Mists of Pandaria has a score of 83% based on 14 reviews on gamerankings

[schippie]

Uhm.. why is this topic allowed when we just a week or so ago had the same topic. Seems fairly redundant if you ask me.

[Mazar]

I give MOP probably a 8.5/10. If VP gear wasnt gated behing dailies I would have rated it better.

WOW is the 2nd best game I have ever played. But that is because of the people I play it with. It allows me to make soo many friends and have real connections with people i never would have known outside of WOW. The only game I truly loved and still miss was Rainbow 6 (1+2) back when i was into FPS's. I played in a gamebattles clan that played in weekly clan matches for money/prizes/etc. We had practice sessions, it was the only time in my life I felt I was a hardcore gamer. Those were great times.

[Maelstrom51]

MoP would be significantly better if it didn't focus so much on dailies, and didn't take so long to reach the VP cap. I don't need a lot of the VP gear anymore, so I only do 15 dailies a day now. But that doesn't matter, since despite clearing all the bosses and doing LFR I'm still quite a bit short on valor. Today after class I get to spend several hours grinding dungeons, hooray.

[Tharkkun]

Honestly, do these numbers mean anything anymore?

We're at the point now where giving a game a 80% or 8/10 score is considered a failed game, not just for WoW but for any game published by a major developer.

Based on who's opinion? If this was metacritic a 75% or higher would be an A because you can vote less than 60%. If a B is a failed game then I guess 95% of all published games are failures because it's rare to see over an 85% on a 1/10 scale.

[vesseblah]

Based on who's opinion?

OP for example.

But then again, this is also a failed thread since metacritic numbers are worthless.

[Lomak]

Why are all the wow players getting so mad about this? It's not even a bad score. Metacritic is fine, reviews are fine, nothing will ever change about that. Most critic reviews are more informative, with actual facts about games, mechanics, ect. then just the authors opinion. If you are incapable of differentiating between the 2 then yea, reviews are probably worthless to you.

Most peoples arguments in this thread boil down to "lol rofl XXX got a YYY% score and I hated / loved that game, reviewers are worthless they all have different opinions". Irrelevant. I could read a bad review about a game that the author just didnt like, and if he did his job well enough I could still find out FACTUAL information about the game that I could use to determine whether or not I would like it, or was interested enough to try it out, despite the authors opinion.

[ngc2440]

Metacritic is fine, reviews are fine, nothing will ever change about that.

El oh el. Metacritic is a broken method that leads to crap games being made. Yes game producers use metacritic to determine what is a good idea to include in games. As has been demonstrated, people will abuse the scoring system for petty reasons. Metacritic is bad and anyone that defends it should feel bad for bringing down the gaming industry by supporting it.

[Adam Jensen]

I think its far too soon to rank a game.

I also think . . . "so?" I don't need some other critic to dictate my opinion of a game for me. But so far, its only in the mid 80s (and I'd give Wrath a 95 and Cata a 70) But I also am not ready to finalize a rank because we're only in the first raid of the first tier, hell the raids that drop tier gear aren't even released.

Come again when patch 5.1 is about to be released.

---------- Post added 2012-10-22 at 09:55 PM ----------

As has been demonstrated, people will abuse the scoring system for petty reasons.

*cough*MassEffectThree*cough*

---------- Post added 2012-10-22 at 09:56 PM ----------

Based on who's opinion? If this was metacritic a 75% or higher would be an A because you can vote less than 60%. If a B is a failed game then I guess 95% of all published games are failures because it's rare to see over an 85% on a 1/10 scale.

Yeah, my personal ranks are analogous to school grades. Anything above 65% is a pass.

[Daetur]

Primarily, I think that a sample size of 14 is far too small to draw a meaningful conclusion.

I also think that for WoW, that ranking may seem lower, but that's still an exceptional ranking for a game this old.

[Garehn Vi-Brittania]

There is no way that fucking piece of shit cata scored better than mop.

[Deleted]

Ive stopped reading reviews and usually look at the forums instead so i can decide a game.

And 83% is way too high, should be 2/10..

[Deleted]

Primarily, I think that a sample size of 14 is far too small to draw a meaningful conclusion.

They are adding reviews from the most popular gaming websites everytime but at the moment there is only 14 of them.

[Deleted]

As expansions go thats very good for an old game.

[Lomak]

Most peoples arguments in this thread boil down to "lol rofl XXX got a YYY% score and I hated / loved that game, reviewers are worthless they all have different opinions".

Case in point.

El oh el. Metacritic is a broken method that leads to crap games being made.

[Wow]

/blame World of Dailycraft

Hey we gave you something to do doesn't matter if most don't want to do that right lol...

[ngc2440]

Case in point.

I know reading comprehension is hard sometimes but here, I will quote myself from my first post in this thread.

Anyone who looks at % score or x/y without generous heaps of salt is a fool. I am still waiting for the day that someone can explain the difference between an 85% and a 86% game. I can't wait until we move past the horrible system of trying to give an arbitrary score to a game, as if those values have absolute meaning.

I did not comment at all on the quality of this expansion or of any game. I am pointing out the major flaw in % based scoring and stating that the use of it degrades the quality of games being produced. What the industry needs is actual reviews. Those magical things that state the good and the bad, going into details about each. Trying to remain as unbiased as possible. Websites like metacritic don't allow that. They pick and choose which reviews get posted. People will automatically give it 10/10 because they were payed off or because they are stuck in fandumb. On the flip side people will give it 1/10 or 0/10 because there is an aspect that they might not agree with and decide that the game is a worthless pile of crap, even though what they have a problem with does nothing to lower the quality of the game. (Need I remind you of the Kung Fu Panda crowd)

Mr "Case in point", care to explain to the rest of us the difference between an 86% and an 87%? It is a serious question.

[PewpewNL]

What always amazes me is, who write those reviews? The score depends on one person? Or just one group with a few people?

The people that have those jobs, writing reviews about games, are never going to expierence the stuff that the raiders / pvp'ers or challenge mode players expierence.
So I think any game-related review is bogus and it's mainly their job to make it look like they're "up-to-date" with everything. Those people play games, literally for a living to just see enough to write about and then throw it away.

Total waste of time and money if you ask me.

[Deleted]

Another average review comes from Gamespot: http://www.gamespot.com/world-of-war...eview-6398907/

They've rated it 7,5/10 and user score is 6.1 at the moment which is really weird.