Support NeoGAF

[SyberWolf]

anyone know why i am getting this? i have the premium edition.... cant equip a suit. or is this because the early access thing because i do own the VIP thing.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Perhaps Metacritic should also split reviews based on different generations of Nvidia and AMD GPUs?

Console games aren't made for components, they're made for the entire system. If anything most PC game reviews should be done on iGPUs since that's what the majority of Steam users have.

It must change, or critics reviews will just keep on becoming more irrelevant for consumers.
Extremely few games are the same as on review codes, and it’s not just about bugs it’s about features and economics and gameplay. A customer thinking about buying No Man’s Sky won’t be helped by reviews.

Worst part of it, critics whine if they don’t get review codes and punish publishers with lower scores later which only makes these fairly irrelevant early reviews be norm even though they rarely show the whole picture for normal consumers who go in later.

Then platform warriors fight years later over which platform have the highest scores on games and pretend the scores actually show the current state of the games.

The whole equation is broken.

If there is no subscription version where I can play test and make up my own mind I only trust my own instincts at this point, and use Steam reviews and filter out low playtime scores. I only use critics reviews to get a vague hunch if it’s a game for me. Anything above 7/10 is interesting in a genre I like.

Critic reviews from the big established sites basically don't mean anything to me, outside of how they contribute to wider online discussion about the game. I've been finding reviews from Youtube channels to be more my bag.

Actually, just watching some early-game footage is enough for me to see for myself if the game's something I want or not. That's what I did with HFW, for example, that's why I ended up picking the game up a couple weeks after it released. Most review outlets feel less like informing curious buying customers and more like preaching to the choir, or appeasing already set-in-their-ways fanbases.

What would be great is if aggregates like MC focused on working with platform holders, and platform holders with review outlets, in getting a good mix of reviewer types based on the goals of the game. And that, instead of the weighing being based on outlet size, be based on the primary market objective for the game. So a game which is a hardcore sequel in a niche franchise, that mainly wants to appeal to the enthusiasts in that fanbase and little more, should have the majority of the reviewers be hardcore/enthusiasts fans of the franchise, which should in turn have the most significant weight to the average. You still get some more casual fans of the IP to review it, and newcomers who aren't fans (or even fans of the genre it's in) to review as well, but their scores would weigh less since the game itself isn't trying to expand out beyond appeasing the core fanbase that already exists.

So then, the review outlets who are able to get reviewers that can fit certain required criteria, get placed in a certain bracket on a first-come-first-serve basis. That still gives a weight favoring certain outlets, but the outlets themselves will change depending on the game. It also should mean a standard baseline of total reviews have to be met, depending on the game size. Indie games need a lesser number of mandatory reviews, while bigger AAA titles would need more. Then you determine out of that number, the different brackets in terms of reviewer type, based on the main market goals of the game in question, and the outlets who have reviewers fitting those brackets can fill them so the minimum of mandatory reviews is hit. Maybe even lock review submissions after that target is hit, but open up re-submissions if the game gets significant updates that could change initial impressions.

That would be the ideal type of way to set up an aggregate IMO. Oh, and any sites with "Xbox", "PlayStation" or "Nintendo" in their names are automatically disqualified

 

[Cashon]

Those Xbox review sites exist solely to pad out scores for Xbox games don't they? That means these games are worse than what their score suggests.

MeuPlayStation, PlayStation Universe, Push Square, PSX Brasil, PlayStation Lifestyle, Nintendo Life, Nintendo World Report, Nintendojo, etc...

Each console has multiple sites dedicated to coverage for them. I think metacritic would be better off without any of them.

 

[Heisenberg007]

MeuPlayStation, PlayStation Universe, Push Square, PSX Brasil, PlayStation Lifestyle, Nintendo Life, Nintendo World Report, Nintendojo, etc...

Each console has multiple sites dedicated to coverage for them. I think metacritic would be better off without any of them.

We've gone through this in detail in other review threads. These PS-centric websites don't typically inflate scores for PS games. I, and many others, reviewed their scores and found that the scores they give to PlayStation Studios games match the average. Sometimes, they score PS games lower than the average.

That is not the case with Xbox-centric websites.

They almost always inflate their review scores and give above average scores. For example, Xbox Era gave Redfall an 8.5 when the average score is 5.6.

