Metacritic = Yet another bogus "review" site. They deleted my negative review.

[motsm]

As others have pointed out, far too many 1's and 10's in the user reviews, the same reason IMDB is rather pants. I don't really mind if their mods clean house now and then, it's probably for the better more often than not.

 

[JumBie]

Metacritic is equally as bad as Steam reviews. Just go to any Steam review and watch all the one word reviews, or all the attempts at comedy in order to gain thumbs up. They are both useless.

 

[flexy]

that wouldn't help anyone. If that is all you said, you offered no details into what you mean by "boring." "Boring" is entirely subjective, so you have to explain yourself.

This has nothing to do with quality writing, but everything to do with forming a cogent review. Yes, you offered an opinion, but you seem to mistake an opinion as the same thing as a review.

No wonder it was deleted.

This does not make any sense since the positive reviews are not better. People stating their opinion that it's "the best game" in two liners without specifying WHY. Their opinion is not "better" than mine, also largely subjective.
So why should I need to write a lengthy, in-depth review to justify my rating and others would not? You cannot apply a double-standard there.

Besides: IMHO, for the "real" (cough, cough) reviews you have their "critics" reviews there, if you want to read more lengthy reviews. The "user reviews" by default are ALL largely subjective.

 

[zinfamous]

This does not make any sense since the positive reviews are not better. People stating their opinion that it's "the best game" in two liners without specifying WHY. Their opinion is not "better" than mine, also largely subjective.
So why should I need to write a lengthy, in-depth review to justify my rating and others would not? You cannot apply a double-standard there.

Besides: IMHO, for the "real" (cough, cough) reviews you have their "critics" reviews there, if you want to read more lengthy reviews. The "user reviews" by default are ALL largely subjective.

look, I don't go to that sight, never really heard of it, whatever. yes, it's the same thing. If you think negative stupid worthless opinions are getting less thrift than the positive stupid worthless opinions, then that is certainly an issue with their standards.

Reading some other posts in this thread, it seems others have figured that out long ago and consider their system garbage.

So, why do you bother with this website?

 

[XavierMace]

A game like Cities:Skylines gets an amazing score like 9.6 <--- how many people left criticism or negative opinions and how many had been deleted to keep up the artificial good score? Now you know HOW and WHY games get such amazing scores, because someone is rigging results.

Do I think Metacritic is a reliable site? No. Do I think rigging happens? Absolutely. That said, have you stopped to consider maybe most people do think Cities:Skylines is that good? I plan on starting it back up as soon as I get home, but I can tell you so far I'm quite pleased with it. Is it perfect? No. But no game ever is, however that in and of itself makes for higher reviews.

I also played the old SimCity's and loved them. But EA succeeded in completely destroying the franchise. SimCity 5 was such a complete disaster that fans of the genre are desperate for something to fill that niche. So, when you set the bar that low, it doesn't take much to get glowing reviews. I won't lie, just the fact that I was able to install it and immediately start playing almost made me cry with happiness. That's going to artificially inflate early reviews.

I agree the UI needs some work, things definitely aren't as clear as they should be. However, lets look at the things it does FAR better than it's competition:

- It doesn't rely on overloaded servers.
- It didn't take a week to actually be able to play.
- No performance issues (that I've run into so far)
- It has a save button
- Far larger map size
- It doesn't depend on an online economy
- It runs stable (I haven't had any crashes anyways)

I find it funny that you mention you liked the older Sim City's then complain about the game coming to a halt while you build power lines and lay pipes. I distinctly recall having to do that in nearly exactly the same fashion in SimCity 2000. In fact, so far the game very much feels like an older SimCity to me and I mean that in a good way. All I'm missing is a tornado ripping through my town.

Most of your comments so far make it sound like you simply don't like city builders. Or at least that's how they sound to me. And if that's how your review sounded, I probably would have deleted it too.

 

[xantub]

I think the problem is that your review is about what you wish Skylines should have been, not what it is. You complain that nothing exciting happens... why should anything exciting happen? It's a city builder, it's for the creative types to build their city how they want. So I disagree with the review, but don't know why it had to be removed really. What they should do is give a thumbs up/thumbs down to the actual reviews, and if many people disagree with the review, it's buried and doesn't count for any computations.