Coolbgdog12
Member
Lol.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
LittleBigPlanet 3 reviews
- Thread starter Loudninja
- Start date
The scores/impressions. Just seems like another LBP game without really bringing much new to the table. I suppose being cross Gen restricts them, but even the floaty controls didn't see to be addressed
Coolbgdog12
Member
Human nature and fanboy nature.
Dr_LucienSanchez
Banned
Because apparently an 80 on Metacritic is the end of the world. We've already got people blaming Shu on this page, so I'm guessing the next step is for that one poster to come in here and talk about the petition.
That's almost insultingly incorrect.
It's not unreasonable to expect consistent standards from reviews, especially when in the case of IGN their primary reason for marking the game down (According to their "cons" list) is technical issues that they have repeatedly shown a willingness to ignore completely in other titles (Even this month alone).
So sequels aren't worth your time if they aren't doing something new?
I don't think so. You can always fix the score ONCE the problems have been settled. Do you want a higher review score? Then fix the problems. The review is a photography of the current state of the game, not of what it could become in the future.
the last console installment was nearly 4 years ago. Even if you count the Vita as a mainline installment that was 2 years ago. One LBP game every 2 years sounds ok to me.
People are in a dire rush to stomp on Sony exclusive titles and feign disappointment. also #concern.
……forgetit
Member
I wonder how many of you guys read movie reviews, if you think this is inconsistent then lol at that camp.
Dr_LucienSanchez
Banned
Have you even read any of the reviews? Most of them touch on how the controls have been changed. We've even had devs on GAF posting about the changes to the physics.
And in terms of create mode, there are an incredible amount of additions. One can basically make a full 3d game now (16 layers with LBP3). So where we had full recreations of FF7 with LBP2 (that are still playable with LBP3), who knows what people will come up with now.
Frame rate and graphical issues are not the same as the game completely crashing multiple times.
AC Unity at least does that as well though, and IGN didn't mention it at all when they reviewed that game.
markedbravado
Member
This is the worst score I have seen a well established franchise get from a reputable game site. Very unprofessional. It reeks of a biased agenda. LBP is not in any way a 6.8 game. I don't even play the franchise because of the floaty controls, but I know quality when I see it. Same feeling I have for Sunset. I think that game looks corny but I can tell it is quite polished and deserves its accolades. Unity should have been giving a pending score and a no buy recommendation until the glitches were fixed because I also feel Unity is in no way a game that should score in the 6s. Scores like this really dissuade the uninformed and it ain't right. Not from these traffic heavy sites that sway so many buying purchases whether u want to admit it or not.
IAmRandom31
Banned
Well...
There is an issue with inconsistencies in reviews and it needs addressing. They are not doing justice to the games and the consumers they supposedly care about.
Thats because not 1 person does reviews.
Especially at IGN. They seem to bring in freelance writers to write reviews of some big games and then you never hear from that reviewer ever again.
Like, Phillip Kollar did the review for Polygon. Same guy who 60'd, 70'd The Last of Us, DriveClub, Dragons Dogma, Monster Hunter 3U, Ni No Kuni, and a number of other reviews I would totally disagree with.
Omnistalgic
Member
So IGN has ruined this thread then?
There review seems to be the lowest with not a lot justifying it, particularly the pro vs. con list.
Still, it's a Sony exclusive getting good reviews, I can't wait to play it. Ignore opinions you don't agree with.
There review seems to be the lowest with not a lot justifying it, particularly the pro vs. con list.
Still, it's a Sony exclusive getting good reviews, I can't wait to play it. Ignore opinions you don't agree with.
When it's a 2D platformer, yes. At the minimum I'd like to see controls that can at least match what indie Devs are able to accomplish in their spare time.
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
Just watch a few streams and look into what this beauty offers to the creators. It's the biggest leap this franchise has even seen and easily deserves scores of 9+/10. Reviewers have completely lost their credibility.