Even in the case of Forza Motorsport, almost all these Xbox-centric websites reviewed the game between 9 and 10, when the average score is closer 8.

 

[Cashon]

We've gone through this in detail in other review threads. These PS-centric websites don't typically inflate scores for PS games. I, and many others, reviewed their scores and found that the scores they give to PlayStation Studios games match the average. Sometimes, they score PS games lower than the average.

That is not the case with Xbox-centric websites.

They almost always inflate their review scores and give above average scores. For example, Xbox Era gave Redfall an 8.5 when the average score is 5.6.

Even in the case of Forza Motorsport, almost all these Xbox-centric websites reviewed the game between 9 and 10, when the average score is closer 8.

I just picked a random PS4 game that I know reviewed lower than average; Medievil. Looked it up on Metacritic. Third score, PlayStation Universe - 95. Metacritic average - 67.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

We've gone through this in detail in other review threads. These PS-centric websites don't typically inflate scores for PS games. I, and many others, reviewed their scores and found that the scores they give to PlayStation Studios games match the average. Sometimes, they score PS games lower than the average.

That is not the case with Xbox-centric websites.

They almost always inflate their review scores and give above average scores. For example, Xbox Era gave Redfall an 8.5 when the average score is 5.6.

Even in the case of Forza Motorsport, almost all these Xbox-centric websites reviewed the game between 9 and 10, when the average score is closer 8.

Yep. There are also way more of the Xbox-based ones than PlayStation or Nintendo, and it's not by coincidence.

Like just look at forums. Do NeoGAF reviews add at all to the MC average? Nope. But guess who does? XboxERA. Xbox. ERA. AFAIK they're one of the only (if not the only) enthusiasts gaming forum whose reviews also add to the Metacritic average.

They do have a frontend website these days, but most of the activity's in the forums, and that's how they started. So in my eyes they're a forum.

I just picked a random PS4 game that I know reviewed lower than average; Medievil. Looked it up on Metacritic. Third score, PlayStation Universe - 95. Metacritic average - 67.

That's just one example. On average, Xbox-leaning sites do this type of thing a lot more than PlayStation-leaning ones.

Another issue is that even some of the sites that don't fall into these naming traps, might engage in similar behavior, in favor of Xbox and against PlayStation games. Stevivor is the most infamous of recent examples.

 

[Cashon]

That's just one example. On average, Xbox-leaning sites do this type of thing a lot more than PlayStation-leaning ones.

This should be pretty easy to prove mathematically. Have you actually looked into it, or are you just leaning on a bias?

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

anyone know why i am getting this? i have the premium edition.... cant equip a suit. or is this because the early access thing because i do own the VIP thing.

Did you by chance do the New Zealand trip to get in early?

I only ask because I did and it doesn't show I own any of the premium bundle stuff but is letting me play.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

Also this forced practice runs needs to go, hopefully I get a little further along they wont force me to practice 3 laps before racing, let me race.

 

[Senua]

Also this forced practice runs needs to go, hopefully I get a little further along they wont force me to practice 3 laps before racing, let me race.

They should just have optional qualifying like old GT games.

Skip qualifying? fine but start last

 

[fred420170]

STOP IT!!! It's a good score for a racing game. The fact that it scores lower doesn't say jackshit about the game itself.

82-84 MC is now "Not a good look"

Get your fucking head sorted mate, like for real.

Any reviews posted from the major sites I now add a point due to the very, very real xbox tax. These "journalists" really have showed their hate for Xbox since the June showcase. They used to try and hide it but since Starfield released its blatantly obvious.

 

[kirby007]

do not skip reading page 5, it was so good i read it again

 

[SyberWolf]

Did you by chance do the New Zealand trip to get in early?

I only ask because I did and it doesn't show I own any of the premium bundle stuff but is letting me play.

yes i did the new zealand thing, i unlocked a bunch of premium edition stuff, but it is not letting me select my vip suit.

 

[SomeGit]

Is there any way to travel to NZ on PC?

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

yes i did the new zealand thing, i unlocked a bunch of premium edition stuff, but it is not letting me select my vip suit.

