People only post reviews of well known critics and review sites. Its the same for every other MMO released before ESO. Its not some conspiracy against ESO trust me.
Majority of the websites you linked..i am sure many do not even know about. Even for me these sites are unknown.
I have always paid attention to PC gamer, IGN and Gamespot for all my reviewing needs.
As far as PC gamer and Gamespot PC Gamer use just a blogger, who wanted more sandbox PVP then the RPG side of the game and doesn't like questing at all, and as far as Gamespot goes, the guy who did the review slapped every Elder Scrolls fans in the face by bashing on oblivion IV (even when gamespot gave Oblivion 9/10 long ago) and wanted nothing more then a sandbox game so he gave it a 6/10.
When you have a list as long as the OP shows praising a game, I think its safe to say, two of the three you listed is pretty much wrong, and I just listed the reasons why they gave their poor reviews because I read them already and they wanted completely different game genres.
I don't pay that much attention to reviews if I am playing the game myself. But posters on this site want to keep telling us about 6/10 reviews, so I am pointing out that most reviewers think that is a ridiculous score for TESO. Reviews are mixed on TESO because it is trying to do something different, somewhat slower progression (nothing like as slow in the old days), no Auction House and other differences do not go down well with many players. Having been fed on a diet of easyMMO's and MOBA's thats hardly a surprise.
I would put it at an 8+ myself.
just gonna throw this out there but over half of those were done on release day April 4th and Merlin'in Kazan? (Turkey) was done on april 2nd.
Your basicly saying that release date wasn't good enough of a review date? That it should be judged on bugs and not how good the game was up to launch?
You can just read the reviews for yourself. A 'good' rating is considered 85+
Ridiculous, with that mindset I would have missed a lot of awesome movies on rotten tomatoes and skipped a lot of good games. Most of these so called professional reviews are ratings based on things I couldn't give a crap about including Bill on this site who will probably give the game a 7 out of 10.
I don't pay that much attention to reviews if I am playing the game myself. But posters on this site want to keep telling us about 6/10 reviews, so I am pointing out that most reviewers think that is a ridiculous score for TESO. Reviews are mixed on TESO because it is trying to do something different, somewhat slower progression (nothing like as slow in the old days), no Auction House and other differences do not go down well with many players. Having been fed on a diet of easyMMO's and MOBA's thats hardly a surprise.
I would put it at an 8+ not a 9 myself.
So no one anyone has heard of and was probably paid off pretty easily...Nice.
You've never heard of Digital Spy, the escapist, eurogamer, and gaming revolution? You must be new to gaming. Regardless a popular site doesn't make the review any more valid, especially when it's premise is comparing to a single player game which ZENIMAX said months ago that they weren't trying to make Skyrim Online. Unrealistic people from all spectrums of life just can't accept that.
so what about the negative reviews that were done before launch that the community here took as law? if its negative its a good review, positive and its because they got paid.
that's how the mmo community here works.
the problem with a lot of these reviewers is they compare it to single player games and not other mmo's
IMO if this mmo is average then so is every single other current mmo.
There are no negative reviews on Metacritic that were on or before April 4th.
Critics don't review games before their launch... Or did you mean user reviews? Metacritic doesn't allow you to review a game before its launch. But there were negative user reviews on the 4th April and they were referring to their gameplay before launch (e.g. beta).
I think people who give 0 reviews should be banned from metacritic. It's one thing to give a negative review but a 0. Those people are stupid as fuck. How many games deserve a 0/10. I haven't played a single game that deserves 0/10. It's just not objective. A 0/10 means the game is exceptionally bad. It mean it's broken, unplayable, is worse than 90% of the games out there and has 0 redeeming qualities.
The zero reviews are there to offset those shill 10/10 paid reviews.
Just ignore all 0/10 and 10/10 reviews.
People should just clam it about paid reviews. If you have proof of that linked to anything specific link it otherwise stop with the generic nonsense.
The zero reviews are there to offset those shill 10/10 paid reviews.
Just ignore all 0/10 and 10/10 reviews.
People should just clam it about paid reviews. If you have proof of that linked to anything specific link it otherwise stop with the generic nonsense.
There we agree. People tend to say that great scores are paid while abysmal scores are paid by other companies but so far have no-one I seen actually proved it for any game.
I still usually ignore 10/10 and 0/10 reviews, since I never played the perfect MMO while anything that actually starts up deserve at least a 1/10 even if it sucks badly. Some reviews tend to ignore all good or bad stuff in the games the review.
In ESOs case it is pretty clear that PvPers seems to rate the game higher than PvErs though, even though good reviewers should put equal focus on both.
