Metacritic

i love how some of those user reviews there seem as though the user never played more than a few minutes.

And so it begins.  Metacritic user reviews are rather infamous because they're so easy to "review bomb" with unreasonably low scores which drag down the average.  In some cases (for instance, Diablo 3), you'll have people registering dozens of times just to push a score down as low as possible.

Sadly I think that is the downfall of the internet and any site that allows the public to sign up with no hurdles to give their opinion. Anonymity gives power to the powerless. 

Rare cases like D3 or Dragon Age 2 deserve it

No, I don't think they do.  I appreciate that some people might not like them, but I don't think that objectively they deserve the abysmal averages they have been awarded by customers.  

Maybe you recognise that people are allowed to have an opinion outside of this forums scope. so theiy are entitled to review the game in either way they like on metacritics. oh and about the "reviewbomb" you can vote and review too...

kesmai

Whilst I agree they don't deserve the hideously low scores often given to them by users (I think Diablo 3 currently has a user average of 3.7) I would actually say in some cases it is a good thing. These kind of games often have extremely high critic ratings, and I'm sorry but the games are rarely deserving of those scores - whether it's hype or advertising money or developer reputation that encourages the big review sites to give these higher scores it is clearly not right... they are not being reviewed from a neutral perspective.

So in my opinion for games like Diablo 3 the user score simply balances things out a bit and lets potential buyers know that the game might not actually be the greatest thing in the history of the world as critics would have them believe.

The 'real' (justified) rating is often somewhere between the critic and user averages.

This makes me think you're one of those reviewers that reviewbomb because the devs didn't do exactly what you were expecting with the game. (IE. those people who thought this game should be MoM 2,) Maybe I've read the post wrong or with some kind of malice, but it just seems like your post was on the defensive. 

D3 I haven't played but I had a lot of friends play and they all loved it. I think the problem with D3 is that the internet was just disappointed, and when you get a hivemind going on one thing (Such as the internet) then they don't stop. That is another problem, the internet doesn't have any respect, they're mostly entitled little kids.

i knew what i was getting it has been  a W.I.P. for quite a time.

i do like the game.

It´s a fine product for me and the fact that people are whining, ranting about the game or giving it bad reviews does not pull me away from the game.

But you have to understand that if people have the means to vote they will and not always to your liking.

Deviant opinions are not wrong per se. they always have subjective truth inside of them that can either be opposed or accepted.

if one is ranting about the bad user reviews then thoroughly read them, there are cores of truth hidden inside of them, at least in the opinions of the reviews writer.

you only get further when you step outside of the boundaries gave yourself. if you stick to a certain kind of boundary, for example the design decission to base all races of elemental on humans and not stereotype fantasy stuff, you have to accept that within this decision there is also the possibility that people think this is "bland".

even if executed in a superb way (like i think it is).

but hey maybe i´m wrong here..

kesmai

Plato put it somewhere along the lines of: democracy eventually leads to a state where every individual is left to find hell in their own way.

Eloquent, and very true. +1

Diablo 3 was a horrid game. Id rather play Titan Quest or Diablo 2. The user rating is right on if you ask me.