Interesting its not giving me any of the premium edition stuff but letting me play early

 

[Elysium44]

Also this forced practice runs needs to go, hopefully I get a little further along they wont force me to practice 3 laps before racing, let me race.

I think I heard once practice starts you can pause and quit to skip it?

 

[SyberWolf]

Interesting its not giving me any of the premium edition stuff but letting me play early

i got some cars and the suits. hopefully the issues are fixed later.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

I think I heard once practice starts you can pause and quit to skip it?

I will try that

 

[Zathalus]

We've gone through this in detail in other review threads. These PS-centric websites don't typically inflate scores for PS games. I, and many others, reviewed their scores and found that the scores they give to PlayStation Studios games match the average. Sometimes, they score PS games lower than the average.

That is not the case with Xbox-centric websites.

They almost always inflate their review scores and give above average scores. For example, Xbox Era gave Redfall an 8.5 when the average score is 5.6.

Even in the case of Forza Motorsport, almost all these Xbox-centric websites reviewed the game between 9 and 10, when the average score is closer 8.

GT 7- Metacritic 87, every single PS focused site gave it 9 to 10 out of 10.

Ghost of Tsushima - Metacritic 83, Most of the PS sites are again 9 to 10s with a few 8.5/8s.

Days Gone - Metacritic 71, mostly 8 and 9 from PS sites.

MediEvil - Metacritic 67, lots of 8 and 9s from PS sites.

Sackboy - Metacritic 79, quite a number of 8.5, 9, and 9.5 scores.

Most of these 'exclusive' sites pad the numbers a bit, some are worse then others but the really bad sites are thankfully a tiny minority.

It sucks, but you overestimate the overall influence it would have on a site with 150-200 weighted review scores. It would impact the overall score by one or two points at most.

As for Forza, it has 7 Xbox website scores, 2 of those are 8/10 which is below the current 84 score, while one is 8.7/10.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

This should be pretty easy to prove mathematically. Have you actually looked into it, or are you just leaning on a bias?

It's something I've noticed. Looking under MC reviews for Sony 1P games compared to MS 1P games, there are simply way less PS-leaning sites with 'PlayStation' in their name weighed in averages for Sony games, vs. with Microsoft.

I can name some of the Xbox ones off the top of my head. Actually, I'll go look under the Starfield reviews and list them:

XboxERA, Xbox Generacion (Generacion Xbox), Pure Xbox, Xbox Addict, Somos Xbox, Mondo Xbox, Xbox Tavern, IGN Brasil (heavily leans Xbox, but you can ignore them), Windows Central (Xbox-adjacent), The Xbox Hub, True Achievements (based on Xbox Achievements, so there you go), Xbox Achievements (dead ass an actual website called this), Xboxygen.

Keep in mind Starfield has 83 Critic Reviews on Xbox. So for sites with Xbox in their name or referencing something directly to Xbox, that is 12 sites. Twelve. 1/7th of all the reviews and guess what? ALL of the sites I just mentioned were green-tier reviews, scoring the game an 80 or higher, most of them a 90 or higher.

Now lemme do the same with God of War: Ragnarok, only this time for sites with PlayStation or obvious PlayStation-related things in their name...

MeuPlayStation, PlayStation Universe, PSX Brasil, DualShockers, PlayStation Lifestyle and...that's it. FIVE out of 149 Critic Reviews, all also green-tiered.

Obviously, you can see why we say it's way more prevalent with Xbox. Starfield, with almost half of the reviews of GOWR, somehow has 1/7th of them from sites with Xbox directly in their name or heavily Xbox/MS-related in their naming (I did not count IGN Brasil in my earlier analysis). OTOH, GOWR has 149 Critic Reviews, yet only FIVE of them are from websites with PlayStation directly in the name or referencing something PS-related obviously (and while I did count DualShockers, I've heard they are not actually a PS-leaning website).

Let me put it another way: for GOW:R, the percentage of sites in the aggregate that have PlayStation in the title is 3%. So low, it basically falls within the margin of error. Whereas for Starfield, the percentage of sites in the aggregate with PlayStation in the title (or very close to it/adjacent, like with Windows Central) is ~ 14%. That's almost 1/5th of all the Starfield reviews on Xbox console.

