-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Topher
Gold Member
One 4/10 vs. Fifteen 10/10 reviews from websites with Xbox in their names.
Not really. A score 10-20 points off the average either way isn't really anything controversial. I said earlier in the thread that 7/10 is perfectly fine, imo. Less than half the overall metacritc score isn't balancing anything out.
And Starfield doesn't have 15 10/10s on metacritic regardless of what sites we are talking about? Might want to pull back on that hyperbole bro.
Last edited:
sainraja
Member
Not at all:
The closing statement in the review is fucking brutal:
If you're the kind of person who thinks videogames peaked with Fallout 3's launch version and they've required neither evolution nor improvement since, this game is absolutely for you. If you believe Bethesda doesn't need to exhibit growth as an artistic outlet and hasn't had to change a thing about the way it's made games since 2008, I can safely say you'll adore Starfield because it's all that a Bethesda game has always been... and literally nothing more.
Where is that expectation coming from?
They are still making a video game, lol. So many games are basically adopting and evolving mechanics that have come before.
ByWatterson
Member
Down to 85 now on Xbox. I know these are "good" scores, but is there any argument left that the overall critical reception isn't at least slightly disappointing?
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
I don't think he has been QUITE as obnoxious as around the time the One X was released, could be wrong though
Bernoulli
M2 slut
Not at all:
The closing statement in the review is fucking brutal:
If you're the kind of person who thinks videogames peaked with Fallout 3's launch version and they've required neither evolution nor improvement since, this game is absolutely for you. If you believe Bethesda doesn't need to exhibit growth as an artistic outlet and hasn't had to change a thing about the way it's made games since 2008, I can safely say you'll adore Starfield because it's all that a Bethesda game has always been... and literally nothing more.
Let's hope the next one is good
Last edited:
That 4/10 has dropped Starfield to 85 on Metacritic for the Series X version.
I give zero credit to user scores, it's driven by fanboys. But that 85 compared to the general expectations (both internal and external) must be a big disappointment for Microsoft/Bethesda.
Topher
Gold Member
I recall him popping up and beating his chest the few times Xbox has outsold PlayStation over the past decade. He reminds me of that football player who does a touchdown dance in the end zone while his team is losing by 60 points.
vaibhavpisal
Member
Don't think so.
If they are at war with certain section of games media so as to hold back review codes, they definitely must've expected it.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Topher
Gold Member
Lokaum D+
Member
XBOXAdiccit 10/10
Genertion XBOX 9.9/10
Somos XBOX 9.8/10
Mondo XBOX 9.7/10
Pure XBOX 9/10
The XBOX Hub 9/10
XBOX era 9.7/10
what make u think that the "critic review" arent driven by fanboys ?
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
GymWolf
Gold Member
Yep, writing is so bad compared to bg3, especially companions writing, everything is boring and dull.
And for now, the main quest has been the most by the numbers piece of scifi i ever player or close to that.
GymWolf
Gold Member
What a way to ask for anal sex, phew...
Topher
Gold Member
That opening where you get the ship did feel quite a bit contrived. Think they could have thought of a better way to transition the character into the story. Thankfully the story and writing get much better from there on. Like I and others have said, starting the game is a bit of slog. Really could have done more to grab folks earlier on.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
- Xbox Addict = 10
- Generacion Xbox = 10
- Somos Xbox = 9.8
- Mondo Xbox = 9.8
- Xbox Era = 9.7
- Windows Central = 9
- Xbox Hub = 9
That 15 10/10s was more in a "sarcastic" way of course, because one 4/10 doesn't balance all those out either.
All I'm saying is that one 4/10 (which is 3 points less than 7) is being criticized so much, but no one is batting an eye on the numerous 10s (which is also the same 3 points above 7).
This one bad review is fine. Having said that, I've said that I would not give this game less than 6/10 because that'd be too harsh.
Last edited:
Alebrije
Member
Yep, spmeone should use the olympic diving system where you eliminate the lowest and hightes scores and then do an average of the rest ones
GymWolf
Gold Member
What was the occasion? The kfc in his town closed for good?He's so dramatic,
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Where was his Starfield vs. BG3 poll?Posting this here before he deletes it
Oh, right.
Last edited:
Jadsey
Member
Prepare to be disappointed
Like you, I spent many hours designing settlements in FO4.
I spent about 30mins in the ship builder and will never touch it again. Clunky beyond hope!
I’ve put another 9 hours in the game now and it’s not good at all. Mods may save it, so I might come back to it in 5 years or so, but I’m done for now.
Between this and Diablo 4, it’s been a disappointing few months for me.
BbMajor7th
Member
I've yet to dive into Diablo 4, yet, but I've logged some embarrassing hours in Diablo 3 - what disappointed you with it?
GHG
Gold Member
Robb
Gold Member
Does there exist a person who takes this guy seriously? I’m not even sure why he reviews games, he doesn’t seem to enjoy them very much.
BbMajor7th
Member
Must be the definition of mixed emotions...Starfield review thread got locked in that other forum after the 4/10 reactions
Yeah unfortunately there are fansites inflating the scores also on the critics side.
(it's no secret that these people are the only reason games like Halo Infinite reached the average score they got).
But it's usually counterbalanced by other extremes. People wanting attention with the extremely controversial review to get traffic and so on.
User scores instead are just a joke with petty review bombings and the likes.
Unfortunately if you claim the game will be Skyrim (a 94-95 metacritic game) in space as they did, you let your whole community overhype it as the next game of the year and claim it to be a turning point for first party productions as they did and then you deliver a Fallout 4 level reskin there will be consequences aka disappointment.
