MW3 Amazing Disparity Between User Reviews and Critic Reviews
by LibertarianGamer on Nov.09, 2011, under Gaming
As I post this, there are 1,388 user ratings for MW3 (xbox-360) on meta critic. The average user score is 2.6 out of 10. The average critic score is 90 out of 100.
Critic reviews have always been suspect, but at this point they are borderline absurd. Either the masses are complete Luddites that lack the sophistication to enjoy the product that is MW3, or the reviewers are dolts.
There were not enough PC reviews to produce an average critic score, however the average user score for the PC is an abysmal 1.5. I suspect the critics doing the PC reviews will be much more critical than their xbox counterparts.
In, somewhat related news, someone realized that MW3 is reusing buildings.
6 comments for this entry:
November 9th, 2011 on 9:03 pm
I think people need to read these things with a certain frame of mind. Should a journalist review MW3 with the other earlier iterations of that game in mind or should each be assessed independently? A lot of the comments were related to MW3 being the same old weapons with the same old sounds…. well I hate to break it to you but this game is based on reality – military personnel are equipped with this specific gear.
November 9th, 2011 on 9:49 pm
I understand what you’re saying.
But people are wanting advances in game play. Change something, perhaps provide a new graphics engine, more players, etc.
However, it’s impossible to judge a game independently. There needs to be a metric of sorts, to gauge the progress of the game. This metric is either it’s predecessors or it’s competition.
If a game is truly unique and fun, it does well and becomes the benchmark for clones.
November 9th, 2011 on 10:14 pm
I think the developers focus to much on multiplayer. They make changes to how it’s played and add some new maps and different perks but leave the core of the game the same. Playing the single player portion feels the same as the last 4 COD games, just different environments, the enemies look different but act the same. Friendly AI are useless as always. Nothing new there.
November 10th, 2011 on 12:43 am
I’ll post a mini review soon. I have played Single player 9 hours (It counts the Co-op mode as a part of Single) and not quite yet 2 hours Multiplayer.
So far me and Filezz had a blast playing the co-op “last stand” missions. If I would have purchased it for the Multiplayer and had played the previous Cod up until this release… well it’s pretty much the same. I didn’t see anything super bad. It is quick, tight maps more of the same. I will play it on occasion, but I didn’t buy it for the Multiplayer. So I think it is a great game for what it is.
Most of the outcry seems to be around the fact that it is more of the same. Not sure what people expected?!
November 12th, 2011 on 8:20 pm
Same for Meta of PC version. Thing is people who bother going to write a review are more often people who are pissed off, people who like the game are too busy playing it to write reviews.
It’s the same on NewEgg, with reviews you always have to look at the whole thing and read between the lines.
BTW I think the whole MW line is crap but that’s just me.
November 20th, 2011 on 9:24 am
Well, the problem is as mentioned earlier, A critic reviews the game differently than a regular gamer plays it. Gamers are tired of Modern Warfare ripoffs, and modern warfare 3 literally rips itself off.