Support NeoGAF

[azertydu91]

No dude, is not a matter of can or can't. Zero (0) and ten (10) are numbers and can be used. If a game can deserve a 10 sure can deserve a 0.

My point you're not getting is, people prefer to look at the number rather than the review inself. Imagine a most well writen review in the history yet without a score number... and in the next day the review in question get a 10 score or a zero score. Understand?

And reviewers are about opinions, nothing more. That reflect the user review score.

I don't think you understand, what I wrote at all and it is probably my fault, english isn't my native language and I probably failed to convey my point.What I said was basically you can't have objective reviews except for performance (resolution targeted, framerate and bugs).Other than that in good faith a clear 0 is not a review done in good faith imo simply because a game running deserve at least 1.And a 10 to me doesn't reflect perfection but a clear validation of expectation set.A note doesn't even reflect the quality of a game, I mean look at cyberpunk it got glowing reveiws from the press (pc version) and I played it with a more than capable PC it was a glitch fest, missing texture holes in the map braindead ia etc...Yet it had fantastice reveiws that is something I would like to understand.How come some games get free passes when other games would have been destroyed by the press.Which means we may need more solid way to put up reviews than just numbers, this is why ùetacritic is not really a good way to tell if a game is good or not.
Just like a game badly reviewed can be great if you hadn't play the previous games of said franchise.
So basically you were saying the same thing as me excpt for the 0 on which we disagree, because I consider that if you are a gaming journalist or afficionado the 0 shouldn't not exist except for game that can't be played at all.And to think otherwise is quite a manichean way of seeing things, life ain't all black or all white here's alot of nuance and subtlety and in bad you can find some great things.And if there are some great thing how come it can be graded 0?

 

[Fake]

I don't think you understand, what I wrote at all and it is probably my fault, english isn't my native language and I probably failed to convey my point.What I said was basically you can't have objective reviews except for performance (resolution targeted, framerate and bugs).

Of course you can my friend. I mean, being a reviewer it's not volunteer work. You can litelary put your heart in your work, its up to you. Remember some reviewers that refuse to beat Death Stranding?

Other than that in good faith a clear 0 is not a review done in good faith imo simply because a game running deserve at least 1.And a 10 to me doesn't reflect perfection but a clear validation of expectation set.

A game that receive 10 and is not perfect can receive a 0 and being not totally crash. Again, I already told you to not get attached to score numbers. And unless people start to read minds, how do you know a game was review in bad/good faith?

Remember TLOUS2? So, some user reviewers are giving 0/10 saying 'this game is crap' and getting invalidated, while others giving 10/10 saying 'fuck the haters' get a huge pass.
10 and 0 can be valid and invalid for many reasons.

So basically you were saying the same thing as me excpt for the 0 on which we disagree, because I consider that if you are a gaming journalist or afficionado the 0 shouldn't not exist except for game that can't be played at all.And to think otherwise is quite a manichean way of seeing things, life ain't all black or all white here's alot of nuance and subtlety and in bad you can find some great things.And if there are some great thing how come it can be graded 0?

What I saying is not for you or me to tell what a game deserves. Opinions vary, score are opinions, so score vary. I find some mobile games to deserve zero because of their application over kid morality.
I not here to debate what game can or can't get a zero, I here to tell you that is totally fine. Nobody is harmed over a zero score.

 

[azertydu91]

Of course you can my friend. I mean, being a reviewer it's not volunteer work. You can litelary put your heart in your work, its up to you. Remember some reviewers that refuse to beat Death Stranding?



A game that receive 10 and is not perfect can receive a 0 and being not totally crash. Again, I already told you to not get attached to score numbers. And unless people start to read minds, how do you know a game was review in bad/good faith?

Remember TLOUS2? So, some user reviewers are giving 0/10 saying 'this game is crap' and getting invalidated, while others giving 10/10 saying 'fuck the haters' get a huge pass.
10 and 0 can be valid and invalid for many reasons.