Danlord
Member
Isn't this what editors are for? Regardles of using freelance writers, the publication should be consistent throughout on a specific attribute like a scoring system. If a website hires freelance writers, that's fine but IGN should have specific guidelines in how the article should be written and what to potentially look for, and they should oversee something like a scoring system, an unfortunately important aspect for reviews, as in some situations can depend on if a game studio gets a bonus and survives to do another project or goes under and closes down.
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
A: Indie games can be great or bad just like any other game
B: This easily matches anything even the greatest Indie devs can make
C: Everything is physics based and sackboy jumps according to the material he's made out of.
D: If you don't like the way he jumps, change it and publish your level.
LegendofDragoonLives
Member
Cott damn, what a shitty shitty reviewer. Well Driveclub deserves a 7ish to be honest.
Thanks for these gems!
On topic :
I played this game and it was really enjoyable to be honest.
Of course, I haven't play the full game, so before computing a final opinion I need to play and finish it. However I think this game will deliver a solid and fun experience !
I'm having a hellova great time playing Unity. Never fallen through the map once (problem was just fixed for everyone anyway). Yes, framerate is pretty bad, but the game itself is great.
ClosingADoor
Member
It is up to the website of course, but you are right that the editor in chief should keep an eye on scores a bit and talk with the writer if his scoring seems out of place.
That being said, maybe they did at IGN. We won't know.
I do want to point out that comparing year old reviews with new reviews is unfair. The industry progresses and if every new game that is better needs a higher or same score, all games would get 10/10 right now.
The fate of the studio should hold absolutely no value to the reviewer, since it is not his job to look out for them. It is his job to give his opinion and say what he likes and doesn't like about the game.
Well...
There is an issue with inconsistencies in reviews and it needs addressing. They are not doing justice to the games and the consumers they supposedly care about.
Different reviewers, different games, different criteria etc. etc. It's impossible to compare. You can say what you want about IGN, but the people crying over them are even worse.
IGN is only good when they give an exclusive for a system of choice a great score. Didn't you know?
CambriaRising
Member
Are people still getting mad about 7.0 review scores? pls stahp
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Sure, but when game sales, developer bonuses, etc... are all affected by Metacritic scores then reviewers not doing their job gets even more problematic even if you choose to ignore it.
IGN has editors, the editors' job is also making sure that the site does not look like a collection of random blogs and you try to be objective unless you intend not to be
.Glorified G
Member
Your post is specifically what's wrong with the current generation of games. There are 19 reviews. 13 of them positive with an overall aggregate score of 79 on Metacritic yet you took one score out off all of them in the OP and made a broad generalization of all the games released this year.
ClosingADoor
Member
Why should the reviewer care about game sales or developer bonuses? That is not his responsibility and should even be thought about while writing a review.Sure, but when game sales, developer bonuses, etc... are all affected by Metacritic scores then reviewers not doing their job gets even more problematic even if you choose to ignore it.
IGN has editors, the editors' job is also making sure that the site does not look like a collection of random blogs and you try to be objective unless you intend not to be
There are issues with scoring games, but those are not part of it. Reviewers should not give higher scores because a developer might miss out on a bonus.
That will never change. I actually like it when some media give a lower and some higher scores. It is an opinion, so of course scores should vary.
Danlord
Member
It is more my point about consistency that if a website is affecting overall scores based on its technical merits, it should be consistent about it especially in how dependent some studios future is with the end result of the reviews.
Omnipunctual Godot
Member
Actually, the lowest so far on Metacritic is Gaming Age with a 58.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-4/littlebigplanet-3/critic-reviews?dist=neutral
The score seems really strange on Metacritic, since they give a C+ (the score that Gaming Age gave the game) a number score of 58. Where does a C+ equate to 58 in any other facet of life? Is it a mistake?
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
I do care when I see a review I think is unjustly dissing a game and/or scoring it low unfairly. It affects the game's sales and the developers' bonuses.
When it comes to the reviews for this generation of games, it quite a "chaos" and I think the quality of the review is seriously decreased in the latest years ...
