Weighing in on Meta Scores
Review scores are completely subjective, one would have to agree, or I would hope so. Why take it to heart if an individual was to give a game, he/she truly enjoyed, a rating you don't agree with? For example, I really loved the original Assassin's Creed, while most preferred part 2, which didn't interest me. We all have different tastes. How can the readers of these reviews expect us all to have the same likes, dislikes, preferences, and whatnot. We would then all be machines. What is the point in doing what we do, if we don't have our own opinion to offer to the readers?
What is fun to me is fun to me, get it? Let me paint a picture for you, there's a Holy-Grail-website that gives a number scale to assist you on whether a game is "better" than another game, based on its number rank. The problem with this is that certain lemmings take this scale to heart and it could create a negative snowball effect.
Let's step back for a second. Who is benefiting from this scoring system. Is it truly for the average Joe? Most people know what game they are looking forward to and will purchase it, no matter the score. If there is a score that opposes their initial thoughts on the game, it only makes sense to do some more research into why. They will investigate and look into other opinions, before they make their final decision. However, does this number system site really benefit the average person, or does it just hype the marketing machine?
Think about this, how hard would it be for a reviewer to give a game a negative score after a publisher has built rapport with a reviewer that has now become an asset? I wanted to ask you all a question, if a game you were really looking forward to was to get a negative score on this holy grail website, would it deter you from purchasing it?