Be one of the worst games to be released in years

>Be one of the worst games to be released in years
>Get a metacritic rating of "Ok"
Why do retards on Yea Forums trust metacritic and reviewers?

Attached: 76.png (713x404, 68K)

Notice how the user reviews are much, much lower?

Yea Forums doesn't, only shills, fools and shitposters after (you)s value a reviewer over there own experience.

User reviews are all that matters

Yet go to any thread and faggots will use Metacritic scores for arguments as if it means shit.

>you're just a retard who still doesn't know how to read Metacritic ratings. 70 and below is piece of shit. Between 71 and 90 is okay or mediocre okay. 91 to 95 is good and 96 to 100 is piece of shit.

metacritic is only used for guaranteed replies, all you do is post a score and "OH NO NO NO NO" and you're good

I don't care about those people

>0-50
Borderline Scam
>50-79
Awful
>80-90
Flawed but okay
>90-95
Good
>95-97
GOTY
>98+
Reserved for Nintendo games

Wrong. It should be
>95-97
Has feminist ideology shoved in
>98+
Reserved for movie

>MK11
>Hold my beer

Attached: 11.jpg (649x254, 72K)

Attached: 1535145898663.jpg (613x1200, 120K)

None of them matter you fucking sheep

Critics do the same difference is they get paid for it

>Not being able to parse through well thought out opinions and shitty spic whining
Anyone that gives a game a zero is retarded

MK sucks now because Ed Boon has been cucked and just wants to score Good Boy points

Yea Forums needs to understand that the metacritic scores don't matter at all, they're not just shifted along a scale or something. The people who write these reviews are casual normalfags who not only have no idea what makes games good but they hate video games and will take the shortest path possible to get their paycheck, so you get a half assed review from an overly limited sample of a game by a person lacking the ability to evaluate games in the first place. Sometimes these people barely play a game at all and just assign a score they think will fit in among the other reviews, predicted from the pre-release hype and disregarding actual game contents. And that's not even mentioning the actual bribery which influences scores.
Obviously the composite of these worthless scores is equally worthless. A metacritic 60 is just as likely to be a good game as a metacritic 90.

was pretty fun and comfy during the free week. Just needs to be cheaper

>Paying Bethesda for a shit game when there are better multiplayer games out

>Scores are mostly untrustworthy advertising
Recommend me some great rpgs bros, at least you don't get paid to shill and sell me shit.

Attached: 1542635449652.png (945x856, 827K)

>using meme arrows when there are better forms of communication

>52 is ok
Professional critic reviews haven't worked like that for years now. Anything below a 70 is usually an awful game. A AAA game receiving a score like that is even worse because they usually get a consolation prize of a 70+ just for being a AAA game.