Polygon introduces "Provisional Reviews"

[Legend]

http://www.polygon.com/forums/meta/2015/2/6/7993679/introducing-provisional-reviews-on-polygon

"Moving forward, Polygon editorial staff will have the ability to flag the reviews of certain games with a "Provisional" tag. If a review is marked as Provisional, then we're advising caution on the part of our audience. It means we haven't tested it enough in real-world conditions to be sure it will function as-advertised. Reviews marked this way will not be listed on Metacritic until the flag is removed. This flag should last only for a short window of time from a game's official release, until such time as we can make an informed judgment about its launch state."



Nice

[Xbro]

That's actually a pretty good system. Then you won't get backlash for changing the score.

[7H3]

that's sounds quite reasonable

[Xevross]

Agreed, this is a good idea. Helps give games a more accurate meta score, especially if more sites decided to do this.

[Dr. Pezus]

I concur!

[Mmm_fish_tacos]

Agreed, this is a good idea. Helps give games a more accurate meta score, especially if more sites decided to do this.

but meta doesn't update scores, so if polygon decided to give uncharted 4 and 60 and then decided they didn't like the way drakes hair looks and updated their score to a 50, meta would still record the 60 originally given.

[Xevross]

but meta doesn't update scores, so if polygon decided to give uncharted 4 and 60 and then decided they didn't like the way drakes hair looks and updated their score to a 50, meta would still record the 60 originally given.

"Reviews marked this way will not be listed on Metacritic until the flag is removed."

Meta would only show once the reviewers have made their final decision

[Mmm_fish_tacos]

"Reviews marked this way will not be listed on Metacritic until the flag is removed."

Meta would only show once the reviewers have made their final decision

Okay, didn't read that part.

[Xevross]

Okay, didn't read that part.

You're a silly billy

[Max King of the Wild]

It's stupid.  Either have a "score pending on release" or just stop scoring all together like the other guys. I lean towards getting rid of scores all together and when there were talks of vgc becoming reviewers I strongly voiced my opinion of not giving reviews scores and that strong reviews should stand on the words and not scores. I was in the minority. Funny how scores are jut becoming absolutely worthless though.

[Xevross]

It's stupid.  Either have a "score pending on release" or just stop scoring all together like the other guys. I lean towards getting rid of scores all together and when there were talks of vgc becoming reviewers I strongly voiced my opinion of not giving reviews scores and that strong reviews should stand on the words and not scores.

Well I agree with that, but this would be a step in the right direction. People still look at scores and judge games by it, that will never change. This would help make sure those scores are more accurate.

[Legend]

I like scores in my reviews. Aint got time to read.

[Xevross]

I like scores in my reviews. Aint got time to read.

Yeah, sometimes I like to just look at the score if I don't fancy reading the review. If I want to know how good a game is though, I definitely won't use the score, I'd read reviews.

[Max King of the Wild]

I like scores in my reviews. Aint got time to read.

but the score is a redundancy. Without the words the scores are meaningless. And if you just look at scores then you should support websites not even write a review

[Legend]

but the score is a redundancy. Without the words the scores are meaningless.

Not if you know and trust the reviewer. "Oh it's Jim. He likes FPS games and dislikes Nintendo. He gave Mario 5,000 an 8.7/10. Wow must be good. I'll look into it."


The two review sites I care about are videogamer.com and gametrailers.com. I watch enough of their video content that the scores are all I need.