Last edited:
Topher
Gold Member
Eh....branded websites throwing out glowing reviews for first party games is not new. This didn't begin with Starfield. Won't end with Starfield either. This comes up every time there is a highly rated first party game.
Any 4/10 for a game that has received an overall great score in the mid 80s should be looked at sideways. Remember when IGN Korea gave God of War: R a 6/10 and the controversy that swelled out that? Same deal. These outlier reviews scream "look at me" especially here from a person who does everything they/them can to scream "look at me". Kind of strange that all of the sudden
Last edited:
Madflavor
Member
I agree 4/10 does seem harsh, but the actual review imo is spot on. I brought it up before, but BGS's design approach to Open World, RPG mechanics, and camerawork are old and outdated. They're sticking only to what they know, and aren't evolving their craft. It's been 17 years since Oblivion. Compare that to other studios like Capcom who've continued to experiment with Resident Evil, to mostly great results. Or Nintendo with their latest Zelda games. Even FromSoftware who tend to stick to their Soulslike design, have evolved and experimented with the formula with games like Sekiro, Bloodborne, and Elden Ring.
Bethesda has been doing the same shit, the same janky shit, for nearly two decades. On top of that while Starfield has it's good points, much of the game feels so shallow thanks to it's procedurally generated maps, abundant loading screens, repeated enemy and base placement, and braindead AI.
And look it's cool if you or anyone else love the game. But I'd wager that someone's enjoyment of Starfield, significantly hinges on how much they love the setting and can allow themselves to be immersed in that world. To people who crave exploring space in a more grounded tonal approach, Starfield is a dream come true. But if the things I listed above are enough to annoy you, it's going to demolish your immersion, take you out of the experience, and annoy you if anything else. This is what Jim is talking about, and while I do think the 4/10 is a bit extra, their actual points are sound imo.
GHG
Gold Member
The problem is the fact that there's a disproportionate amount of them for Xbox and every single one of them get preferential treatment. Start an Xbox fansite and the likes of Phil/Greenbeeg/Bond are giving you preferential treatment, encouragement and gifts from day one. Explain to me how they all get sent review codes along with the usual twitter/youtube fluffers but at the same time they send a code to Eurogamer but state it's only allowed to be used by Digital Foundry?
Last edited:
BbMajor7th
Member
It'll have been mock-reviewed about three months ago - all publishers do this, both for the benefit of last-minute tweaking and for formulating marketing and PR strategies. It's quite possible that limiting codes was part of the strategy, other publishers do take this approach. It can also go the other way too: when a game lifts its review embargo a week early, you know the mock reviews were glowing.
Last edited:
Kilau
Member
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
GOWR is not the right example because it's a universally praised and liked game with a score of 94/100. So a 6/10 is completely out of sorts. It's like someone giving Elden Ring or Zelda TOTK a 6/10 -- which wouldn't make sense. Games like GOWR, ER, Zelda TOTK are nearly flawless games.
On the other hand, if someone gives Days Gone -- a good game but with definite flaws -- a 5/10, I can see that happening. Some may also give it a 10/10 (which would be equally wrong) because it's not a perfect game.
The point is that a +/- 20 score makes sense, but only when the game is divisive. If it is a near-perfect game, a 6/10 is a bad score. If it is a complete horseshit game, a 9/10 is a bad score. This is also why Xbox Era's 8.5/10 for Redfall is a bad score because they gave a good score to a unanimously bad game.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
He doesn't even like himself.
GHG
Gold Member
Their mock reviews process is broken though and they know it. Phil came out and said that they had Redfall scoring at least 10 points higher in their mock reviews process.
How do you mitigate for that in the short term without overhauling your mock review process (which takes time)? Only give review codes to those who you know lean more favourably towards your platform.
DeaDPo0L84
Member
As someone who is having a fun time with the game but also didn't hype this to the moon (pun intended), I actually agree with that last statement. It's a very safe game, it pretty much pulls everything from their previous games and slaps a sci-fi skin on top of it. If this is all you were expecting from a new Bethesda game fine, I think most though had higher expectations for one of the juggernauts in the videogame space, especially with Microsoft's apparent war chest at their disposal.If you're the kind of person who thinks videogames peaked with Fallout 3's launch version and they've required neither evolution nor improvement since, this game is absolutely for you. If you believe Bethesda doesn't need to exhibit growth as an artistic outlet and hasn't had to change a thing about the way it's made games since 2008, I can safely say you'll adore Starfield because it's all that a Bethesda game has always been... and literally nothing more.
Robb
Gold Member
I wonder what score he’d give himself.
graywolf323
Member
hey, I just met you, and this is crazy
but here‘s my ship, go to my organization, maybe?
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
BbMajor7th
Member
Depends how you go about it. You generally want to get mock reviews from different regions and a couple of different types of reviewers. XBOX being the big American brand it is, I can see them having reached out to a few NA reviewers to do the mock without hitting up outlets elsewhere in the world, or reviewers may have sent over provisional scores on the basis of identified issues being addressed ahead of launch. The product managers who commission the review might omit details like that when they summarise the findings to the executive team.
Last edited:
Mr Reasonable
Completely Unreasonable
You've noticed that the newer scores coming in are...
Wait a minute, how often are you checking the score?! Hourly or more often?
graywolf323
Member
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
I've been refreshing every minute.
Or ... Perhaps I was smarter and realized that if you filter MC scores by date, you can easily see which reviews were added after the review embargo date. And that you don't have to check the scores in real-time to see when new ones were added.