What I saying is not for you or me to tell what a game deserves. Opinions vary, score are opinions, so score vary. I find some mobile games to deserve zero because of their application over kid morality.
I not here to debate what game can or can't get a zero, I here to tell you that is totally fine. Nobody is harmed over a zero score.

Once again not the point I was making.I feel like we are going in circle so let's move on to the topic either you don't understand what I am saying or I can't explain it properly.It just seems stupid because no game that is working deserve 0 just because I don't see it as a manichean ay and realistically everything is more in a shader of grey than all black or all white.

 

[SkylineRKR]

Cyberpunk was hyped up by the press, they LIED to the consumers. Pearce was shilling until no end, and then threw it under the bus just as the review bombs do. The review bombs aren't different per se, except for the fact Cyberpunk actually is a broken piece of shit. BF 2042 is a broken piece of shit too.

TLOU2 was a solid game, it was polished and delivered for me. It could be its theme and narrative isn't everyone's jam, but the product worked as advertised and I thought it was fine. Those other 2 games deserve review bombs. They're simply bad products and I would say a waste of money.

 

[recursive]

No, that wasn't the point.

He basically said we don't want this social justice stuff in our game when is not their game. The developers are entitled to create any story they want because it's their game, not the gamers.

Agree on that but consumers can criticize it all they want.

 

[alabtrosMyster]

This was the point I tried to make if 0/10 are politics and 10/10 critic scores are perfectly fine, something is fishy!
You love the game? More power to you.
I dislike the writing, combat and pacing and you cannot dismiss those points as political reasons.

Nope, I can't.

I replayed TLoU 2 after the drama was over, and just like the first one I liked it more the second time around... However, I don't agree with your point of view writing and combat, but I will admit that the game often have very long pauses between encounters, contrary to TLoU some cut scenes are much longer as well, I think it hurts the game, like it hurt Uncharted 4.

My issue is more with the buggy games getting a free pass because patches.... reviewers should review the game as it is, not as it "should be".

 

[Lucifers Beard]

No, that wasn't the point.

He basically said we don't want this social justice stuff in our game when is not their game. The developers are entitled to create any story they want because it's their game, not the gamers.

I think the point people are making here is that this has absolutely nothing to do with SJW shite and everything to do with the game being bad.

Why are we talking about story when it’s non-existent in the game anyway? Games should be judged based on what they are, not what anyone thinks they should be.

In this case, it’s a poor multiplayer shooter that has taken 1 step forward and 10 backwards. There are so many bad design decisions that can’t be avoided too. It’s also chock full of bugs and glitches that the majority of people have run into, some of which require the game to be completely restarted.

 

[MrTentakel]

My issue is more with the buggy games getting a free pass because patches.... reviewers should review the game as it is, not as it "should be".

Agree!
If the game is finished enough to take money for it, it`s finished enough to be criticised.

 

[Concern]

My squad yes but we wanted a traditional one were I can see everyone's.

Of course, so do I. I'm just not sure everyone seen the one im talking about

 

[Concern]

It's not "their" game. They're a consumer of a product. The only thing you should be "entitled" to is that the game works and it's playable from beginning to end.

It is "their" game once they pay $70 for the damn thing. Of course your logic is flawed and you're only here to defend tlou2, rather than actually contribute to the actual "problem" op is referring to.

 

[Calling 911 Melts Beams]

review bombing games i like is bad and should be banned

review bombing games i dont like is based and redpilled

 

[K2D]

Cyberpunk was hyped up by the press, they LIED to the consumers. Pearce was shilling until no end, and then threw it under the bus just as the review bombs do. The review bombs aren't different per se, except for the fact Cyberpunk actually is a broken piece of shit. BF 2042 is a broken piece of shit too.

TLOU2 was a solid game, it was polished and delivered for me. It could be its theme and narrative isn't everyone's jam, but the product worked as advertised and I thought it was fine. Those other 2 games deserve review bombs. They're simply bad products and I would say a waste of money.

No.

CD project were the ones who lied and manipulated the media.

The media did a poor job of raising critical questions.

