Good luck with that, linear game + no MP will greatly hurt its chances +90.
We already have mp only games this gen, not tacking on mp as a bullet point isn't going to hurt a game.
Good luck with that, linear game + no MP will greatly hurt its chances +90.
Just being twice as long will be enough to score higher. Also, multiple endings.
Jim was strictly talking about the live action part.Yet another game where the story seemingly fizzles out towards the end if we only go by Jim's review thus far. I am seriously starting to be fed up by games being too front-loaded in every sense of the word. I mean, sure, the "journey" itself is usually very rewarding, but the true top-tier games are those that don't have squandered endings.
Devs, pleeeeeeeease start prioritizing the end-games, it's important to wrap up stories in a satisfactory way.
Yet another game where the story seemingly fizzles out towards the end if we only go by Jim's review thus far. I am seriously starting to be fed up by games being too front-loaded in every sense of the word. I mean, sure, the "journey" itself is usually very rewarding, but the true top-tier games are those that don't have squandered endings.
Devs, pleeeeeeeease start prioritizing the end-games, it's important to wrap up stories in a satisfactory way.
Watches. People should wear one.Hahaha- whats with people forgetting its still march. My wife asked me this morning too
It'll score about the same as Alan Wake, in the end. It's a strict single player experience without any added content stuffing (like NG+, online features or open world missions). The core gameplay could be the best in the world but it wouldn't still score in the 90's.
That, plus the resolutiongate has reviewers quite easily stamping the game as an "interesting and fun" title. Low 80's. It's a shame, as Remedy titles are beautiful games, but also understandable in a way.
No way.Great score!
Predicting 90-94 at meta.
There is.
yeahh I think those days of the mid-high 90's are all but gone. Most games would do well to get 87-90 rangeNo way.
Not even sure if U4 will come close to 94, let alone any other game this year.
A reminder, last year with TW3, BB, MGS5, Batman etc.. No game got 94 MC.
It's really really hard to score it this gen.
yeahh I think those days of the mid-high 90's are all but gone. Most games would do well to get 87-90 range
We already have mp only games this gen, not tacking on mp as a bullet point isn't going to hurt a game.
Yea I like it when 85 today is considered to be a great score, journalists and fans matured in the last 2-3 years in regards to reviews and scores.yeahh I think those days of the mid-high 90's are all but gone. Most games would do well to get 87-90 range
Agreed, it reminds me of when I was writing essays at school. Teacher said minimum 200 words. Reaching 195 words, my last words were: "And everyone died. The end."
I think ND needed extra dev time for making a good end game for U4, I am glad they did.
Yea I like it when 85 today is considered to be a great score, journalists and fans matured in the last 2-3 years with regards to reviews and scores.
They obviously still matters, but the scale is closer to sanity compared to last gens where "OMG game got 8.8, dieeeeeee Gamespot!!!1" was pretty common.
It's not only extra time, is extra money. A while ago some ex-Ubi dev said that in AAA games most of the money is spent on the beggining because they know that not everyone reaches the end.
It'll score about the same as Alan Wake, in the end. It's a strict single player experience without any added content stuffing (like NG+, online features or open world missions). The core gameplay could be the best in the world but it wouldn't still score in the 90's.
That, plus the resolutiongate has reviewers quite easily stamping the game as an "interesting and fun" title. Low 80's. It's a shame, as Remedy titles are beautiful games, but also understandable in a way.
Yeah those 10's back in the day were always stupid. No game is perfect.
They matured indeed abit. Sterling gave The Witcher also 8.5 so its not a bad to have to same.
It looks like the TV stuff didn't add anything to the experience more like actually hurt it. Not really surprised though, they should have used the old fashioned animated CG.
Not bad review. Anyway, curious about the lenght of the game.
Is it short ( without live action scenes )?
You equating a 10 with 'perfect' is the only stupid thing, honestly. There is no such thing as a perfect game and a 10 just means it's a masterpiece.
Why even have a ten point scale if one of them is completely impossible to assign to any game.
And plenty of games still get showered with 10's this generation. GTAV, MGSV, Bloodborne, The Witcher 3.
It's not only extra time, is extra money. A while ago some ex-Ubi dev said that in AAA games most of the money is spent on the beggining because they know that not everyone reaches the end.
Why are reviewers always forgetting one of the most important parts? Length and replay value. This is a linear third person cover shooter for 70$. I need this info or I'm not going to buy it.
That is just sad
Nah. I mean purely off hype maybe but I see IC4 clocking in at 89.Nah. Red Dead Redemption 2 will be up there, and I'm pretty confident Uncharted 4 will be too.
I don't remember the exact statistics, but I think less than 10% of users finish games. Not worth the effort.
Pathetic.
If Devs wants the mainstream media and crowd to take their games seriously and treat it as a work of art, they should do so as well.
Unfortunately the statistics support that person. Something like 80% of players don't make it half way through most games. There was research published about it last year i think - and you can easily see this from looking at how many people get trophies in any game. The trophy attainment from after the first few levels/missions of any game drops off really, really quickly. The manority of people play singleplayer games very little, on a game-per-game basis.
We are the minority.
There are different paths as I heard, but I don't know if that changes much to replay the game.
As I grew up and earn my money to buy new games, I don't care about replay value to be honest.
It's not only extra time, is extra money. A while ago some ex-Ubi dev said that in AAA games most of the money is spent on the beginning because they know that not everyone reaches the end.
Great score
Ubisoft predominantly make open world games. Surely the majority finish the more linear experiences.
I wonder why is that, I mean games that are full of padded and recycled content I can get (even I quit MGS5) but for well paved games?
Wonder what is the statistic on U2.
Great score
Ubisoft predominantly make open world games. Surely the majority finish the more linear experiences.
Psnprofiles says U2 on PS3 was completed at least on easy by 67.5% of the people who played it.
edit : MGS5 on PS4 seems to stand at 37%
You can find out yourself by going on the PSN and looking at what proportion of people unlocked the "game complete" trophies for various SP games.
I think you'll be disappointed. Most people boot a game up, have a blast, then shut it down and probably barely ever play it again. And they probably only own a handful of games at most, ever. Most people who pick games up are, quote, "filthy casuls".
And U2 is probably one of the ones with highest completion rates :/
PS3 : 65%
PS4 : 52%
Yep, I beat Uncharted 2 also. What do the stats say about TLoU? I dropped out of it only a few hours in, too boring.