Look, I don't like to post more than one blog a day, but I feel absolutely compelled given my background in statistics and research methods to comment on the shockingly low scores given to Brutal Legend by Destruction.
Short version? I don't agree and I am going to explain why the score should be rejected by a more throughout analysis of the data.
Long version: Every time you have a data set you will have a mean and a standard deviation which details how much spread there is from the central tendency (mean). There will always be outliers that are anomalous data points which are either on the high end or low end of the bell curve. These outliers are statistically uncommon and may not be useful in making informed decisions such as whether to purchase a game based on a review. If look at the CURRENT meta-score for Brutal Legend (both platforms), we know it's 86 which is pretty damn good. The two current outliers we have are from Gaming Nexus which gave it a 100 (only one) and, surprise, surprise, Destructoid on the low end which gave it an unprecedented 60. Most other scores are in the 80's and low 90's. Given this information, is it plausible to argue that Brutal Legend is a perfect game deserving 100? Most likely no, but does it deserve an absurd 60? With a high degree of certainty, NO.
Short answer: The game is most likely a good game (meta-critic = 86) and the Destructoid review is a biased anomaly that should be rejected by most unless you already made up your mind and think the game sucked.
I will likely pick this up if only to piss off Kotick. Shame on you Destructoid.
|
The RPGist's blog
Follow
RSS
Contact
Yeah I understand the statistics behind why Destructoid's review can be considered an outlier, but just because their review was so much lower than the rest, doesn't mean they have to change or should feel "shamed."
I thought you were going to use some math-wizardry explain that if you looked at the text of the Dtoid review and gave the words numerical values they would add up to something that isn't a 6.
Oh well.
Its a cool Tuesday night, I don't have the game I've been waiting, and I'm admittedly in the area of cranky to ornery. But I have to say, wagging a condescending finger at Destructoid for an honest review plotted against its full 1 to 10 scoring values is, at the very least, pretty rude in its own right.
I respectfully urge you to review the site's scoring mantra, consider the actual value of review score deviation, and stow your score whining and statistical e-peen at the door so as not to track mud into this house.
I love you. Stop it.
Stop it.
You're attempting to determine statistical validity against a data set that has no basis in scientific method. IGN's 6 is different from XPlay's 6 and is different from Destructoid's 6. Mean means squat if there isn't a standardized scale at the time of "data collection".
Its like asking 20 children to give something a number rating without defining for the child what their numbers mean. Oh yeah, and you don't tell them what the rang is. However, during analysis, you'll weigh out the number and assign the closest numerical value to their un-uniform number.
Have you ever bought a car or a desk chair using online reviews? I personally find the most value in the top AND bottom scores, because its arguably the best and worst things you can say about a product. What I read next is arbitrary. Ultimately, if you're being super serious as a consumer, you've got to breathe in the full spectrum of what a reviewing group is telling you. Breaking it down to maths the way you do just makes you feel good about milque toast-medium popular opinion, which is what it is. Popular opinion is not necessarily analogous to YOUR opinion. If it is, I would question it even more.
You're seeking a true opinion. Does that really make any sense?
Could tell off the bat it wouldn't be genre-defining, but that doesn't really mean it's not enjoyable, which there's no doubt in my mind that it isn't. Does have the look of a short game though with perhaps easy-medium trophies/achievements.
Nick has a perspective on the game that other people didn't share. That's not bad, that's gold. That's rare; even important. I mean, what makes you think that some, if not all of the other reviewers who took on Brutal Legend didn't take the easy way out by giving the game the same score that they everyone else to gave it? It takes a lot more guts, consideration, and honesty to give a game a 6 that everyone else is giving a 8 or a 9. To do that, you can't just copy and paste other people's opinion, then collect your paycheck. You have to really stick your neck out, as well as think for yourself. You have to care enough about your own opinion, and your relationship with your readers, to go the extra mile.
For the people who have the same taste in games as Nick, his review just saved them $60. For everyone else, they can go by other reviews if they feel like it, or better yet, for their own opinion by demoing the game themselves.
In conclusion, there is no truth, only different perspectives. Science cannot be used to establish what games are "good" and which games are "bad". The minority voice also deserves to be heard, and you're just going to have to deal with that.