One platform is padding its review scores, and it's not PlayStation. Of course, I'm just talking about sites with the console names directly in their titles, or close to it, but the point still stands

 

[GHG]

Jimmy Broadbent chimes in:

 

[64bitmodels]

Do NeoGAF reviews add at all to the MC average? Nope. But guess who does? XboxERA. Xbox. ERA. AFAIK they're one of the only (if not the only) enthusiasts gaming forum whose reviews also add to the Metacritic average.

They do have a frontend website these days, but most of the activity's in the forums, and that's how they started. So in my eyes they're a forum.

So..... that's why their reviews are counted. They have a frontend where they publish official reviews.

Maybe we should get GAF to allow a similar system? Not like we are an insigificant portion of the gaming community,

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

GT 7- Metacritic 87, every single PS focused site gave it 9 to 10 out of 10.

Ghost of Tsushima - Metacritic 83, Most of the PS sites are again 9 to 10s with a few 8.5/8s.

Days Gone - Metacritic 71, mostly 8 and 9 from PS sites.

MediEvil - Metacritic 67, lots of 8 and 9s from PS sites.

Sackboy - Metacritic 79, quite a number of 8.5, 9, and 9.5 scores.

Most of these 'exclusive' sites pad the numbers a bit, some are worse then others but the really bad sites are thankfully a tiny minority.

It sucks, but you overestimate the overall influence it would have on a site with 150-200 weighted review scores. It would impact the overall score by one or two points at most.

As for Forza, it has 7 Xbox website scores, 2 of those are 8/10 which is below the current 84 score, while one is 8.7/10.

Read my post above looking at Starfield vs GOW:R and you'll see why the problem is much worst with Xbox exclusives.

So..... that's why their reviews are counted. They have a frontend where they publish official reviews.

Maybe we should get GAF to allow a similar system? Not like we are an insigificant portion of the gaming community,

Yeah, it would be a great idea honestly. Hopefully it happens someday soon. Definitely way more presence and weight here than vs. something like XboxERA.

 

[Cashon]

It's something I've noticed. Looking under MC reviews for Sony 1P games compared to MS 1P games, there are simply way less PS-leaning sites with 'PlayStation' in their name weighed in averages for Sony games, vs. with Microsoft.

I can name some of the Xbox ones off the top of my head. Actually, I'll go look under the Starfield reviews and list them:

XboxERA, Xbox Generacion (Generacion Xbox), Pure Xbox, Xbox Addict, Somos Xbox, Mondo Xbox, Xbox Tavern, IGN Brasil (heavily leans Xbox, but you can ignore them), Windows Central (Xbox-adjacent), The Xbox Hub, True Achievements (based on Xbox Achievements, so there you go), Xbox Achievements (dead ass an actual website called this), Xboxygen.

Keep in mind Starfield has 83 Critic Reviews on Xbox. So for sites with Xbox in their name or referencing something directly to Xbox, that is 12 sites. Twelve. 1/7th of all the reviews and guess what? ALL of the sites I just mentioned were green-tier reviews, scoring the game an 80 or higher, most of them a 90 or higher.

Now lemme do the same with God of War: Ragnarok, only this time for sites with PlayStation or obvious PlayStation-related things in their name...

MeuPlayStation, PlayStation Universe, PSX Brasil, DualShockers, PlayStation Lifestyle and...that's it. FIVE out of 149 Critic Reviews, all also green-tiered.

Obviously, you can see why we say it's way more prevalent with Xbox. Starfield, with almost half of the reviews of GOWR, somehow has 1/7th of them from sites with Xbox directly in their name or heavily Xbox/MS-related in their naming (I did not count IGN Brasil in my earlier analysis). OTOH, GOWR has 149 Critic Reviews, yet only FIVE of them are from websites with PlayStation directly in the name or referencing something PS-related obviously (and while I did count DualShockers, I've heard they are not actually a PS-leaning website).

Let me put it another way: for GOW:R, the percentage of sites in the aggregate that have PlayStation in the title is 3%. So low, it basically falls within the margin of error. Whereas for Starfield, the percentage of sites in the aggregate with PlayStation in the title (or very close to it/adjacent, like with Windows Central) is ~ 14%. That's almost 1/5th of all the Starfield reviews on Xbox console.

