 perhaps? It's arbitrary. Review content is king. Reviewers need to present the content of their review as objectively as possible, not label it with an arbitrary score, and let the reader or viewer decide whether or not to purchase.

We need to stop thinking "what's the best, most honest place to read a review?" and start thinking "I will read several reviews, digest them all, and then make my own decision." It's no different to other forms of journalism. If I only ever read the Daily Mail, I think Britain is full of "dirty immigrants" who are causing all of our problems. If I only ever read the Sun, then I am probably equally biased. Even the BBC can be guilty of this (intentional or unintentional) bias. If I read 3 or 4 sources who all agree on some things and disagree on others, and are unaffiliated with one another, then I can make a sensible decision for myself.

I'm amazed that having read around 100 posts on this, nobody's said (that I could see ;) ), "go read at least a few reviews and make your own mind up".
 
Honestly - this game feels very empty and unfinished at this stage. It is very repetitive... There is not much to do and to see after couple of hours...

I was generous and gave it 3 on Metacritic, just because I have (some) hope that it will improve and grow. Also sound effects are really good!

At this moment I feel cheated on so many levels and I am very, very sorry that I have payed 120 euros for it. Never again will buy a game until it is officially released.
One more interesting fact regarding Metacritic negative reviews - half an hour ago there was 58 negative reviews - now only 48... Anybody knows if they are deleting negative reviews or is it something else?

Now fun-boys and "lawyers" of this game - jump at my throat!
 
Last edited:
You find reviewers who share your taste in video games. Then read their reviews on said games to help you make an informed choice. You don't count how many "stars" a game gets...scores are pointless and don't mean anything.

You're absolutely correct in regards to score numbers being useless. But, while you're also correct in suggesting that one finds a reviewer with shared tastes, that doesn't apply to large name game 'journalism' sites. Even if I know the reviewer likes the same things I do, I don't know whether his review is genuine or not. Cutting deals for positive press and exposure is simply how it's done -- and been done -- for a long time now, and it's a pretty open secret.

Now, granted, I don't base my purchases off one or two reviews, but to say professional reviews don't affect sales of a game is false. Metacritic is far from perfect -- especially when you have astroturfing and 0-10 score wars -- but if I stick to just the reviews that are well thought out, I can get a feel for a game I've never touched far better than a single review that is possibly bribed. Youtube Let's Players actually have a far greater reputation than professional games "journalists." That's not without its problems, as there have been documented cases of companies coming forward to such people attempting to throw money at them for the same exact reason as gaming sites, but I find those still more trustworthy. They're not claiming to be journalists, either. Plus, you can actually SEE the game in action.

This kind of mindset works on both ends and hence contributes only to the problem.

What "both sides?" Explain.
 
I really like Elite Dangerous but I was honestly a bit surprised to see such a high score on Metacritic, given that this game is quite special in what it tries to do. It certainly is not targeted at the mass market, which makes the current MC rating a bit special. At the moment I have the feeling that the true fans run the user review show so I think we'll have to see how that pans out in the next few weeks when the user reviews get a bit more sanitized.
 
So after 5 hours of playing so far, the game is still a 10/10 for me. Again, like I stated, it is all about the fun factor, and I am have a super blast playing this game so far. For me, 10/10 does not mean a perfect game that does not need any improvements, again, all based on how much fun I am having.
 
Score I gave on Metacritic: 10/10. Mainly to counterbalance at least some portion of the brain dead zero rage-reviews.

I think I should reduce my over 2700 characters long negative critique that fully explains the reason to 0/0 to counter the brain dead 10/10 fanboy ratings...
 
  • Like (+1)
Reactions: Rog
So after 5 hours of playing so far, the game is still a 10/10 for me. Again, like I stated, it is all about the fun factor, and I am have a super blast playing this game so far. For me, 10/10 does not mean a perfect game that does not need any improvements, again, all based on how much fun I am having.

Yea, give it a week then come back and tell me what you think :)
 
So after 5 hours of playing so far, the game is still a 10/10 for me. Again, like I stated, it is all about the fun factor, and I am have a super blast playing this game so far. For me, 10/10 does not mean a perfect game that does not need any improvements, again, all based on how much fun I am having.

Come back after 50 hours or more. Once you've learned and tried everything and repeated it a few hundred times.
 
I tossed a 6/10 on metacritic and yes, I do refer to it that site sometimes. It isn't harsh on niche games either, DCS is looked upon favorably there as are RoF and BoS. The reason for my 6/10? Lack of multiplayer features and bland overall feel once the graphical prettiness wears off a little. That said, it was a positive 6/10. I think the game has a lot of potential and was simply released too early.
 
Back
Top Bottom