Metacritic

[Winnow]

Whats up with metacritic?

I'm not liking the new layout and colors so far.

[miir]

It's awful.

[Aslanna]

It's been like that a couple weeks or so. And yeah it sucks. I much preferred the old layout. They should make that a skin option or something.

[Kaldaur]

Damn, you all are metacritical.

hahhha

[Leonaerd]

It still functions the same, at least. The only thing that's ever bugged me about the site: Ordering the left column (lists of movies / games / dvds) by score, then when one of the games is clicked the column reverts to alphabetical order. Oooooooh the precious wasted seconds.

[Winnow]

Has Metacritic always been owned by CBS Interactive

http://www.cbsinteractive.com/?tag=footer%3blink

I'm wondering f that's the reason for the horrible change in appearance.


lol, saw this from VV's original IGN boards:

http://vnboards.ign.com/outpost/b22180/111326635/p1/

Their board layout hasn't changed since VV left.

Looks like you'll eventually get to switch back to the dark look if you want.

I wonder what kind of treatment CBS shows get since Metacritic is owned by them.

Check this Metacritic Forums thread announcing the new look and how it's more readable. lol:

http://forums.metacritic.com/eve/forums ... /869102412

followed by a string of people saying how bad it is. How can they possibly think it's a positive change? It's practically 100% negative feedback.

[Aslanna]

Another new layout and even more suckage. Or is that the change that they made last year where at least you could change it back? I am not seeing that option now. Before you could get a nice compact list of all games for a platform along with the score now it's not so compact and you can only get 100 on a page. I don't see how this is an improvement.

[miir]

Not sure how long it will work, but http://apps.metacritic.com/games will give you the old layout.

[Aslanna]

Much better. Thanks!

[Winnow]

Anyone else got issues with the above? How the hell did they come up with 82?

[Drolgin Steingrinder]

if (reviewed item=affiliated with cbs) then(discard 9 lowest scores)

[Leonaerd]

Anyone else got issues with the above? How the hell did they come up with 82?

They perhaps don't include outliers (2x stdev) into their calculations, which in this case includes the lowest several scores, but none of the highest ones. If that's the case, scoreflation would occur all the time and most scores would be significantly higher than the mean. Maybe Metacritic doesn't trust low scores because they're so frisky. Maybe Metacritic has an agenda to pander to somebody and push games.
topical tangent:

[Show]

I read a book called Supercrunchers, about people who use good math to bypass the need for conventions we've become used to. Example: A man, who saw wine quality resulting from measurable factors including weather patterns, made a simple equation based on the conditions the crop went through before it was harvested. It essentially rated different batches of wine on a 100 point scale. This caused an uproar from the wine rating community, who claimed wine quality can't be gauged this way. The equation has been highly praised otherwise, and has proven to be extremely accurate. It is interesting to see how wine pricing has changed since the equation's use began. The point being: you can't trust a reviewer. They're always pandering to something.

The whole thing is ironic to me, since I immediately look for the worst scores to bring to light a gaming flaw that might not have been adequately calculated by the high scores, which I assume are mostly slobbing on publishers' knobs. For me, the sincerity behind a reasonable 9.5 / 10 score has long since been watered down to an assumed embellishment. I'd rather just see a "reviewer" simply list what's most annoying about a game. That's more helpful than 2 pages of IGN sucking a game's 90 / 100 dick, while leaving inadequate review space for cons that could realistically turn me off to a game.

[Aslanna]

I think it was a generalization showing they come up with a single score based upon multiples. I don't think that's supposed to be an actual factual mathematical truth. Or solution.. Or whatever term those crazy mathematicians use.