Although we’ve found Metacritic a userful resource for game reviews, many folks have gone on a user submission rampage to discredit games that haven’t even launched yet. Their first attack was on LittleBigPlanet followed by Resistance 2, now their hitting Gears of War 2.

While Gears of War 2 has a Metacritic score of 94/100 the user’s have reviewed it to be a 3.5 out of 10, with a bright red box around the user review due to its low nature we’re sure. Although users are free to give their own honest representation of the game from their perspective, Gears of War 2, as of the review dates, hasn’t been released yet – these reviews are bogus.
This style of attack was popularized in Spore, when Amazon got nailed with poor reviews of the game because Spore’s “Draconic” DRM made people angry. However, it’s more reasonable for people to voice their opinion on a known issue with a game; Gears of War 2 review spamming is just mean.
We use Metacritic as guidance when we do our gaming podcast to understand what games are rated in the industry, but we don’t use user reviews as our main guide. There are plenty of folks out there that may utilize these reviews in more seriousness because they may feel journalists reviews are tainted by advertisers or “the man” and want the common gamers opinion.
The common gamer cannot possibility be reviewing Gears of War 2 before the title has arrived. This is bogus. Metacritic has this to say:
“My advice for our faithful users is to focus your attention on the Metascore for this game and not the thousands of user votes, most of which have been submitted before said users have played the game. This is a gaming community, and if people want to stuff the ballot box, there’s not much I can do at this point. When we upgrade the registration requirements for participation on the site in the near future, this type of thing won’t happen. We’ll post the full legitimate user reviews upon the game’s release. As always, thanks for using the site.” (1up)
So, to those looking for holiday gaming gifts, keep this in mind while you start hunting down games you’ll want to buy.
@Do it like it’s 2013
It’s good to see Nintendo finally getting it’s stuff together. But I still say they missed their chance. They had a large release advantage over Xbox One and PS4 and they wasted it. They are now forever cursed to play catch up.
@All your videos are belong to us
I kick this right into the lawyer’s ball park. I remember the days of the Xbox and PS2, when I gave developers money for their game and that was the end of our interaction. But the modern game industry spawned this horrible mutation of gaming, where developers still have a considerable impact on my gaming experience post release. After Xbox 360 I got used to continuous updates. But it keeps getting worse. The gaming industry is nurturing it’s own Big Brother, which is largely controlled by non-gaming people. No good will come of this.
@Cell Games
I agree with Jonah. I was impressed with the inFamous games. But I didn’t see any differences between multiplatform titles. Cell was a poor choice for Sony; much like HD DVD was for Xbox 360. I am eager to pick up a PS4 and see what Sony’s new hardware is capable off.
@Plus one Paul!
Earlist thing I remember. How long has it been since then? I will miss Paul. He brought a very unique and interestig point of view to the gaming industry. I learned a lot about game development from him. I also realised that I never want to be a game developer. Good luck to you Paul. And get a proper job. It’s time you started puling your weight for the economy (mandatory hate mail).