Personally, there's nothing wrong with someone's opinion being different from the majority, but beliving critics to be wrong JUST because they don't agree with you (like what happens with say.... any Sonic game) is not a healthy mind set. Differing opinions are IMPORTANT for society.
(Remember Shadow the Hedgehog everyone?)
Let's imagine I don't remember Shadow the Hedgehog... enlighten me.
You guys had me at blood and semen.
What better way to celebrate than firing something out of the pipe?
@Snaplocket I don't think anyone always agrees with critics. But a game that is well-received by critics tends to be better than one which is poorly received by critics.
Similarly, Metacritic may have questionable score aggregation methods, but there's a good chance a 90-scored game is better quality than a 60-scored game. I wouldn't feel as confident with higher granularity though (e.g. comparing a 90 to a 92 game...that's pretty much meaningless IMO)
When is comes to publisher rankings...it becomes more and more about the aggregation method and further from the raw data of the critic reviews. First of all, you're aggregating scores from multiple different games, rather than a single game, so you're likely to get vastly different distributions between publishers. Secondly - it's entirely subjective how you weigh this - do you just look at the best games, do you look at the number of good games? Do you look at all games? (in which case a publisher who has released one flop will have a reduced score compared to one with an otherwise identical outputs).
I just saw a list of the 22 games coming to the Xbox series of consoles (https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2021-03-27-microsoft-lists-22-id-xbox-games-coming-to-xbox-game-pass for anyone interested), and while I do have a Series X and Game Pass, often I find myself preferring to play indie games on the Switch instead. So I guess the question is, does anyone know if these games are coming to the Switch. And yes I am aware games like STALKER 2 wouldn't and I also know Google is my friend, but with 22 games listed I thought I would ask first.
NEW WEBSITE LAUNCHED! Regular opinion articles, retro game reviews and impression pieces on new games! ENGAGE VG: EngageVG.com
@Snaplocket Of course people think critics are wrong if they disagree with them. That's... what disagreeing with someone generally entails. Especially if you believe yourself to have a reasoned position on an issue.
If you don't believe all viewpoints to be equally valid, you believe your own viewpoint to be reasonable, and critics disagree with your viewpoint, wouldn't that usually mean you'd naturally come to the conclusion that critics are wrong or mistaken?
Currently Playing: Yakuza Kiwami 2 (PC); Unicorn Overlord (NS)
Pixelheart's "big" announcement is only a few hours away. What is everyone expecting? The teaser video they posted previously suggests that a popular pachinko provider has given Pixelheart a license to redistribute a classic collection. My assumption is that it'll be the Konami arcade collection (with a few more games) for Nintendo Switch.
Switch Physical Collection - 1,260 games (as of June 15th, 2024)
Favorite Quote: "Childhood is not from birth to a certain age and at a certain age the child is grown, and puts away childish things. Childhood is the kingdom where nobody dies." -Edna St. Vincent Millay
@Grumblevolcano I'm not sure if I'd call an Orin/Lovelace based Switch a 'silent successor'? More like a revolution for Nintendo employing bleeding edge tech! Which is why I thought it was a bit of a mad rumour. But yes, anything more than a speeding up of the existing Tegra X1 would probably lead to new platforms exclusives sooner or later
For first party games, Nintendo will do their best to have their games run on every iteration of Switch. But third party publishers? For example games like RE 2 Remake, DMC 5, Final Fantasy 7 Remake, Kingdom Hearts III, etc. Those would certainly be exclusive to the newest iteration of Switch, not compatible with the original or Switch Lite.
Switch Physical Collection - 1,260 games (as of June 15th, 2024)
Favorite Quote: "Childhood is not from birth to a certain age and at a certain age the child is grown, and puts away childish things. Childhood is the kingdom where nobody dies." -Edna St. Vincent Millay
Started up MH Rise and it reminds me why I didn't get far in XCX on Wii U. The damned character creator is way too long.
In the case of XCX I bought the special edition day 1 and started it the same day. Watched the intro cutscene but then the character creator was so long that I got distracted by exciting things happening on the Xbox front. By the time I intended to go back to XCX, Nintendo made it very clear that they were porting the Wii U to Switch so I waited for a Switch port.
Review aggregates are incredibly useful. As we say- all models are wrong, but some are useful. What people have to understand is the margin of error. Now, I don’t know what it is. Trying to quantify uncertainty (aka trying to measure the unknown) is a difficult task. But it is one that I do at my job, so I am well versed in confidence intervals, 95% expanded uncertainty ranges, margin of error, etc.
And so, all specific aggregates are wrong, but within a margin of error, all aggregates are correct. The question is, what is the margin of error? To determine such a thing you would have to poll tens of thousands of individuals who completed a certain game, and ask them what they would score it. And you would have to take the aggregate of the masses and find the deviation from the review aggregate and record that deviation. You’d then have to repeat that process for 100 different games, and analyze those hundred deviations as a distribution, calculate the standard deviation, and multiply by 2 to get the 95% confidence interval for any given aggregate score.
That’s a lot of work. Nobody’s going to do that. But we can use statistical shortcuts like, taking the range of deviations from a few individuals and dividing by 4 to estimate the standard deviation. And usually when I hear disagreements, it’s never more than 1.5 off from what the individual would rank it as. So I would say, using napkin math, any given review aggregate is within +/- 1.5 out of 10 for 95% of the time. And that’s a pretty wide range.
That means 95% of the time, aggregates are correct... within a 15/100 score in either direction. And that explains why games many people feel is 8/10 gets a 90/100 aggregate. And many games people feel is a 9.5/10 gets an 85/100 aggregate. As long as you approach aggregates with that in mind, they can be useful. Obviously the probability gets smaller the father you deviate from the aggregate. So 50% of the time the aggregate is within 0.65 out of 10. You can use those estimates to get a range of scores that a game is likely to fall within by your standards.