TLoU2 deserved its user score for different equally valid reasons. Though I feel the 10 point system on aggregator sites are pointless.

 

[BlackGauna]

What are you talking about? The new BF is fucking bad. It deserves every bad score it gets.

Cyberpunk was/is a mess.

TLOU2 was very divisive, even if you blend out all the "woke" outcries. I personally didn't like the story and characters at all. Biggest disappointment in a long time.

You can maybe criticise people for voting only the extremes, 1 or 10. But that is absolutely normal, see imdb etc. Most people just equate 1 with "don't like" and 10 with "like".

 

[MiguelItUp]

"Review bombing" in general is pretty shit, especially when majority of the time it's for ridiculous reasons. Or for things that are massively blown out of proportion.

If a game in BROKEN and CANNOT be enjoyed, or HORRIBLY monetized, etc., then I get it. But for tiny disagreements, minor bugs, or anything that doesn't severely affect the game, or game's functionality, it's shitty IMO.

 

[BigBooper]

Reviews are not some holy grail of integrity and never have been, and never should be expected to be, because it just ain't happening.

If a game is receiving a ton of bad reviews it gives a potential buyer a reason to pause and look into the situation before blowing their money. It's a very useful tool.

 

[NickFire]

There is no equivalence between review bombing LOU2 and giving broken games sold by snake oil salesmen a 0.

 

[GnomeChimpsky]

Spoiler

Missing Core Features

> No standard server browser

> Fewer standardized game modes

> Fewer base game maps than any other title. (even including portal the map count is only 13)

> No persistent lobbies. You have to matchmake after EVERY round

> Fewer in-game assignments None outside of cosmetic unlocks

> Less character customization options (than BF5)

> No profile progress/stats page in the menu

> No battle log/stats tracker for other players

> No global leaderboards

> No end of round assignment progress screen

> No custom emblems

> Fewer achievements

> No medals

> No swelling crescendo of dramatic music near the end of a match. Static Noise does not count

> Less destruction

> Only a small handful of destructible buildings on each map

> No map altering levolution

> No spectator mode

> No permanent community servers (would be useful for clans and events)



Missing from Infantry Gameplay

> Fewer guns. Even including all the portal guns, BF4 still had more at launch

> Fewer infantry gadgets

> No manual leaning

> No diving while swimming

> No high wall vaulting

> No crouch sprinting

> No backwards prone

> No explosion knockback

> No rolling after falling from heights

> No ammo or health pickup off teammates

> No scope zeroing

> No thermal optics

> No indirect fire gadgets

> Less anti-tank launchers

> No lock-on launchers. The M5 works with the SOFLAM but that requires 2 people

> No AP mines/claymores

> No static weapon emplacements

> No fortification building

> No resupply stations

> No suppression mechanic. This one I don't mind but it was a staple and now it is gone



Missing from Vehicles

> Fewer vehicle types. Separate vehicle progression per faction even though they are functionally identical.

> No naval vehicles Except I guess the hovercraft technically

> No vehicle gunner direction indicator

> No lock on direction indicator

> No vehicle enter/exit animations

> No tank turret decoupling. This was in BF4

> Less vehicle driver/pilot customization options

> No tank zoom customization options

> No tank gunner customization options

> No helicopter gunner secondary weapons

> No separate helicopter/fixed-wing controls

> No control input while looking behind/free looking in aircraft



Missing from Scoring System

> No squad wipe scoring

> No player damage points

> No vehicle damage points

> No vehicle kill assist points

> No headshot bonus

> No long-range kill bonus

> No assist counts as kill bonus

> No squad objective play bonus

> Oversimplified teamplay scoring (i.e. healing a teammate always gives you +5xp rather than the amount of health you give)

> Squad and Teamwork

> No commander

> No special squad call-in abilities

> No squad field upgrades

> No in-game VOIP

> Fewer factions (with almost nothing to give the 2 factions any distinction)

> No cross-team chat

> No "create new squad" option

> No "promote to squad leader" option

> No clans

> No view of squadmates while in the spawn screen

> No "Medic incoming" indicator in downed state

> No rank names/icons, just a number.