One platform is padding its review scores, and it's not PlayStation. Of course, I'm just talking about sites with the console names directly in their titles, or close to it, but the point still stands

Any thoughts on why a major Xbox game only has half the number of reviews of a major PlayStation game in the first place?

 

[Mr Reasonable]

It sucks, but you overestimate the overall influence it would have on a site with 150-200 weighted review scores. It would impact the overall score by one or two points at most.

It sucks but you overestimate the overal influence reality has on that guy's posting style.

 

[64bitmodels]

Yeah, it would be a great idea honestly.

It's an obvious one. You see every other gaming forum turning into a review site and then we still have GAF not really doin shit out here. I say bring the reviews on. A system of curated users picked out by the mod staff to review the latest AAA titles.

 

[FoxMcChief]

Jimmy Broadbent chimes in:

That looks like a trustworthy face, not just looking for clicks.

 

[Fools-Emissary]

It's something I've noticed. Looking under MC reviews for Sony 1P games compared to MS 1P games, there are simply way less PS-leaning sites with 'PlayStation' in their name weighed in averages for Sony games, vs. with Microsoft.

I can name some of the Xbox ones off the top of my head. Actually, I'll go look under the Starfield reviews and list them:

XboxERA, Xbox Generacion (Generacion Xbox), Pure Xbox, Xbox Addict, Somos Xbox, Mondo Xbox, Xbox Tavern, IGN Brasil (heavily leans Xbox, but you can ignore them), Windows Central (Xbox-adjacent), The Xbox Hub, True Achievements (based on Xbox Achievements, so there you go), Xbox Achievements (dead ass an actual website called this), Xboxygen.

Keep in mind Starfield has 83 Critic Reviews on Xbox. So for sites with Xbox in their name or referencing something directly to Xbox, that is 12 sites. Twelve. 1/7th of all the reviews and guess what? ALL of the sites I just mentioned were green-tier reviews, scoring the game an 80 or higher, most of them a 90 or higher.

Now lemme do the same with God of War: Ragnarok, only this time for sites with PlayStation or obvious PlayStation-related things in their name...

MeuPlayStation, PlayStation Universe, PSX Brasil, DualShockers, PlayStation Lifestyle and...that's it. FIVE out of 149 Critic Reviews, all also green-tiered.

Obviously, you can see why we say it's way more prevalent with Xbox. Starfield, with almost half of the reviews of GOWR, somehow has 1/7th of them from sites with Xbox directly in their name or heavily Xbox/MS-related in their naming (I did not count IGN Brasil in my earlier analysis). OTOH, GOWR has 149 Critic Reviews, yet only FIVE of them are from websites with PlayStation directly in the name or referencing something PS-related obviously (and while I did count DualShockers, I've heard they are not actually a PS-leaning website).

Let me put it another way: for GOW:R, the percentage of sites in the aggregate that have PlayStation in the title is 3%. So low, it basically falls within the margin of error. Whereas for Starfield, the percentage of sites in the aggregate with PlayStation in the title (or very close to it/adjacent, like with Windows Central) is ~ 14%. That's almost 1/5th of all the Starfield reviews on Xbox console.

One platform is padding its review scores, and it's not PlayStation. Of course, I'm just talking about sites with the console names directly in their titles, or close to it, but the point still stands

First game I looked at Horizon FW. ALL PS reviews are 90 or above, including some 100's.

Horizon Forbidden West

Join Aloy as she braves the Forbidden West – a majestic but dangerous frontier that conceals mysterious new threats. Explore distant lands, fight bigger and more awe-inspiring machines, and encounter astonishing new tribes as you return to the far-future, post-apocalyptic world of Horizon. The...

www.metacritic.com

There's two 80's from MS/Xbox sites, below the average for Forza.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Any thoughts on why a major Xbox game only has half the number of reviews of a major PlayStation game in the first place?

Doesn't matter. I was focusing on the frequency of such occurrences of platform-named websites contributing to the average. And, it's way higher with Xbox games, at least going by most recent big 1P releases from both. 14% rate for Starfield vs. 3% rate for GOW:R.

First game I looked at Horizon FW. ALL PS reviews are 90 or above, including some 100's.

