I wasn't assuming anything. I made an earlier comment on the metacritic future that we shouldn't judge this game until some reviews were done off of english language copies. Now that we actually have a few, I'm acknowledging that those reviews are not any better.
We can't make those assumptions as we don't know what 'weight' each review has...remember that the MC score is a weighted average not a mathematical one.
Play magazine has just had their review added to the mix: Phantom Hourglass is absolutely worth playing and is certainly one of the better games in the DS library, but its quest is one of the less memorable entries in the Zelda cannon. [Oct 2007, p.96]
Score 80/100 Current Metacritic score with 8 reviews: 91
@csinning, Metacritic Futures are settled against the Metacritic score, so if you buy above 100% and hold onto the contract, you are guaranteed to lose. I don't know why anyone would buy the contract above 100 to sell higher because I can't see anyone wanting to buy the contract from you...unless that player doesn't pay attention to the selling price.
My limited understanding is that there is no price cap so if you buy shares of it you are assuming that others are willing to buy it at an even higher price because they thing it will view well. No one believe that the game will actually get above 100% they think people will keep buying it up because the game will review well. Zelda games do have that sort of reputation.
3
Game Informer Issue 174
Review Score 9.5/10 (95DKP)
'Second Opinion' Review Score: 9.5/10 (95DKP)