on top of that, metacritic did everything they could to raise zedla totk's average to 96 when it had fallen to 95 for 2 weeks, and they only added 10/10s for the latest scores, but they're doing the opposite for Sony and Microsoft
this site is really dishonest
Dunno,
are they doing the opposite for Microsoft? Did Stevivor's "updated" Halo Infinite score get added to the MC average?
Just checked...
NOPE! The original 95 Stevivor score is
STILL there, even though when you click the link, and scroll to the bottom, the actual score is now a 7/10.
Metacritic is trash. People,
STOP VALIDATING THEM! They need to do way more than just stemming the bad-faith user review botting to actually have a legitimate aggregate system there, but they seem set on doing the bare minimum.
Metacritic actually is faster to update... OpenCritic take some more time to add most of the sites that MC already added.
IMO MC is better than OC.
OC's guy created it thinking the scores will be different from MC when removed the weight but at the end the difference was 1-2 points only.
Actually that's not what I've noticed. OC is faster because there's less of a process for the reviews to be approved, and there are usually certain reviews that pop up on Opencritic that never make it to Metacritic.
Maybe FF XVI is the outlier but I definitely noticed that OC tends to be faster to get scores in for several games. And like others have said, the weight MC gives to select review sites is a potential problem as it allows for certain sites to decide a game's overall score, agendas and all, knowing it'd take 10+ smaller outlets giving a very high score to offset their singular lower score.
IMO it's the opposite: OC is better than MC by a fair margin, but both have issues. MC's are more severe, however.