Horizon Forbidden West

Join Aloy as she braves the Forbidden West – a majestic but dangerous frontier that conceals mysterious new threats. Explore distant lands, fight bigger and more awe-inspiring machines, and encounter astonishing new tribes as you return to the far-future, post-apocalyptic world of Horizon. The...

www.metacritic.com

There's two 80's from MS/Xbox sites, below the average for Forza.

Yes, all four of them (maybe five if counting one other I'd say somewhat fits the naming profile).

Out of 138 total reviews. Again, versus something like Starfield where it's 12 out of 83.

I'm not saying this isn't an issue with PlayStation or Nintendo games; it happens with them too. But it's significantly less an issue with reviews of 1P titles on those systems, versus 1P from Microsoft on Xbox.

It's an obvious one. You see every other gaming forum turning into a review site and then we still have GAF not really doin shit out here. I say bring the reviews on. A system of curated users picked out by the mod staff to review the latest AAA titles.

Hopefully someone can give a convincing pitch to EviLore and/or some of the mods. Could also work as another advertising avenue in its own way.

 

[Fools-Emissary]

Doesn't matter. I was focusing on the frequency of such occurrences of platform-named websites contributing to the average. And, it's way higher with Xbox games, at least going by most recent big 1P releases from both. 14% rate for Starfield vs. 3% rate for GOW:R.



Yes, all four of them (maybe five if counting one other I'd say somewhat fits the naming profile).

Out of 138 total reviews. Again, versus something like Starfield where it's 12 out of 83.

I'm not saying this isn't an issue with PlayStation or Nintendo games; it happens with them too. But it's significantly less an issue with reviews of 1P titles on those systems, versus 1P from Microsoft on Xbox.



Hopefully someone can give a convincing pitch to EviLore and/or some of the mods. Could also work as another advertising avenue in its own way.

So you agree that all the reviews were above the average for PS sites for Horizon and you'll see that isn't the case for Forza. Seems you're talking sht.

Who cares about reviews/aggregates anyway.

 

[Cashon]

Doesn't matter. I was focusing on the frequency of such occurrences of platform-named websites contributing to the average. And, it's way higher with Xbox games, at least going by most recent big 1P releases from both. 14% rate for Starfield vs. 3% rate for GOW:R.



Yes, all four of them (maybe five if counting one other I'd say somewhat fits the naming profile).

Out of 138 total reviews. Again, versus something like Starfield where it's 12 out of 83.

I'm not saying this isn't an issue with PlayStation or Nintendo games; it happens with them too. But it's significantly less an issue with reviews of 1P titles on those systems, versus 1P from Microsoft on Xbox.



Hopefully someone can give a convincing pitch to EviLore and/or some of the mods. Could also work as another advertising avenue in its own way.

It absolutely matters; if ~half of the places reviewing PlayStation games are only reviewing PlayStation games, regardless of the name of the site, then there's strong evidence suggestion of a bias. And since the actual crux of this debate is whether or not scores are inflated by sites that are biased toward a particular platform, you would have to question whether or not those 60-ish sites have a bias toward PlayStation, thus inflating the scores of PlayStation games.

 

[nikos]

Alright, so after tweaking a bunch of things I've managed to play for a bit. Here are some first impressions.

Setup: 7800X3D / 4090 / 32GB DDR5 / Fanatec CSL DD + V3 Pedals + Shifter / 49" 32:9 Samsung G9

Right away the game looked horrible. There's something going on with the rendering that makes it look like it's running at a very low resolution. There's no explicit OFF setting for Dynamic Rendering, so I'm wondering if something is happening with that, but I believe it works with each setting individually because every setting has an "Auto" toggle.

I've manged to make it look decent by enabling DLAA and and setting RTX to High instead of Ultra because that felt a lot smoother to me. Frames are consistently over 100 so far. I've also replaced the DLSS file with version 3.5 since it ships with 3.1.

There is an FOV setting for each view but you can't move the camera independently of that. Still seems to work decently for my setup. The rear view mirror is probably the worst I've ever seen. It looks horrible.

After some tweaking, the wheel actually feels decent. I definitely need to tweak a lot more, and I'm hoping people start sharing their settings, but it definitely works so far. Only small issue is the game not differentiating between cars with different transmission types. I prefer using my H pattern shifter, but I don't think I should be able to in cars that don't have one.

