Starlink: Battle for Atlas for Switch Reviews - Metacritic (https://www.metacritic.com/game/switch/starlink-battle-for-atlas)
Same rules as the GOW thread. (http://vizioneck.com/forum/index.php?topic=6155.0) Give a high, medium, and low prediction.
IE you expect it to get a 95 so you set that as your middle. Then you set 97 as your high because you don't think the game has a good chance of scoring above that. Then you set 88 as your low because you don't expect the game to score lower than that.
RESULTS WILL NOW BE SCORED SO THAT AN OVERALL WINNER CAN BE DETERMINED AT THE END OF THE YEAR. IF YOU HAVE THE CLOSEST PREDICTION, YOU EARN POINTS: SCORE +=100-(high prediction-low prediction)*2. IF THE FINAL MC FALLS OUTSIDE YOUR HIGH AND LOW PREDICTIONS, YOU LOSE POINTS: SCORE -=50.
Review embargo ends when the countdown ends. Feel free to post predictions and edit them up till that time.
100:
99:
98:
97:
96:
95:
94:
93:
92:
91:
90:
89:
88:
87:
86:
85: Legend, nnodley
84:
83: Dr. Pezus
82:
81: the-Pi-guy
80:
79:
78:
77:
76:
75: nnodley
74:
73: the-Pi-guy
72: Dr. Pezus
71:
70: Legend
69:
68:
67:
66:
65: nnodley
64: Dr. Pezus
...
60: the-Pi-guy
59: Legend
Time to get betting!
High: 85
Mid: 70
Low: 59
High: 85
Mid: 75
Low: 65
83
72
64
This is a fun one to predict since the studio has never made a game like this.
81
73
60
Woops, there's already 21 scores.
Sitting at 79.
Locked in lol!
Woops, there's already 21 scores.
Sitting at 79.
Sure doesn't look like anyone cheated, so I added Pez and you.
Seems to be a lot better than most of us feared.
This system is flawed
This system is flawed
What's up?
What's up?
I had no idea where this was gonna go and I didn't wanna risk losing points so I just didn't bother.
I had no idea where this was gonna go and I didn't wanna risk losing points so I just didn't bother.
The idea behind the range is that it rewards people for being confident in their predictions. Why couldn't you just have a really large range?
Lol didn't realize reviews were out already
I'm curious about this game, but its definitely an on sale type of game to buy.
The idea behind the range is that it rewards people for being confident in their predictions. Why couldn't you just have a really large range?
Eh I guess, but with only the winner earning points it hardly feels worth it :P
Eh I guess, but with only the winner earning points it hardly feels worth it :P
It's not sustainable, but right now we have so few active members that it's pretty easy to win points :-\
It's not sustainable, but right now we have so few active members that it's pretty easy to win points :-\
I suppose, I still think there should be a system where everyone gets points though. Perhaps a multiplier which gets smaller the further down you place, like 2nd place can only get up to 50 points, 3rd up to 30 etc.
I suppose, I still think there should be a system where everyone gets points though. Perhaps a multiplier which gets smaller the further down you place, like 2nd place can only get up to 50 points, 3rd up to 30 etc.
Do you personally think of/want metacritic betting to primarily be a competition between posters on the forum, or primarily be a reflection of your own predictions?
Do you personally think of/want metacritic betting to primarily be a competition between posters on the forum, or primarily be a reflection of your own predictions?
Competition of course!
Down to 76!
Nnodley winning
Competition of course!
Ok me too.
Maybe change it so instead of it being -50 for getting outside the range, make it -25 for getting outside the range and +25 for having your middle prediction within 5 points? That way you're more enticed to participate for every betting thread.
Ok me too.
Maybe change it so instead of it being -50 for getting outside the range, make it -25 for getting outside the range and +25 for having your middle prediction within 5 points? That way you're more enticed to participate for every betting thread.
I think something like that would be better, make it so that you're often earning points, otherwise with most games only one or two people have any points changes and that's just boring.
I think something like that would be better, make it so that you're often earning points, otherwise with most games only one or two people have any points changes and that's just boring.
Cool. I'll apply that change retroactively if no one objects.
Down to 74. Holy cow.
Down to 74. Holy cow.
Up to 75
I was summoned?
You losing, baby.
You losing, baby.
Them's fighting words for someone not even in the ring.
Boom! Hope it doesn't change!
Nnodley's prediction holding strong.