BfA compared to every other Expansion on Metacritic

Community General Discussion
62

If you put survey now older expansions will always win ~Nostalgia FTW. People used to remember only good things from previous expansions.

63

That’s also true. People who tend to be positive do not normally do this kind of sureys, so the level of bias is enormous and believing the contrary is only delusional

1 Like
64

Just because of AP fram and Legends in Legion, BfA is miles ahead.

65

AP farm is real in BFA with introduction of 5th ring :stuck_out_tongue:

66

Sure, only as I said the people with positive reviews that go and take part in this kind of things are very few compared to the negative ones. If you are positive you don’t even think to go and write somehere that you are positive

67

I was gonna point this out too as one reason to explain ratings but then didn’t because of Legions rating being so high compared to some earlier ones sort of break this theory.

1 Like
68

Theory is not broken. Legion was just one good expansion :slight_smile: Ask someone why did he like WotLK more than BFA, he will tell you hundreds of things, he will even list some bugs that are funny to him today.

69

Burning crusade was an excellent expansion due to the fact that we had waited long enough for it and when it hit everyone went nuts.

I do remember a few other expansions always having a huge impact. One time, I think it was for WOTLK, I had preordered my copy at webhallen here in Stockholm, Sweden. The time to get said copy was at midnight. The queue was insane and the hype was huge. Cars were even driving up and down the streets honking and cheering. It was fun.

I missed out on Pandaria, Draenor and most of Legion. I however bought a copy of each except legion, during their launch. This time around with BFA I got a retail copy at the store as usual. I quite like the expansion. I wouldn´t be able to grade it now since we are still only 4 or 5 months in but I´d say it gets a solid 8/10 in my book.

70

I am not convinced that unbreaks the theory, it should then matter to BFA as well.

I do think BFA rating will rise after it is “all out”. I am hopeless optimist and can’t help of thinking they got something absolutely smashing surprice on their back pocket they will throw at us before expansion is over. I mean, this just can’t be all of it can it? But even if that would happen i think the rating would not go higher than 6 really. Just my opinion of course!

71

It is better to believe in it than not. Making game simplier doesn’t mean it will be better, they are prunning everything and want to make wow like a facebook game, log in, do dailies, log off. People doesn’t like it, it’s mmo, peeps want to live in game. Progress is not everything that people seek in WoW.

1 Like
72

Quoting for ultimate truth. If we would have signatures here i could use this as mine. :smiley:

2 Likes
73

@Redoctober: Thank you. In this case I would prefer to think that I am expressing a differing opinion and please see further…

This makes sense by itself. :slight_smile:

I can understand this point of view, but I (partially) disagree with it. Giving an extreme value (of either end), in my humble view requires the game to be literally (or at least figuratively) unplayable or a piece of pure genious. BfA is, again in my opinion only, neither. To oversimplify, I am making a subjective observation that in my opinion, people who gave BfA a rating of zero, were not being objective in any sense. I am not protesting the proportion of negative reviews, what I am saying is that in my view, there are an abnormal amount of zeros.

Average of 0, 0, 10 and 10 is 5,0.
Average of 3, 3, 7 and 7 is also 5,0.
Average of 0, 3, 7 and 10 is again… 5,0.
Average of 2, 4, 6 and 8 is yet again 5,0.
Average of 5, 5, 5 and 5 … is 5,0.

Now for the trickier part, theoretical… Average of 789 zeros, 65 fives and 238 tens is something entirely different (roughly 2,48) than the average of 789 threes, 65 fives and 238 sevens (roughly 4,64). The ratio of negative, mixed and positive did not change at all… but the average went up by more than two.

Which means that rating distribution within generic type (negative, neutral or positive) actually matters a lot, when we talk about large numbers of zero entries. There is a rather significant difference between “This piece of PEEP is PEEP, it does not even PEEP PEEP run” and “I really, really dislike ALL the changes they made”…

You may continue to disagree with me, the above is merely the basis on which I made my earlier post.

EDIT: Deleted an excess “the”.

1 Like
74

Yes, agreed, though I feel you are missing the point of the “people’s vote”. People don’t need to be objective, all they are required is to say how they feel about the product. It doesn’t matter in the slightest if to you the game is neither a piece of genius or a piece of garbage, it matters how it is to each individual user. Averaging the opinions will eventually show a composite trying to index those opinions. Is voting visceral? Sure it is, that’s easy to spot given the very low amounts of “mixed” ratings to basically everything, not just WoW. That’s basic human psychology: people either like or dislike something, but most people aren’t used to consider things with gradients. That’s pretty much the reason why no sociological survey will ask people to grade their view on something on, say, a scale of 1 to 100 or 1 to 1000, not even on a scale of 1 to 10. Wherever you will look, you will see scales designed to measure opinion being either made of 2 items (good, bad opinion), 3 items (good, neutral or bad opinion) or at most 5 items (very good, good, neutral, bad, very bad).

This is why I told you that while you might have an objection on how visceral the votes might have been, all you would need to do is count them on a scale of 3 instead of on a scale of 0 to 10. If you did, the grade the game would get would be 0.72 * 1 + 0.06 * 2 + 0.22 * 3 = 1.5. The game would get 1.5 on a scale between 1 and 3. On such scale, 1.5 would be placed practically at pretty much the same place where the rating of 3.1 is placed on a scale from 0 to 10 (3.1 is at 28% distance of the lower end on a scale of 11 gradients between 0 and 10, while 1.5 is at a distance of 25% from the lower end on a scale of 3 gradients between 1 and 3).

What does this tell? That it doesn’t really matter much what method you use, and that even taking the possibility to be visceral completely away from people (as well as the possibility to be ecstatic) nets the same result.

2 Likes
75

Most people are sheep without their own opinions just look how people vote their leaders most of the time they give their votes to person who has the firmest handshake and offers the best coffee at the rallies.

76

Never heard of that until last year. And it seems to mostly be a thing on these forums. Don’t know why.

77

BC was the golden age, I always tell the boys, it wasn’t Classic and it wasn’t Wrath (the beginning of the descent) it was smack in the middle. Best expac ever. Good raids, good dungos and more classes & specs became viable.

78

Nostalgia goggles. Very fashionable on these forums.

79

I miss those days in Mist of Pandaria when we had a gazillion buttons and me and my friends would spend all day wargaming
Good times

1 Like
80

I find it weird that MoP doesn’t have more than 6.0 User score (Maybe from users that didn’t want to even try it brought it down?). I also find it weird that WoD has such a high User Score. Was it because of the Raids and the Questing? Feel it should have been atleast under 4.5 . Rest seems kinda correct imo.

81

Selection bias. Many players on these forums went through the entirety of MoP. Most players that were, for example, against the Pandas or the theme most likely didn’t play. Most people that stopped playing for a long time at some point are still not playing (the whole >100m accounts created during WoW’s lifetime and only 3 to 4 mil playing currently). It’s pretty obvious that people on the official forums will tend to have a bias towards some more recent expansion of WoW, if not the latest.