Missing from UI and Quality of Life

> Less control customization options

> Less UI customization options

> No HUD/icon opacity customization

> No HUD scaling customization options

> No gunsight reticle customization options

> No network performance graph

> No individual player scoreboard

> Less detail in the 'who killed you' screen

> No ultrawide monitor support

> Cannot move UI elements to suit screen size

> Very poor friend joining system



BROKEN

> 45 tick rate servers

> Rubberbanding

> Deploy bugs, revive bugs

> Downed state bug that prevents you from respawning if you clip through anything

> Janky animations

> Performance is horrible on PC. Unplayable framerates from what looks like CPU bottlenecking

> Unlock three different silencers for the same weapon that have no effect on the stats of the weapon

> Exact same attachment on two different guns having an opposite effect

> Hovercrafts are able to scale vertical surfaces, as well as fly in the right circumstances.

> In rare cases, a player will become unable to damage enemies. This player will also lose their nameplate, causing them to appear as hostile to allies. This is fixed by dying and respawning.

> Bullet Registration

> Weapon Balance

> Vehicle Balance



Do not buy this game

The bugs are the least of this game's problems. It deserves that Steam rating.

 

[Concern]

Has there been any shooter in the modern era that has no voice chat in it? Especially a shooter that is supposed to be all about teamwork and objectives?!

When I played the beta I had issues killing people. I always use ARs or LMGs in shooters. When I read about the buggy bullet spread after, no wonder.

None that I can think of off the top of my head.

I usually run ARs too and noticed an inconsistency with them. Then saw on reddit why.

 

[OneShotThrill]

Or u gotta stop being delusional and start to face reality how about that.

The game isn't a buggy mess and my video of my playthrough of 3 hours showcases this the other day. Zero problems encountered. And yes buggy mess is where its at because that's what everybody keeps complaining about in video's that bash the game and not.

So becuase you in didnt encounter any bugs in a 3 hr playthrough..somehow EVERYONE else is lying. Not like theres tons of footage of other people goin thru bugs..its not like DICE has already had to remove things from the game. No its made up. Everyone is lying. Its a grand conspiracy. Theres no chat in game.. there no squad invite in game, thers no server browser, theres whole UI options that are missing....this game isnt finished. Im not even talking about bugs. The game is literally needs more time in the oven. Not a roadmap of possible fixes with season passes.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

None that I can think of off the top of my head.

I usually run ARs too and noticed an inconsistency with them. Then saw on reddit why.

The hilarious thing is if there's ever been an opportunity for BF to get a jump on COD it's this year. Not that it would outsell COD, but at least close the gap.

Vanguard hasnt been received well by critics and gamers dont care for WWII.

All BF 2042 had to do is release a decently polished game at their usual 3-4 weeks before COD comes out and it could had been a big break for the series. Add in that Portal mode for customization and to draw in legacy gamers who may have jumped ship and if it all came together, there's no doubt 2021 is the biggest opportunity. Yet BF is unfinished, unpolished and released AFTER COD. This might be the first time ever they released after their main competitor. They couldnt even ship on time as the original launch date was October.

Now, EA, Dice and gamers will have to wait 3 years for the next BF game.

 

[Filben]

Could you imagine people not liking the writing, pacing and combat

Yes.

 

[OneShotThrill]

None that I can think of off the top of my head.

I usually run ARs too and noticed an inconsistency with them. Then saw on reddit why.

i havent seen any ONLINE only fps launch with no voice chat. ..and this is coming from Battlefield. 128 players and we only have 4 man squads with no chat and no way to edit squads. Theres no way that people can think this was part of DICE's release plan. Also AR bloom is inconsistent as hell. SMGs have been outperforming ARs .

 

[StreetsofBeige]

i havent seen any ONLINE only fps launch with no voice chat. ..and this is coming from Battlefield. 128 players and we only have 4 man squads with no chat and no way to edit squads. Theres no way that people can think this was part of DICE's release plan. Also AR bloom is inconsistent as hell. SMGs have been outperforming ARs .

