Current Events > Critic score vs. Audience score. Which do you trust more?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Nomadic View posted...

Audience.

Its easy to buy off a critic. Or a critic may have irrational political views that a film is promoting. Or the critic may have a conflict of interest in a film doing well.

Mine is shaped by what my opinions have lined up with in the past. More often than not I tend to agree with the audience when it comes to film and tv and the critics when it comes to video games.
---

thelovefist posted...

Critic reviews, always. Audience reviews often seem baseless with comments left attached to their review containing, "I've never played this game/watched this movie, but I don't like it anyway so 0/10".

Yeah, if youre actually diving into the review itself, then the critics work is going to be much more informative and contain a better analysis.

If you just want to know if its generally good or bad, then Ill trust the amalgamation of the general public than the handful of professionals.
---

Audience, but I skim them to get the general gist of why it's negative if it's a negative score. if it's for reasons I don't care about, I'll still get the game if I wanted it. I don't bother with critic reviews at all
---

Critics over audience, but the score isn't what matters as much as the written part. The number is just telling positive or negative balance, the reasoning for why positive and why negative is the important part. Audience reviews are generally uselessly facile, while critical reviews explain things in a helpful manner and are more likely to compare to other movies I have seen and have opinions on.
---

its been proven most "reviewers" are bought and paid for shills who write about video games as a career....they lack vision, fuckem....
---

Roxborough4Ever posted...

its been proven

link
---

Audience score, definitely. Critics are too... critical.
---

I trust real audience reviews more. As far as scores though, pretty much everyone rates things a 1 or a 10, so that number is completely unreliable.
---

A combination of the two, both sides are usually wrong but if it's easy to make up my mind about a game or movie when I analyze the two.
---

Both.

both high scores = you can expect a good film
both low scores = shit movie
high critic, low audience = probably a pretentious or artsy film that can be good/bad depending on your tastes
low critic, high audience = casual film that doesn't take itself seriously and can be good/bad depending on your tastes
---

Audience. I'm part of it.

And critics increasingly judge things that aren't what I care about. If your review isn't about the gameplay then I don't care to read it.
---

^ You do realize that genre is entirely tied to game play right?
---

Audience.

Critics get paid to shill for shitty movies and games.
---

I always point to Boondock Saints to show why I trust the critics over the audience.

Critic score: 20%
Audience: 91%

LMFAO
---

Neither, to be honest.

Thats on me though, as what I like seems to be very different from what everyone else likes lol.
---

Critics tend to review with their head and audiences with their heart. The critic reviews more often look at the history of film and cinematography, and whether the film can bring a new idea to the world in an interesting way. Audiences tend to like films that touch them or hit their favorite genre or are just funny even if cinematically flawed.

I find looking at a bit of both and deciding if we have a charming mess, a brilliant bore or something in the middle helps. Do I want to watch this film to learn something about humanity or eat popcorn and laugh? A poor critic rated film with a decent audience score can often do the latter.

Films like God's Not Dead were critically panned but loved by the audience.

...yeah, I'm gonna stick with critic reviews.
---

DoGCyN posted...

Roxborough4Ever posted...

its been proven

link

awh, let me guess.....the parable of the big 3....its not TRUE without the link....i get it
---

Roxborough4Ever posted...

DoGCyN posted...

Roxborough4Ever posted...

its been proven

link

awh, let me guess.....the parable of the big 3....its not TRUE without the link....i get it

No I mean I'm generally curious if they'd been paid off. So give me a link?

This would certainly sway my opinion if it were true.
---

16-BITTER posted...

Critic reviews for films.

Audience reviews for games.

I'd say audience reviews for music too, but these days it's too easy to just hear some of it for yourself.

audience reviews for music I've found are completely untrustworthy as literally the only people who review music online are people who already liked the music beforehand. Literally every album is 5/5.
---

Rika_Furude posted...

the game itself being amazing

it's really not. Undertale is average at best
---

Usually the audience score, but I keep in mind that a movie that is controversial (like the new Ghostbusters) can be subject to review bombing by bored or antipathetic internet denizens.
---

Esrac posted...

Usually the audience score, but I keep in mind that a movie that is controversial (like the new Ghostbusters) can be subject to review bombing by bored or antipathetic internet denizens.

Ghostbusters 2016 has a 60 Metacritic and 5.3 user score on Metacritic.

I mean I just don't think that review bombing has the effect people actually think it has. It's pretty hard to get enough fanboys together to meaningfully change anything.
---

If I take any reviews into account at all it's audience reviews.
Far more often than not critic reviews are always the polar opposite of what I end up thinking. Movie critics want artsy, heady crap most of the time. They're more concerned about what the costumes look like, if a character gave you the feels. Did the story make you think? Did it subvert your expectations and should be graded and congratulated on that alone? (We all know what I'm talking about with that one) Was it's style different or was it filmed differently? That sort of garbage.
Rarely does any of that make an entertaining movie. Rarely is there any overlap between a good movie and a critically acclaimed movie.
---

I have a few people I specifically trust the opinions of, and I go from there. My taste is my own though, and I can never fully take somebody else's word.
---

Depends on the genre and medium. Game scores I usually trust audience scores, particularly for things liek action games.

Movies, I usually go with critic scores, except for action movies and most comedies.
---

One thing I never understood was when trailers quote movie reviews and of like "4 Stars!"

But that's like

Just 80% man
---

critics are generally hacks and you need to actually read the reviews to know that or not.
---

wackyteen posted...

One thing I never understood was when trailers quote movie reviews and of like "4 Stars!"

But that's like

Just 80% man

Most movie critics go by a 4-star scale instead of 5.
---

Gafemage posted...

Most movie critics go by a 4-star scale instead of 5.

but y doe
---

inb4 people misunderstand rotten tomatoes ratings

I go with critic scores over audience scores because of review bombs.

But I place actual written reviews by trusted critics above either of them

a score doesn't tell me anything. i'd rather read what someone thought of the film
---

wackyteen posted...

Gafemage posted...

Most movie critics go by a 4-star scale instead of 5.

but y doe

No idea; I think when movie reviews first started popping up in newspapers & similar publications, four-stars was the original scale & critics have just kinda rolled with it ever since. Regardless, for most critics & publications, a 4-star rating is a 100% rating.
---

Audience score tends to be review bombed or swayed by the current meme, but critics give every game an 8/10 or higher (or risk being fired ;>_>)
---