The reviewer said he didn't have many issues, so I guess that's where the 93 comes from. However, I disagree - I don't think you should rate a game as highly just because you personally are lucky enough to have not experienced major tech issues.
You can't "not experience" these technical issues unless you're on >= 6700k/1080. These aren't environmentally specific problems, they're core engine issues that affect everyone playing the game on PC. Anybody claiming they aren't experiencing the problems are either brute-forcing past them with the best hardware available or they don't understand performance well enough to notice when it's really bad. A PC Gamer reviewer should absolutely be knowledgeable enough to avoid the latter and/or acknowledge the former if he/she is claiming that they "didn't experience" technical issues. This type of comment in reviews drives me crazy because it perpetuates the internet stereotype that people who complain about performance are just a tiny minority who don't now how to configure their hardware/software and/or have unrealistic expectations for game performance.
Personally, I'm starting to get pretty f'in irritated seeing Dishonored 2 get rave reviews everywhere while the majority of PC players are still waiting to play it two weeks after release. The narrative from Arkane that "omg gee wilickers we had no idea that the game had these problems but we sure are working on them now!" is even more infuriating since 99/100 random PC gamers from the internet could have told them that the game had major technical problems after playing it for five minutes. Once again in 2016, the gaming press is rewarding a studio for releasing a game with piss-poor optimization and major technical flaws. But it's okay, because you can't
really tell the difference over 30 frames per second anyway, right?
Edit: Here's the current summary on steam, where the game has mixed reviews and discussions filled with customers complaining that the game runs like shit
"Reprise your role as a supernatural assassin in Dishonored 2 – this Fall’s #1 rated game on Metacritic. Praised by PC Gamer as “brilliant”, IGN as “amazing” and “a super sequel, IGN as “amazing” and “a superb sequel”, declared a “masterpiece” by Eurogamer, and hailed “a must-play revenge tale among the best in its class” by Game Informer"
What the hell is going on with the disconnect between game journalist/critic reviews and the experience everyone else is having? PC Gamer and Eurogamer should know better, and the Metacritic rating should show
some indication that a sizable percentage of the customer base are very unhappy with the state of the game. If you don't take performance seriously then you should not be reviewing PC games, you're doing a disservice to the entire PC gaming population by downplaying and glossing over technical issues that will have major impact on the experiences of your readership.
