Should GBATemp keep doing clickbaits?

[Gourmet]

Discuss!

 

[Gourmet]

No.
Does it say "HERR DUHRR WORST ZELDA EVURRR O/10 2MUCHGREZZ"?
It doesn't.
It's not clickbait if the title is just "Zelda BOTW Review".

Writing a coherent text doesn't mean it has a good purpose. The guy just took some random stuff from those 0/10 metacritic users and made it look like valid criticism.

 

[Imacaredformy2ds]

Writing a coherent text doesn't mean it has a good purpose. The guy just took some random stuff from those 0/10 metacritic users and made it look like valid criticism.

A 7 is a "good" score. Just because someone didn't think this Zelda game was God's gift to the earth, does not constitute clickbait. Clickbait is what sites like Buzzfeed do, to lure people in with false intentions in order to get hits. "Zelda Is Horrible: Click To Read Why is clickbait", not "reasons why I didn't think Zelda was a 10/10".

Thanks Chary

 

[Tenshi_Okami]

*Implying an honest review with a score of 5/10 is clickbait

It was an example, plus considering its BOTW, a 5/10 would had triggered a lot of ppl (like OP xD)

 

[NightScript]

Besides, what GBAtemp is doing is called a review. Not clickbait at all.

If you think that its clickbait, we can say the same about IGN or GameXplain, then.

 

[Jacklack3]

Writing a coherent text doesn't mean it has a good purpose. The guy just took some random stuff from those 0/10 metacritic users and made it look like valid criticism.

then in your case, this shouldn't be here.

but it is, i wonder why?

 

[Issac]

One deviating review shouldn't make anyone ask if the site should "keep doing clickbaits". It's just one review.

Now, what I think is far worse is how Opencritic interpret scores. Everything below 70 is "Weak". That's pretty damn narrow.
0-69 Weak (70 steps of weak)
70 - 74 Fair (5 steps of fair)
75 - 84 Strong (10 steps of strong)
85 - 100 Mighty (15 steps of mighty)

 

[Deleted User]

The 10 score system is useless imo. It should be 1-5. But the review is not clickbait.

Shit I forgot my clever quip to get likes from. Maybe next time

 

[Chary]

tbf i do think they aimed to score it low, the gbatemp logo is a bit like sonic in a whirlwind so they have to be edgy I guess,

W-what?

I'm not saying they cant give it 7.0 and maybe they are right, but the excuses were a bit clutchy like someone reviewing their enemies cooking abilities....ohhh well you put too much pasta on my plate

While some of the review could have been better worded, there's plenty of evidence that the reviewer found that kept the game from being an 8+/10. There was no intent to score for the sake of being low, this was a staff member who went out of their way to review the game because they were passionate about writing about the content of the new Zelda game. We even discussed some of the more irksome qualities of the game in the staff section, so these opinions aren't unique to just one person. A perfectly objective review doesn't exist, but the goal is to be as objective as possible.

Writing a coherent text doesn't mean it has a good purpose. The guy just took some random stuff from those 0/10 metacritic users and made it look like valid criticism.

Yes, because you obviously were in his mind, seeing the writing process.

One deviating review shouldn't make anyone ask if the site should "keep doing clickbaits". It's just one review.

Now, what I think is far worse is how Opencritic interpret scores. Everything below 70 is "Weak". That's pretty damn narrow.
0-69 Weak (70 steps of weak)
70 - 74 Fair (5 steps of fair)
75 - 84 Strong (10 steps of strong)
85 - 100 Mighty (15 steps of mighty)

I think they use the American school grade system, which a lot of reviewers use as well. It doesn't make sense, but it's what a lot of people think of when it comes to scores.

The 10 score system is useless imo. It should be 1-5. But the review is not clickbait.

Shit I forgot my clever quip to get likes from. Maybe next time

I don't really think a 1-5 scale gives enough room though. A full 0.0-10.0 system gives a lot more variety to the scores, and lets the writer give a better numerical value to the game.

 

[Gourmet]

One deviating review shouldn't make anyone ask if the site should "keep doing clickbaits". It's just one review.