You never know.

Maybe shitty ARs are planned by the devs to get more people to use other guns.

Kind of like back in the day in COD, SMGs were great up close but garbage at medium/long range. Then starting in MW3 the maps got more rat mazy and suddenly SMGs have majorly improved accuracy at longer ranges. There is no way any longtime COD gamer can say SMGs the past 7-8 years are the same shitty effective range as MP5s, Uzis, Thompsons or MP40s back then.

Shitty ARs in BF might be EA's way to get people to do more closer combat than picking people off at longer distance.

 

[Concern]

The hilarious thing is if there's ever been an opportunity for BF to get a jump on COD it's this year. Not that it would outsell COD, but at least close the gap.

Vanguard hasnt been received well by critics and gamers dont care for WWII.

All BF 2042 had to do is release a decently polished game at their usual 3-4 weeks before COD comes out and it could had been a big break for the series. Add in that Portal mode for customization and to draw in legacy gamers who may have jumped ship and if it all came together, there's no doubt 2021 is the biggest opportunity. Yet BF is unfinished, unpolished and released AFTER COD. This might be the first time ever they released after their main competitor. They couldnt even ship on time as the original launch date was October.

Now, EA, Dice and gamers will have to wait 3 years for the next BF game.

Never underestimate the ability of these companies to fuck something up thats in their favor. Everyone I know who bought Vanguard is regretful of it.


We'll see how they can turn it around. Definitely tons of potential in it. Had an insane 128 player rush match on Caspian map yesterday.

 

[OneShotThrill]

Never underestimate the ability of these companies to fuck something up thats in their favor. Everyone I know who bought Vanguard is regretful of it.


We'll see how they can turn it around. Definitely tons of potential in it. Had an insane 128 player rush match on Caspian map yesterday.

Hey this was their year The game def has potential. They need actually finish it before it's too late.

 

[Concern]

Hey this was their year The game def has potential. They need actually finish it before it's too late.

Most definitely. The hype was completely in their favor as soon as their trailer teaser came out and they dropped the ball. They're usually good at post patching tho so we'll see.

 

[Excess]

It wasn't what trolls and specialist groups wanted it to be

Look man, I happen to really like Cyberpunk 2077, but I accept why so many people hate it, and deservedly so. Just don't resort to cognitive dissonance to justify it.

 

[plushyp]

It's hard to sift between real outrage and gamers being a bunch of male Karens.

Very strange you say male Karens when there are female gamers out there who also had issues with the games.

 

[justiceiro]

What is this? Every new game that has a bad metascore is the work of review bomb, not just a poor launch? Let's stop feeling sorry for multi million dollars products, please?

 

[Platinumstorm]

I think review bombing is a disservice to gamers. I've put in a solid amount of time in Battlefield. I think it's reasonable for it to deserve a score somewhere between 50-70. A 0 score to me means fun is impossible. I am having a very reasonable amount of fun in battlefield, and even the bugs are adding to the fun.

 

[Fitzchiv]

You know what the real issue is? The growing gap between the reality consumers of games and movies occupy and that of the paid, sycophant, virtue signalling dickheads that review them.

We don't need identity politics ramming down our throats. We don't need telling what we SHOULD like. We pay good money for products we expect to be vaguely functional and onward from that reserve the right to say go fuck yourself to studios and writers who've disappeared up their own arses.

 

[Tiago Rodrigues]

You know what the real issue is? The growing gap between the reality consumers of games and movies occupy and that of the paid, sycophant, virtue signalling dickheads that review them.

We don't need identity politics ramming down our throats. We don't need telling what we SHOULD like. We pay good money for products we expect to be vaguely functional and onward from that reserve the right to say go fuck yourself to studios and writers who've disappeared up their own arses.

This is so true.

The entire Cyberpunk release just revealed how gaming reviews are rotten and 100% based on hype and how a broken product on consoles can amount to a 7/10 or even more in plenty of cases. There's perfect PS4 grades for that game out there. A game that was released without working!