The racing itself feels good so far. I was able to feel even small upgrades on the vehicle. The rating systems in place are really nice. There are a lot of performance metrics. The game even analyzes each collision to determine whether a penalty should be given.

I did one online race and it was honestly a lot of fun. The structure was nice. You're free to set up your car as you'd like, and there's fuel/tire degradation. The game is nice enough to tell you how many laps your fuel will last, so there's no guess work involved. Did some practice laps, qualified, then raced. I qualified P2 and finished P2 as well. It was a really close race with P1 the entire time, and we both managed to stay clean. Felt really good.

The 60 FPS limit for multiplayer sucks but it's not as horrific as I thought it would be. This will probably depend on your monitor setup and how well it handles motion. Having a super ultrawide display 20" from your face makes things a lot worse, so I moved it back a few inches. The only silver lining here is being able to bump up the game's render resolution because of the performance overhead.

First impression is good so far. There was some initial disappointment, and the image quality still isn't great, but it's getting a lot better as I get used to things.

 

[nikos]

If anybody's interested in the game's PC settings, here they are:

 

[Zathalus]

It's something I've noticed. Looking under MC reviews for Sony 1P games compared to MS 1P games, there are simply way less PS-leaning sites with 'PlayStation' in their name weighed in averages for Sony games, vs. with Microsoft.

I can name some of the Xbox ones off the top of my head. Actually, I'll go look under the Starfield reviews and list them:

XboxERA, Xbox Generacion (Generacion Xbox), Pure Xbox, Xbox Addict, Somos Xbox, Mondo Xbox, Xbox Tavern, IGN Brasil (heavily leans Xbox, but you can ignore them), Windows Central (Xbox-adjacent), The Xbox Hub, True Achievements (based on Xbox Achievements, so there you go), Xbox Achievements (dead ass an actual website called this), Xboxygen.

Keep in mind Starfield has 83 Critic Reviews on Xbox. So for sites with Xbox in their name or referencing something directly to Xbox, that is 12 sites. Twelve. 1/7th of all the reviews and guess what? ALL of the sites I just mentioned were green-tier reviews, scoring the game an 80 or higher, most of them a 90 or higher.

Now lemme do the same with God of War: Ragnarok, only this time for sites with PlayStation or obvious PlayStation-related things in their name...

MeuPlayStation, PlayStation Universe, PSX Brasil, DualShockers, PlayStation Lifestyle and...that's it. FIVE out of 149 Critic Reviews, all also green-tiered.

Obviously, you can see why we say it's way more prevalent with Xbox. Starfield, with almost half of the reviews of GOWR, somehow has 1/7th of them from sites with Xbox directly in their name or heavily Xbox/MS-related in their naming (I did not count IGN Brasil in my earlier analysis). OTOH, GOWR has 149 Critic Reviews, yet only FIVE of them are from websites with PlayStation directly in the name or referencing something PS-related obviously (and while I did count DualShockers, I've heard they are not actually a PS-leaning website).

Let me put it another way: for GOW:R, the percentage of sites in the aggregate that have PlayStation in the title is 3%. So low, it basically falls within the margin of error. Whereas for Starfield, the percentage of sites in the aggregate with PlayStation in the title (or very close to it/adjacent, like with Windows Central) is ~ 14%. That's almost 1/5th of all the Starfield reviews on Xbox console.

One platform is padding its review scores, and it's not PlayStation. Of course, I'm just talking about sites with the console names directly in their titles, or close to it, but the point still stands

God of War Ragnarok has 8 PS focused reviews. 149 total. 5.3%

Starfield has 11 Xbox focused reviews across both PC and Xbox. 158 total 6.9%. (Xboxygen doesn't count, as it has no review score), neither does IGN Brasil because obviously, I included Xboxera from the PC sites.

You are complaining about 3 sites. Remove 3 random sites and the score drops by what, a point? Probably not even that when you combine the PC and Xbox scores.

 

[GHG]

Super GT's review (7.5/10):

That looks like a trustworthy face, not just looking for clicks.

This is funny because you fail to realise he doesn't need clicks, especially not for something like this.

 

[FoxMcChief]

Super GT's review:






This is funny because you fail to realise he doesn't need clicks, especially not for something like this.

