I download every album that gets above an 80 on metacritic. Found some good gems that wayCaring about music reviews
Are Reviewers Still Afraid To Bomb Big Games?
- Thread starter bogey_j
- Start date
be back in a bit
All Star
The way they review games is flawed, that's why all these games is getting high scores. Put out a game that is 20+ hours long, has open world gameplay, has "player choice" and rpg elements, and it's an auto 7/10 metascore minimum. So anything that's above average and meets all that criteria gets 8/10 or higher.
They don't attach enough importance to the controls/feel/mechanics of a game, level design, enemy design, etc. . It's all about how much "value" and "content" a game has. They don't respect the craft of game making
They don't attach enough importance to the controls/feel/mechanics of a game, level design, enemy design, etc. . It's all about how much "value" and "content" a game has. They don't respect the craft of game making
I download every album that gets above an 80 on metacritic. Found some good gems that way
Outright lie?
U actin like i insulted your moms. I just IGNd the scores for the last 3 cods.
Ghosts 8.8 out of 10
AW 9.1 out of 10
Blops 3 9.2 out of 10
I said damn near. Exaggerated slightly but not much. Games should be getting 6 and 7s at best.
Street Fighter V is currently at an 82 on metacritic it's not really getting stellar reviews. Street Fighter IV is what a 94 on metacritic and critically acclaimed. I would say that's about right for that game. I think the youtube gaming community was a lot more vocal than actual publications were about Fallout 4. I haven't played it so I can't say who's right or wrong, but we also have to keep in mind singular people review these games. Then we take those single reviews and associate them with the publication as that's what everybody felt that way. I think reviews are falling by the wayside anyway. With YouTube, NeoGaf, and Twitch @ your finger tips you can get a wide array of opinions on a game before you buy it.
cherry pick 3 review scores from one site to Metacritic's 87 scores brehs (and that's just for BLOPS, if we include ghosts and AW with that, that's 175 scores)Outright lie?
U actin like i insulted your moms. I just IGNd the scores for the last 3 cods.
Ghosts 8.8 out of 10
AW 9.1 out of 10
Blops 3 9.2 out of 10
I said damn near. Exaggerated slightly but not much. Games should be getting 6 and 7s at best.
Make a fool of yourself online brehs
Fail to comprehend basic math brehs
Last edited:
GoldTeef
Sarranid Bleu
pretty much. It's a shame the things Bethesda gets away with, horrible textures and game breaking bugs being the two things reviewers consistently brush to the side every time they release a game.
the metacritic scores are lowerOutright lie?
U actin like i insulted your moms. I just IGNd the scores for the last 3 cods.
Ghosts 8.8 out of 10
AW 9.1 out of 10
Blops 3 9.2 out of 10
I said damn near. Exaggerated slightly but not much. Games should be getting 6 and 7s at best.
Ghosts 78/78/68 (PS4/X1/PC)
AW 83/81/78
Blops 3 81/81/73
and trying to say how a game should review is rather arrogant. you have an opinion and a number, just like every other reviewer
Man if a game is 70 or above it's usually worth checking out, just play it if you're interested to get your take if it's good or bad.
Video games are judged differently than music and TV/Film. Above 85 is considered good for a video game, but considered excellent for a movie or TV show. You rarely see 90+ tv shows, movies or music. But you do see 90+ video games.
My rule of thumb:
85+ is good for video games
75+ is good for music
70+ is good for TV and film.
Each industry has different ways of judging things
Alien Isolation is 81 on metacritic. The game is miles better than Skyrim.
You consider Alien Isolation trash breh?
I agree with the reviewers. Skyrim is a classic. It deserved the scores it got. I haven't played much of Alien: Isolation (survival horror isn't my favorite genre), but I'd be willing to bet most would agree that Skyrim is much better. A:I seemed a bit generic (but I am looking forward to experiencing it with my soon to arrive Oculus Rift). I sincerely doubt I will find it better than Skyrim. Skyrim is a top 5 game of all time for me. It's pretty hard to beat that. But to each his own
You have unique tastes in games, I'll give you that, but Skyrim is a classic. It'll be hard to top that (and no Fallout 4 didn't. I thought that was just a good game; not a great game, and definitely not a classic. It deserved the mid 80s scores it got)
Metacritic is pretty accurate for most games in my opinion, but there are a few I disagreed with (like Captain Toad)
Metacritic is not the ultimate authority (personal experience is), but it's a damn good tool to filter out the myriad of games that come out each year. I've always said that, and I will continue to say that.
I don't think there's any conspiracy or payola for reviews.
Its just that reviewers are fans just like anybody else.
Games/franchises that have established fan bases, and a lot of hype usualy get scored a little better than they should, while new IP dont get that extra benefit.
Its just that reviewers are fans just like anybody else.
Games/franchises that have established fan bases, and a lot of hype usualy get scored a little better than they should, while new IP dont get that extra benefit.
Maybe not a conspiracy, but there is a rather toxic relationship between game developers and reviewers, where the latter might be less inclined to point out game flaws to keep a relationship with the devs. Many game reviewers get early review copies directly from the developers (in addition to other free swag). Reviewers are incentivized to get reviews out first for ad review & site traffic. A company has the right to withheld these games from whomever they wish. So if they know a reviewer didn't like previous games or bad mouthed previous products, or the company itself, they might cut a reviewer from early access to their games. Not to mention, sometimes, especially AAA game devs, have flown reviewers out to see them, fed them top notch meals, put them in fancy hotels, gave them laptops & shyt in addition to early access to their games. Who would want to risk a company blacklisting them, and miss out on shyt like this?
It's why we needed gamer gate.