There's even better previews and videos from "influencers" talking about how the game would change the industry...and it did. But not like they expected.

After that, I just didn't mind about them anymore. Word of mouth and gameplay reviews are 100% how I select what I play. Maybe it's my fault it didn't happen like this before, for sure.

 

[Guilty_AI]

The entire Cyberpunk release just revealed how gaming reviews are rotten and 100% based on hype and how a broken product on consoles can amount to a 7/10 or even more in plenty of cases.

"revealed"

*Driv3r flashbacks*

 

[ResurrectedContrarian]

I don't know... it seems to me that there is often a situation where developers openly disdain their own customers ("let's make this game not all about 18-35yo dudes! in fact, let's be sure all characters are designed to go directly against the fantasies this group"), and review-bombing or generally trashing their game by any means possible in the open market online is a fully justified form of revolt.

 

[iorek21]

Not every review bombing is justified, but I think we can agree that most of them are: Battlefield, countless FIFAs, Cyberpunk, Fallout 76 etc.

TLOU2 was a different case that leads to other kinds of discussions, but we could say that it was quite unfair.

Then again, the majority of review bombings seem pretty great to me; it’s a legitimate way of protesting against terrible products and unjust practices.

 

[Ghost of Caelid]

Review bombing is stupid and does nothing to progress the industry and gaming as a whole. Any changes usually comes from twitter outrage. Games like the last of us 2 being review bombed is why...it kills all merit of legitimacy behind the practice when people review bomb for illegitimate reasons. Honestly user reviews shouldn't even have a score...just text based review voted on by which is most useful.

 

[zeorhymer]

Everyone shut up and just CONSUME.

 

[DForce]

It is "their" game once they pay $70 for the damn thing. Of course your logic is flawed and you're only here to defend tlou2, rather than actually contribute to the actual "problem" op is referring to.

Doesn't surprise me that the point would fly over your head.

You have a habit just like the other guy of not paying attention. You own the physical copy of the game, not the actual IP.

If I ask you who owns a video game, are you going to say, "We both do?"

Do you get it now? It shouldn't be that difficult, Concern.

You can't go around telling people don't want in their game because you're not the developer or the owner of the IP. We're not talking about owning a physical copy of the game, we're talking about owning the IP to where you can choose what goes in and out of your game.

 

[DForce]

I think the point people are making here is that this has absolutely nothing to do with SJW shite and everything to do with the game being bad.

Why are we talking about story when it’s non-existent in the game anyway? Games should be judged based on what they are, not what anyone thinks they should be.

In this case, it’s a poor multiplayer shooter that has taken 1 step forward and 10 backwards. There are so many bad design decisions that can’t be avoided too. It’s also chock full of bugs and glitches that the majority of people have run into, some of which require the game to be completely restarted.

Did you even read his comment?

when you start attacking your fanbase before the games release and trying to inject a social justice type angle on the game its gonna get heat regardless of the actual game
gamers are sick of having this sort of shit injected into their games

I didn't mention TLOU because he was talking about SJW type stuff being injected into their games. I basically said it's not your game and they can decide to put whatever they want in it.

It shouldn't be that hard to understand.

 

[Concern]

Doesn't surprise me that the point would fly over your head.

You have a habit just like the other guy of not paying attention. You own the physical copy of the game, not the actual IP.

If I ask you who owns a video game, are you going to say, "We both do?"

Do you get it now? It shouldn't be that difficult, Concern.

You can't go around telling people don't want in their game because you're not the developer or the owner of the IP. We're not talking about owning a physical copy of the game, we're talking about owning the IP to where you can choose what goes in and out of your game.

They're selling you a product. If you don't want/agree with the politics or whatever in it, its your right to criticize it. But obviously the only point you see is "must defend tlou2 at all costs" lol. You obviously can't understand anything from the op besides "tlou2 is bad". Talk about missing the point

Perfect example with Battlefield 1 with the "dont like it, don't buy it". Put whatever garbage in the game you want but don't cry because people tear it to shreds later.