The final scores has been lowered compared to the previous generation, but this is not the real issue, since it's only a number, the content of the review is where we should put our attention and honestly, even on major outlets, some reviews looks pretty flat and easy (yes, most of the reviewers are just amateur and this became apparent on their reviews).
Sure, but when game sales, developer bonuses, etc... are all affected by Metacritic scores then reviewers not doing their job gets even more problematic even if you choose to ignore it.
IGN has editors, the editors' job is also making sure that the site does not look like a collection of random blogs and you try to be objective unless you intend not to be
How much a reviewer want to decrease a game's score because of bugs is entirely opinion based and can vary significantly from reviewer to reviewer. It also, obviously, depends on how many and the magnitude of the bugs.
Freedom = $1.05
Banned
it's a review thread, I haven't seen this posted but I'm already nearing BINGO myself from what ive read
ClosingADoor
Member
Again, the studios future is of no concern to the reviewer or website. It should not be. If they would rate games higher so a studio can continue, people would be (rightfully so) call it corruption.
Yes, there should be a part of consistency, but a game can not be compared to another game easily. A bug in one game might hold the game down a fair lot, while a bug in another will only impact the experience a little bit.
A review is an opinion, so scores vary and that is normal. You can disagree with the review or score, but that does not make it wrong.
The Freeman
Member
Wait, so you've not played the games but disagree with what someone who has played it has critiqued it as?
I fail to see how this is a biased agenda. Surely if that was the case every PS4 game would be getting marked down?
It one thing to criticize a reviewer if they aren't giving the game a fair shake (ie. reviewing a game without playing the multiplayer component). But if a reviewer plays a game and thinks it's a 6.8, what is there to criticize? A review is just an opinion, and if you don't like the types of opinions a certain reviewer has, read someone else. Why does everyone get so wrapped up in what a game's metacritic score is?
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
That is a reason why I care. I still do think that it should not warp their reviews, but at least make them feel like their job ought to be done well and professionally because it impacts other people's lives.
The same thing I think when I am evaluating my reportees, I will be objective with their evaluations and if they deserve a low score I will give it to them, but I will try to do my best at being objective and thorough because it is my job and because it has real effects on real people.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
... Sure, but the editors are there to make sure things are professional and thorough and consistently handled or at least follow some sitewide guidelines.
ClosingADoor
Member
Sure, it has effect and a review should be done correctly. However, I see no indication that the IGN review is unfair or not done correctly (for example, didn't play the game or played it too little). The disagreement is purely with the score here.
The companies giving those bonuses use Metacritic, that is their responsibility. They could also say: if 90% of reviews are positive, you get a bonus. Or if sales are above X you get a bonus. That is their choice and responsibility, not the reviewers.
A review can not be objective. It is an opinion and sometimes people will like different things or hold certain things against a game harsher then others. That is the way reviews are and should be. The objective review does not exist, neither should it.
Coolbgdog12
Member
Perfectit's a review thread, I haven't seen this posted but I'm already nearing BINGO myself from what ive read
Imp the Dimp
Member
I finished both LBP 1 and 2 and enjoyed the art design and little else. Its platforming mechanics were just not up to my standards.
Bluemercury
Member
Lol
The problem with reviews nowadays is like every game that come from a MS this year is a blast! and everygame that come from Sony is a crap...
They emphasize problems they found in both like framerate(halo has a lot of framerate problems) but people ignore that there and emphasize in sony games...
When Driveclub came out a lot of reviews changed the score with multiplayer problem and about Halo no one changed the score.
They emphasize problems they found in both like framerate(halo has a lot of framerate problems) but people ignore that there and emphasize in sony games...
When Driveclub came out a lot of reviews changed the score with multiplayer problem and about Halo no one changed the score.
ClosingADoor
Member
I think this is just looking for some hidden anti-Sony agenda, which is nowhere to be found. Plenty of sites reported on Halo's problems, just like with DriveClub. Halo maybe had the 'luck' of launching along Assassin's Creed Unity that many focused on over the last week due to its bugs and review embargo problems.