"It takes a lot more guts, consideration, and honesty to give a game a 6 that everyone else is giving a 8 or a 9."
You're stretching it there a bit, but I agree with you on most points. There have been countless reviews from nearly every publication that has given a game a lower score than it deserved, as well as higher, without really validating the opinion of why it deserved it.
Not saying that happened today though. Haven't played the game yet, and I'm definitely going to at some point.
Honestly, why do people have such a hard time accepting that someone out of the billions and billions of people out there could possibly have a different opinion then them??
For example, one of my absolute favourite games this generation, maybe of all time, is Warhawk on the PS3. I have never enjoyed a competitive multiplayer as I have with this game. I mean, the scale of the battle and the variety of the play styles make this a shooter unlike anything else out there. Yet there are many Dtoiders on here who do not share the same feelings as me on the game. What I see as a great feature, the sense of scale, they despise due to the gaps in action after getting killed and all the wasted space in between these points. We have completely contrasting experiences with the game. So which of us is right?? The game is rated about a mid-80. While I'd rate it in the mid-90s I can see people rating it as low as 55% with the steep learning curve, unforgiving balance and localized actions. Not to mention the bland art style, unoriginal weaponry (outside of the actual Warhawks of course), the insanely difficult leveling system and the lack of a single player mode. See, in the end I honestly don't care because we don't have to agree on everything. It's their opinion and I'm sure there will be another game that comes along that we can both tolerate together. But in the mean time I'll fly the skies in my Warhawk.
Also, you learn more about a game through reviews that rip it apart then the ones that praise it regardless of its faults.
Also there's no such thing as an unvalid review. A review is the opinion of someone playing the game, therefore it's subjective and as valid as any other.
All of them.
Video games are not grades of milk...know what, hold on a minute...
Not saying I totally agree with RPGist, but whether or not individual reviews are designed to be aggregated (ie: IGN 6 is different from Dtoid 6, etc.) is somewhat irrelevant. If you implement a number based scoring system some people, whether aided by sites like metacritic or not, will directly compare the scores. You may not agree with it, but you can't deny that it will happen.
It is for this reason that I believe there to be some merit in the whole 'dtoid outlier' thing. Is the Brutal Legend review honest? Yes. Is it harder to give a low score to a hyped game such as this? Probably so. But if you're one who looks at aggregate scores, you will probably end up putting less weight to the lowest and highest scores. And since game review is neither wholly objective nor subjective and neither fully scientific nor artistic, I can't outright say I think RPGist is "wrong".
Personally, I'm split on the subject. Can't deny that I do look at metacritic to some degree when it comes to making purchases, but I also put a good deal of faith in reviewers whose tastes seem to fall in line with my own.
TL;DR hooray for dissenting opinions!
EA may have paid for those positive Brutal Legend reviews. Maybe they didn't. I am not in a position to hazard a guess, but without certainty, those values are mathematically invalid, as they may or may not reflect the true feelings of the reviewer. Therefore, would it not be truer to say that Destructoid's review score is more more accurate and thus more useful in this respect because we know that EA did not pay for a better review?
Well, I wouldn't say absurd. If you're going to cheat on a test, you don't want to give yourself a perfect 100, right?
Did you get a chance to check out that video? I'm curious as to what you think about it as it relates to this topic. I get what you mean about people using averages as a tool: as someone in comments said, its possible that would happen. I just thinking that's a poor way to go about it! :D. And, I believe you could see it my way if the idea is explained the right way.
Well, I wouldn't say absurd. If you're going to cheat on a test, you don't want to give yourself a perfect 100, right?
Did you get a chance to check out that video? I'm curious as to what you think about it as it relates to this topic. I get what you mean about people using averages as a tool: as someone in comments said, its possible that would happen. I just thinking that's a poor way to go about it! :D. And, I believe you could see it my way if the idea is explained the right way.
If you check Metacritic, everyone who ATTEMPTED to learn the multiplayer that Double Fine worked on for four years, gave BL rave reviews. Everyone who expected it to be single player despite all the multiplayer videos hated it.