 

[fersnake]

so you are comparing TLOU 2 with battlefield and cyberpunk? lol one just had some controversial thing that i personally didnt care, on the other hand bf and cyberpunk ppl bombed because in some cases you couldnt even play the game.

 

[DForce]

They're selling you a product. If you don't want/agree with the politics or whatever in it, its your right to criticize it. But obviously the only point you see is "must defend tlou2 at all costs" lol. You obviously can't understand anything from the op besides "tlou2 is bad". Talk about missing the point

Perfect example with Battlefield 1 with the "dont like it, don't buy it". Put whatever garbage in the game you want but don't cry because people tear it to shreds later.

Once again, you're not paying attention.

Show me where I mentioned The Last of Us in my initial response.

It's not "their" game. They're a consumer of a product. The only thing you should be "entitled" to is that the game works and it's playable from beginning to end.

I never mentioned it.

I was talking about video games in general. I also never said people weren't free to criticize the game, because they are. That's what they're entitled to.

This is the second time in a row where you misinterpreted my comment. I wasn't talking about The Last of Us, I was talking about how gamers don't have the right to decide what goes in and out of their game.

If you don't like what's in it? Then don't buy it. It's really that simple.

 

[BigBeauford]

Gaming media, similar to film media, have shown the inability to be objective about the state of a game. 9/10, the fans are right.

 

[TGO]

By the OP's logic Ghostbusters 2016 and The Last Jedi didn't deserve the user bad reviews because they was actually good.

 

[Concern]

Once again, you're not paying attention.

Show me where I mentioned The Last of Us in my initial response.



I never mentioned it.

I was talking about video games in general. I also never said people weren't free to criticize the game, because they are. That's what they're entitled to.

This is the second time in a row where you misinterpreted my comment. I wasn't talking about The Last of Us, I was talking about how gamers don't have the right to decide what goes in and out of their game.

If you don't like what's in it? Then don't buy it. It's really that simple.

Your first post in the thread lol. Just look at your breakdown of tlou2 reviews . Insulting people for not liking what you like is ironically childish ain't it?


Not everyone follows everything with game announcements. Most people (casuals) impulse buy when they see the game on the shelf. But cuz you say so, they aren't allowed to criticize something they don't like in their favorite ip right?

 

[DForce]

Your first post in the thread lol. Just look at your breakdown of tlou2 reviews . Insulting people for not liking what you like is ironically childish ain't it?


Not everyone follows everything with game announcements. Most people (casuals) impulse buy when they see the game on the shelf. But cuz you say so, they aren't allowed to criticize something they don't like in their favorite ip right?

My first post in this thread has nothing to do with my response to captainraincoat.


It's obvious at this point that you didn't pay attention and now you're getting desperate by bringing up my first post in this thread instead of my reply to captainraincoat.


There's nothing here to discuss and you just want to argue at this point. Read the conversation first instead of making assumptions.

 

[Mozzarella]

Metacritic user score before it got popular was actually better than the critic score for me, all the top rated user games were really great games and the score reflected the games accurately.
But the past few years it turned to protest tool, if the game has something someone doesnt like (which is most games) then the game auto receives 0. It turned to shitshow. And what is worse is that people give it attention, youtube and twitter always refer to it as its some reliable website for gamer score.
On Metacritic, its either 0 or 10 most of the time, the reviews are terrible, most of them are trash tier spam that belong in trash. And a lot of them are not even about the game, but instead a protest about something the company did or some agenda.

I have to say that some games deserve it. It's just that the whole thing is bad because trolls dont get punished for making bad reviews, and fanboys can make a review like this "Best game amaaaaaaaaaazing 10/10" and it will get accepted as well. Also the context does not get checked so you have some people who say "great game" but give it 0 instead. And anyone can make an account and go rate, also the website is terrible for handling profiles, you dont get to see what a user rated, and they dont take into consideration number of votes, so a niche visual novel can reach 9.7 user score with 20 votes, overall its just a bad system to score games, its nothing like IMDB.

