ForceUser wrote:A site that allows 'professional' reviewers to say things like it's too in depth on a game that's main focus is to be an in depth game mirrors exactly what is wrong with the gaming community as a whole.
Metacritic doesn't allow anything. It just gathers the reviews. I doubt it's paying any attention on what is said on those reviews, only if the review site in general is considered to be "professional" by the community.
A gaming community that only wants regurgitated sameness year after year, where the best selling games is just minor reskinned FPS games with slight gfx improvements with identical story lines and 10h game play if you run through the campaign, twice. These people are the ones writing both user reviews and 'professional' reviews on metacritic and it shows. That is why the site is bad and why anyone ever referencing it as a basis for saying if a game is good or not is a fool. It is highly frustrating because they are the reason why we can't have nice things
Let's look at the games that have >90% on both professional and user reviews :
The Orange Box
Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn
Team Fortress 2
System Shock 2
Rome: Total War
Thief: The Dark Project
Age of Empires II: The Age of Kings
Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri
The Longest Journey
The Operative: No One Lives Forever
The Sims 2
Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory
Half-Life 2: Episode Two
Command & Conquer: Red Alert
Not a single one
of those games follows your description! (Well, maybe Half-Life 2: Episode Two, but it is supposed to be an expansion pack to Half-Life 2...)
Now, it is a shame that metacritic won't show games that didn't have 4 professional reviews (like Complete SotS1), nor allows you to order following user reviews.
Actually case in point, saying the game is in beta. There is absolutely zero basis for syaing that but you say it because that is what people say on those sites so it has to be true. The game has been released for over 2 years, it has an expantion, it is completely playable from beginning to end, all major and minor elements are in game and functioning. there are no outstanding features that still need to be implemented. What basis is there at all to call sots2 a beta?
Balancing, improving the completely functional AI, performance tweaks and minor bug fixes are NORMAL full released game stuff and does not make a game a beta.
First, that's my personal opinion, and I actually haven't read any reviews saying that, probably because they rarely have the time and the patience for an in-depth study of the game mechanics.
Second, are you playing the same game as me? Especially the "all major and minor elements are in game and functioning. there are no outstanding features that still need to be implemented" (diplomacy?), "completely functional AI" (see the recent report about the AI sending damaged ships to fight, while combat ships stay behind), "minor bug fixes" (AI not debt-suiciding anymore is not a minor bug fix). Have you read the tech support forum lately?
A little reminder of what constitutes a beta (emphasis mine) :
Beta, named after the second letter of the Greek alphabet, is the software development phase following alpha. It generally begins when the software is feature complete. Software in the beta phase will generally have many more bugs in it than completed software, as well as speed/performance issues and may still cause crashes or data loss. The focus of beta testing is reducing impacts to users, often incorporating usability testing.