All have sinned and fall short of Gods glory. Wages of sin is death. Romans
God so loved the world He sent His only Son- whoever believes on Him has eternal life. Unless you believe, you will die in your sins. Whoever believes, rivers of living water flow within them. John
@TSR3 I meant silent in the sense of name, the Switch revision's name likely won't be something that suggests a successor as Nintendo would want the new model to boost Switch's momentum rather than risk everything starting from 0.
@Magician I think around the first 2 years all 1st party stuff would be on all 3 models (Switch, Switch Lite, new Switch revision) but some 3rd party stuff would be exclusive to the new Switch model and then Nintendo drops support for the Switch and Switch Lite after that timespan.
I've long thought putting game reviews on a scale of 1-10 or whatever was pretty dumb. I much prefer reading narrative reviews and just listening to what people thought about it.
@Grumblevolcano The problem with a "silent" revision of that nature is that it makes it very very difficult for anyone to release packaged exclusives for the revision. The packaging itself would have to have disclaimers left right and centre and the majority of consumers wouldn't actually know if they have "Switch 1.0" or "Switch 2021" if it's been so silent and the packaging on the console itself just says "Switch".
Aside from which - the install base for the regular Switch is now 80 million. This huge install base is the carrot for publishers. The unbadged "Switch 3.0" will probably never offer that kind of install base so releasing a game exclusively on it would be a bit like releasing a launch title on a new console.
Digital games are, of course, a different proposition. The eShop can just check if the game would run on your console.
Still - I tend to think that a silent revision will never really get exclusive games. If they explicitly badge it as "Switch Pro" then I'd see exclusives as a more of a possibility (and Nintendo will probably do a tiny number, New 3DS style. I think relatively minor exclusive "Switch Pro" modes in games that release more generally will be more common. That and some games that release generally but which are really compromised on the regular Switch...).
@StuTwo I think it's also worth considering that Nintendo may look at Switch in a similar to Microsoft and Xbox now.
We have Switch, Switch Lite, and presumably it'll be called Switch XL.
Then in a few years, Switch XL replaces the other two, we get a Switch Lite revision with the more efficient version of the Switch XL chip, and then we get another revision, which eventually phases out the Switch XL.
Mobile processors, and the speed at which Nvidia seems happy to shove features they never thought about before into a mobile chipset, lends itself very well to the "iPhone" model, only every few years instead of every year.
I'm not sure how they'd work it, but that way you have a continually rolling userbase that by the time you move over to stopping support for the OG, still has 30 or so million users on Lite and XL.
Now Playing: Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart, Crash Bandicoot 4
@StuTwo I was meaning certain names would be very obvious successor names like "Switch 2", "Super Switch" and "Switch Advance" whereas something like "New Switch" or "Switch XL" would suggest it's just a revision. By going for a name like the latter 2, Nintendo wouldn't be starting from 0 but could eventually drop support for the original Switch and Switch Lite over time.
@JaxonH
I mentioned this in the metacritic thread, but showing the variance of scores would be useful, especially to compare against reviwers' scores (although the small number for reviwers' might produce an error).
I would imagine that for most games, scores would be normally distributed - if not, or if there was a skew, then that might point towards fake scoring, or how the game is divisive.
Not sure that applying a confidence interval would be applicable, as it is all the reviews and not just a sample.
__________________
As for Switch naming conventions, have New Switch, and once that is established, have Old Switch and just Switch (for that new version). If it's just a revision of course.
@Rambler The great thing about metacritic is that it grants you access to all the reviews...so while a measure of variance might be interesting, you can get a quick idea on this by looking at the game's page and seeing the various scores. Personally what I do is take a look at reviews across the spectrum to get an idea of the good and bad qualities of a game.
Confidence intervals could work if you consider that reviews are samples of what is a greater sample of opinions in the population (although, arguably and perhaps demonstrably, critic reviews may follow different trends to the wider population) . But I think that's getting overly analytical because it implies an objective truth that can be drawn out given enough sampling.
@timleon@Rambler
That would make things much easier, assuming critic reviews are from the same distribution. There’d have to be a balance between reliability and practicality. A simple repeatability measurement would be practical.
But I would propose this- assuming the critic reviews can be considered random samples from opinions at large (which isn’t true, but it’s an assumption we’re going to have to make for the calculation to work), we can simply find the Standard Error of the Mean. Take the standard deviation and divide by the square root of how many reviews there were. Multiply that by the t-score needed to achieve 95% confidence (which can easily be done in Excel, so if the data was exported you could have formulas do all the work automatically). If you’re just doing napkin math for an estimate, use t=2
1 Write down aggregate score 2 Calculate and write down standard deviation (SD) from all individual scores 3 Divide SD by the square root of number of individual scores. This is Standard Error of Mean (SEM) 4 The confidence interval around the aggregate is +/- twice the SEM (or use Excel for exact formula).
All this could be done automatically though in excel if you just had a way of exporting the score data. In fact, it’s something their aggregate website should provide. Frankly, I’m kind of surprised they don’t provide any kind of margin of error calculation.
ALSO OF NOTE, their aggregate isn’t the true mean, so you’d have to calculate the true mean first when deriving the Standard Deviation.
All have sinned and fall short of Gods glory. Wages of sin is death. Romans
God so loved the world He sent His only Son- whoever believes on Him has eternal life. Unless you believe, you will die in your sins. Whoever believes, rivers of living water flow within them. John
Forums
Topic: The Nintendo Switch Thread
Posts 55,161 to 55,180 of 70,202
Please login or sign up to reply to this topic