Now, what I think is far worse is how Opencritic interpret scores. Everything below 70 is "Weak". That's pretty damn narrow.
0-69 Weak (70 steps of weak)
70 - 74 Fair (5 steps of fair)
75 - 84 Strong (10 steps of strong)
85 - 100 Mighty (15 steps of mighty)

I agree. It makes this even worse.

69 mighty (lowest is 5 points from strong)
0 strong
1 fair (1 point from weak)

 

[VinsCool]

That's not a clickbait. Google Buzzfeed. THIS is what clickbaits are like.

 

[Gourmet]

7.8 too much water
7.0 weapons break

Both are clickbait.

 

[FAST6191]

The 10 score system is useless imo. It should be 1-5.

There are ways to engineer scoring systems to influence results -- if you do the classic "hate, dislike, neutral, like, adore" split in a survey you will tend to find a lot of people tend towards neutral or the extremes where the same survey questions without a middle choice tends to be far more reflective of the "truth". Indeed you can witness an example of something similar in action in this very thread, and the review that spawned it, where 7 is considered a somewhat poor score despite it being well above the halfway point.

Depending upon the divisions available in the points scale though mathematically speaking 1-5 could be identical to out of 10, give or take how you want to deal with the extremes (is it 0 to 5 or 1 to 5).

As for actual clickbait I try not to do it but if the content is good then clickbait headlines are not the worst.

 

[gamesquest1]

yeah I think clickbait is obviously the wrong word, and ultimately I think the scoring is only marginally low, I would probably have maxed out at about 8/10, its a really nice game, but too many shortcomings but again with all these things its always going to boil down to personal preference to some degree, and it would be wrong to feel obliged to score it high simply because everyone else had

then again I think maybe the reviewer felt "kinda" rushed to get it out the door, which is why its important for reviewers to get review copies as if everyone else gets it before you then your left on the sideline and have to rush through to catch up and get your review out on time, which would obviously effect your experience of the game even if you try to not let it

 

[Chary]

7.8 too much water
7.0 weapons break

Both are clickbait.

7.8 was far too good for that game.

Do you have no concept of the review grade system? Most people would accept a 7.0 as a pretty good game worth their time. If you really wanted to see an example of clickbait, then there would be a review with a 3.0 score. THAT would be pure clickbait, as everyone can agree, the game does in no way deserve a 3...unless a case can be made, I'd love to see such. A "fair/good/decent" score is fine.

 

[Deleted member 412900]

A lot of people in this thread don't seem to understand what clickbait means. Clickbait is anything that makes you even mildly upset or uncomfortable.

 

[Chary]

A lot of people in this thread don't seem to understand what clickbait means. Clickbait is anything that makes you even mildly upset or uncomfortable.

Literally triggered.

 

[Armadillo]

Game shouldn't be scoring that high anyway (10s).

Even if you have no problems with gameplay, should have had points knocked off for techinical issues. Same for other big name games, for some reason reviewers never seem to find issue with games performance until it's a smaller title that isn't predestined to get a high score.

 

[Jacklack3]

A lot of people in this thread don't seem to understand what clickbait means. Clickbait is anything that makes you even mildly upset or uncomfortable.

*facepalm*

It means when you try to make someone click on your link by baiting them with a title/thumbnail that isn't part of the content. Such as if I said "HOW TO GET A FREE HOUSE!" but the article was talking about cheap homes.

 

[Kioku]

The Switch and BotW has brought out all the idiots apparently. I can't remember the last time I've seen so many retarded threads.

 

[gamesquest1]

A lot of people in this thread don't seem to understand what clickbait means. Clickbait is anything that makes you even mildly upset or uncomfortable.

its not exclusively that, its something designed to mislead or entice you to click on something that you otherwise wouldn't, be it a fake headline i.e "free money if you view my video*" *imaginary money bitches or scoring something really low or really high compared to everyone else to attract heated debate i.e "Zelda botw sucks" or "Barbie is the most amazing wiiu game ever, heres why......"