As i said above some games deserve it, and to be honest sometimes the 0 and 10s balance themselves out, so you will get an actual good score overall that represent the community despite the reviews themselves being bad. So the score itself is not bad, if you just take out the number, its generally accurate. For instance TLOU2 has both a lot of high scores and low scores and it represent what gaming community think of it, its indeed a controversial game. I can understand people who rate it low, because of its story, i have watched and read reviews and i agree with a lot of their points, personally i disliked it, but people who like the game gave it high score and made their own reviews so the score kinda reflects that in some way.

Cyberpunk case is because of the bugs and lies, its deserved, the pc score is around 7.1? which is accurate, its close to steam reviews. Again the reviews themselves are bad but the score is okay? when it comes to popular games at least, the niche jrpg and visual novel always get inflated high scores because only people who care about them bother to rate them.
What i dont like however is for example when Cyberpunk turned out to be a disaster launch i saw a bunch of review bombing for Witcher 3 Blood and Wine, an excellent DLC and you go there and read a review with 0 score saying Cyberpunk was trash, wtf? thats on the admins for not filtering trolls.

I would say that overall its a bad place to read reviews, and it gets a lot more attention than it deserves, but sometimes you can try to take the score with a grain of salt, sometimes the score can be accurate about the overall reception of the game.

 

[Mabdia]

Except that I understand the some games deserve 10's, whereas I have never ever seen a game that deserved less than 2 or 3.I mean for a game to be a 0 it would need it to be literaly unplayable anywhere and can't be refunded.And I played my fair share of shitty games, from Crackdown3, to ride to hell, going by the zelda ( but for the phillips CDI...Dun...Dun ...Duuun).And none of those games deserve a 0, even though Ride to hell was probably the closest one by far.That is for a somewhat objective review system though.
but the problem is that some games are reviewed based on expectationsthe higher they are, the higher the note will be if met or even exceeded but it has the counter part, the higher they are the more you will nitpick and lower the note.To that you can had franchise fatigue, lack of innovation and you can't have objective reviews for franchises.Because they have to tick all the boxes so the dev can't focus on more creative ideas...That's why I think Ubi games (and especially assassin's creed) get reviews all over the place.
Imagine being new to acreed or even having played just the first one...Then Valhalla looks awesome, but after origins and odissey it feflt like a letdown.
But that's another debate do we judge a game based on what has been previously done or not, based on the population it is targeted to or what other games have achieved is a tricky question.That is true for every media be it a painting, music or a movie for example.
So that's why I think an objective review can only be based on the technical presentation aone, because that is the only way to have an objective scale.Does it hold its fps constant, is there a lot of bug and how often do they occured etc...And I think that if a game can boot and be somewhat playabe it deseve more than 0...Not especially 10 but it can't be 0.

I totally agree with you that a game should be only reviewed about technical point of a view. At least when we are talking about the so called "gaming journalism".

I can understand that for you no game should get a 0. But each of us int this entire planet are like an whole universe in ourselves. That's why when we are talking about user reviews it is right that some individuals think that a game deserves 0 to 10 based in the world view that each of us have and how each of us experience a single game. That's why I just can't understand that why someone giving a 0 for a game that someone likes might make that person uneasy or anything.

Again, in the end all zeroes or all tens will cancel each other and the real feel of the game will be in the center/middle ground.

 

[ResetEraVetVIP]

Look at OP's post history to know they're here with a very specific mission to damage control negative reactions to Battlefield 2042.

Nah, I just don't like reviews with no detail...

 

[Silver Wattle]

Customers giving reviews is basically the only form of feedback we can give that can't be hidden or dismissed, to dismiss that is to be anti consumer.
You might think that people giving the games unfairly harsh review scores, which is true, but people HAVE to give excessively bad scores to products they dislike to get any kind of attention draw to the game being bad, this all stems from mainstream reviews always being overwhelmingly positive, usually out of incentives or fear of reprisal.

TLDR; We don't get fair mainstream criticism of new games, so players have to band together to create a counter narrative to the mainstream positivity.