That said, metacritic and Opencritic Gave Mina the same score. So… Regardless of where you look, the outcome is essentially the same.
Comment on Mina The Hollower Is Now Metacritic's Highest-Rated Game Of 2026
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
I think people give Metacritic too much credit. Better look at OpenCritic in my opinion, where Mina The Hollower and Schrödinger’s Call are the highest rated games of the year with a score of 93. One of the issues of Metacritic is, that it weights certain sources higher than others. And OpenCritic includes sources that Metacritic would not want to have.
opencritic.com/game/19213/mina-the-hollower and opencritic.com/game/20596/schr-dingers-call
Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
With this one game, yes. I’m not talking about one game, but in general. The overall score of this specific game is not even my main point.
novibe@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
What do you mean by “would not want to have”? Why would we want to have them?
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
Metacritic is selective at what critic is allowed to be on the site. While OpenCritic is selective too off course, its accepting more voices than Metacritic (and weights them all the same).
criss_cross@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
But what do they filter on?
There’s certain critics (think right wing nut jobs like Critical Drinker) that I wouldn’t want impacting a score as they’d just rate it low because there’s a minority included in a game.
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
BTW I just looked up the list of reviewers having an impact on the OpenCritic score, at opencritic.com/faq under the section “Where can I find a list of all publications on OpenCritic?”. The list of Top Critics is separate from the others, and include The Jimquisition, The Angry Joe Show and Skill Up in example And their opinion is weighted as much as the one from IGN. And I think this is a good thing.
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
Details how Metacritic is operating is uknown. Another reason to avoid it.
That’s your personal taste and this is good. But imagine someone else decides for you who can impact the score and how much. If you like Metacritic, that’s okay. But OpenCritic takes a more general approach and does not discriminate (at least not as much as Metacritic) and provides a “real” average value. In example I don’t want IGN to impact the score too much too, but Metacritic values scores from places like IGN higher than most other platforms. And with excluding Critical Drinker, IGN’s opinion has even higher impact on the score.
If you really like that, by all means keep using and looking up IGN. I don’t think its the worst in the world or anything like that. I just think OpenCritic operates a little better and that’s it. My initial point was to provide and alternative to Metacritic, because I do not like how it operates overall.
p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
Tried it out with Mixtape: This and this both look the same, except Metacritic exposes the brazen astroturf campaigning going on with this mediocre game. I would also expect OpenCritic to have critics that weren’t directly paid by Annapurna Interactive on the list to drag the score down. Instead, the critic score is even higher.
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
The point is not that OpenCritic matches your taste or expectations of a game better than Metacritic. The point is that OpenCritic is more fair by giving everyone the same voice (average instead weighting) and allow more people to speak / vote. This does not guarantee a better result for you, it just makes it more fair and even. This way OpenCritic has less control of the result than Metacritic, because Metacritic has a hidden algorithm that weights voices differently.
ampersandrew@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Is it possible, even a little bit, that people just have a different opinion than you about a video game? Surely if there was flagrant bribery happening, someone would have receipts and a conscience that compelled them to share it.