Ok. Is he YouTube famous or something? I don’t recognize him. Just saying that’s the kind of thumbnail used to get clicks. You know that.

 

[Kacho]

Ok. Is he YouTube famous or something? I don’t recognize him. Just saying that’s the kind of thumbnail used to get clicks. You know that.

Yes, he's well known in the sim racing space. He's a bit of a goober but he's trustworthy.

 

[64bitmodels]

Ok. Is he YouTube famous or something? I don’t recognize him. Just saying that’s the kind of thumbnail used to get clicks. You know that.

Yeah, hes one of the biggest names in the simracing community. ppl like him

 

[GHG]

Ok. Is he YouTube famous or something? I don’t recognize him. Just saying that’s the kind of thumbnail used to get clicks. You know that.

He's "youtube famous" but now races in real life.

 

[DJ12]

Ok. Is he YouTube famous or something? I don’t recognize him. Just saying that’s the kind of thumbnail used to get clicks. You know that.

Do you even play racing games bro, first Jimmy now supergt....

Get an education dude

 

[FoxMcChief]

He's "youtube famous" but now races in real life.

Ok

Do you even play racing games bro, first Jimmy now supergt....

Get an education dude

Very casually. I’m still super early on the “menu” of GT7. I jump in and out with racing games, as they’re pretty boring, if that’s all you’re playing.

 

[SlimySnake]

Ok. Is he YouTube famous or something? I don’t recognize him. Just saying that’s the kind of thumbnail used to get clicks. You know that.

SuperGT was the most famous Forza youtuber before he defected to GT after GT Sports came out. I was there when he hit 50k subscribers as a forza guy who never played GT. Now he exclusively plays GT but thats because he got sick of forza online races being a wreckfest and because they took an inexplicable 6 years break.

This guy is as OG Forza as they come. his forza videos about rammers literally have 5 million views.

 

[H From Steps]

We've gone through this in detail in other review threads. These PS-centric websites don't typically inflate scores for PS games. I, and many others, reviewed their scores and found that the scores they give to PlayStation Studios games match the average. Sometimes, they score PS games lower than the average.

That is not the case with Xbox-centric websites.

They almost always inflate their review scores and give above average scores. For example, Xbox Era gave Redfall an 8.5 when the average score is 5.6.

Even in the case of Forza Motorsport, almost all these Xbox-centric websites reviewed the game between 9 and 10, when the average score is closer 8.

Ah the good ol he’s cheating but the others are cheating less so there fine logic

 

[64bitmodels]

not sure if this review's been posted already

 

[F0rneus]

Disappointing to read on how the SP content is lacking. That's not good to hear for me. That makes two hyped games for me getting plain bad SP content, with Forza joining MK1.

 

[FoxMcChief]

SuperGT was the most famous Forza youtuber before he defected to GT after GT Sports came out. I was there when he hit 50k subscribers as a forza guy who never played GT. Now he exclusively plays GT but thats because he got sick of forza online races being a wreckfest and because they took an inexplicable 6 years break.

This guy is as OG Forza as they come. his forza videos about rammers literally have 5 million views.

Ok. I’m not even sure why we are going on about this, lol. I was just pointing out how the one thumbnail was very click baity.

I have absolutely zero affinity for the FM franchise. I’ve played some. I’ve always enjoyed GT more. I’m not calling out anyone for bias, other than that single thumbnail.

 

[Cashon]

God of War Ragnarok has 8 PS focused reviews. 149 total. 5.3%

Starfield has 11 Xbox focused reviews across both PC and Xbox. 158 total 6.9%. (Xboxygen doesn't count, as it has no review score), neither does IGN Brasil because obviously, I included Xboxera from the PC sites.

You are complaining about 3 sites. Remove 3 random sites and the score drops by what, a point? Probably not even that when you combine the PC and Xbox scores.

The combined number that you have for Starfield; does that include duplicates (say, IGN showing on both the PC and Xbox page) or is it 158 unique reviews between the two?

 

[mako]

Is there anyway to tweak the controller deadzones in game?

 

[mako]

Is there anyway to tweak the controller deadzones in game?

Ah shit I found it

 

[64bitmodels]

Is there anyway to tweak the controller deadzones in game?

Ah shit I found it

neogaf.gif