Amazon posting Metacritic scores on game pages

[Sload Soap]

prfsnl_gmr's "to do" list for April 2, 2104
1. Buy a copy of Dead Space 3
2. Drop off dry cleaning
3. Work out
4. Make a member of the Racketboy forums sad
6. Spend time with children

Only three more to go!

I think you should do your laundry and spend time with the kids at least once before 2104, dude.

[prfsnl_gmr]

prfsnl_gmr's "to do" list for April 2, 2104
1. Buy a copy of Dead Space 3
2. Drop off dry cleaning
3. Work out
4. Make a member of the Racketboy forums sad
6. Spend time with children

Only three more to go!

I think you should do your laundry and spend time with the kids at least once before 2104, dude.

I certainly will. The real issue is that I don't plan on doing anything else.

[Hobie-wan]

http://kotaku.com/amazon-adding-metacri ... 1556940107

[ZeroAX]

What was wrong with just having amazon user reviews? Taking too much space on their servers?

[Hobie-wan]

I just don't get what they're doing this for. "AAA" titles that seem to get good scores no matter what won't really be helped with sales increases as there's always a ridiculous hype machine for them. Good to not so good titles being considered by a person who only looks at the Meta number and thinks that anything under 80 is a bad game might be turned off and not buy. Anyone who's actually trying to learn about the game will likely have arrived with research done. I just don't see this doing much besides hurting sales for Amazon.

[Luke]

. I just don't see this doing much besides hurting sales for Amazon.

Nope. Not a bit.

If someone logs on to Amazon, they have already decided to buy something. A metacritic score ain't changing a damn thing. A negative review from Joe Schmo doesn't mean squat either.

Any idea what the bounce rate is for Amazon once someone has logged in? I do, but I can't tell you, but it rhymes with something less than Sven.

[IrishNinja]

not really liking this...aggregate review sites don't need any more pull over dev/pub trends than they current enjoy, especially with the questionable scoring methods compiled. a simple <THIS NUMBER MEANS NOTHING REALLY caveat would balance it out nicely for me.

[Hobie-wan]

. I just don't see this doing much besides hurting sales for Amazon.

Nope. Not a bit.

If someone logs on to Amazon, they have already decided to buy something. A metacritic score ain't changing a damn thing. A negative review from Joe Schmo doesn't mean squat either.

Ok, let me rephrase that. "I just don't see this doing much besides maybe hurting sales for Amazon." Otherwise as I said, an informed (or even a blind) buyer won't be affected by a positive either. Maybe grandma looking at a list of games little Betty/Billy asked for might choose one over another based off that number.

I just don't see why Amazon is doing this.

[01toubib]

Hmmm, they should only post the Metacritic score if the game is above 90, to inform the buyer its a top game. No need to post a bunch of 70 and 80 games because those scores mean jack squat.

[Luke]

I just don't see why Amazon is doing this.

Consumers love content, be it positive or negative.

The adage about press has been around forever for a reason. People want to believe they are well informed, whether they agree with a comment or not. It's a marketing tool.

Plus more and more people love to love things others hate. Vegemite sales are up even though people claim to hate it.

Any content = good content. And who did it first? Amazon. They know what they're doing.