Fun fact: Reviews that get paid off (mostly PR, good PR = more details = more money) to give high scores at times have quite morally uncertain writers that sneak in more subtle jabs to make up for having to review a game higher then it deserves. Fun link http://www.zeldainformer.com/news/former-ign-employee-admits-review-scores-are-skewed-due-to-public-relations#.U1xr0fldUgg or heck if you like to see tons of bias support of stuff/backlash against other stuff, turn on Fox News and tell me people are fair and balanced with stuff and not one sided (and laugh at them cause its quite hilarious how they portray it)
Come on now, even an outside like me easily sees how flawed ESO is in its design and principles. Most TES fans I know pretty much are quick to dismiss it as a 'weak TES game" with the MMO aspect often as a handicap in attempt to give it more of a benefit of the doubt. When reviews are out there praising its graphics (which btw, aren't that great. Average compared to most recent mmos released in the last 2 years) and seem to ignore its blatent flaws, no one can really take them seriously.
In a way, it really makes me wish I had the funding to do my own review of games from a realistic standpoint. If only I had magic powers to take away my own Bias for/against games to make me feel credible enough to give an accurate 'judgement' of a game, but then again I think that is impossible given human nature. XD
People should just clam it about paid reviews. If you have proof of that linked to anything specific link it otherwise stop with the generic nonsense.
You my friend are living in a world where you don't know what's REALLY going on.
I have one word for you.
EEDAR
Look at their client list, go research what they really do, crazy to see every major game company use them - and not a single company ever talks about them?
Hmm...
Wake up and smell the coffee.
oh and don't bother with /tinfoilhat - you can save that for the conspiracy theorists.
actually, that's exactly why I wrote my response, because I think you are living in a fantasy world dreaming up stuff that may not exist. Again, you posted your unsupported claim, so unless you have proof to a site with a review that has anything to do with the OP you shouldn't post fantasy. I shouldn't have to do your research. How many times have people like you said this site is paid for their positive reviews. Every time the site denies it. Then when they give the score a 7, I'm sure you'll be like "what a great review, I agree". There will be no nonsense about payment then.
The zero reviews are there to offset those shill 10/10 paid reviews.
Just ignore all 0/10 and 10/10 reviews.
People should just clam it about paid reviews. If you have proof of that linked to anything specific link it otherwise stop with the generic nonsense.
There we agree. People tend to say that great scores are paid while abysmal scores are paid by other companies but so far have no-one I seen actually proved it for any game.
I still usually ignore 10/10 and 0/10 reviews, since I never played the perfect MMO while anything that actually starts up deserve at least a 1/10 even if it sucks badly. Some reviews tend to ignore all good or bad stuff in the games the review.
In ESOs case it is pretty clear that PvPers seems to rate the game higher than PvErs though, even though good reviewers should put equal focus on both.
Thanks, though what is odd is that I've seen threads where people claim the PVP is empty and everyone is in PVE, so I don't know what to believe anymore lol. I'm enjoying the PVE a lot, haven't tried the PVP at all, but I guess I'll give it a go at end level.
Perhaps PvP is not full of players because not everyone is racing to top level? I have had a look at PvP, done the tutorial and a handful of quests, but that's all. When I was in DAOC I did not really start faction play until about level 30 to 35 and I only really got into it at 45+. Here with levelling being so fast (yes fast) I doubt I will look at PvP again until 40+.
I don't pay that much attention to reviews if I am playing the game myself. But posters on this site want to keep telling us about 6/10 reviews, so I am pointing out that most reviewers think that is a ridiculous score for TESO. Reviews are mixed on TESO because it is trying to do something different, somewhat slower progression (nothing like as slow in the old days), no Auction House and other differences do not go down well with many players. Having been fed on a diet of easyMMO's and MOBA's thats hardly a surprise.
I would put it at an 8+ not a 9 myself.
Digital Spy is not a gaming review site, the rest i have never heard of.
Expresso gave me a Hearthstone beta key.....I'm so happy
so what about the negative reviews that were done before launch that the community here took as law? if its negative its a good review, positive and its because they got paid.
that's how the mmo community here works.
the problem with a lot of these reviewers is they compare it to single player games and not other mmo's
IMO if this mmo is average then so is every single other current mmo.
There are no negative reviews on Metacritic that were on or before April 4th.
Actually there are no 'negative' reviews full stop.
so what about the negative reviews that were done before launch that the community here took as law? if its negative its a good review, positive and its because they got paid.
that's how the mmo community here works.
the problem with a lot of these reviewers is they compare it to single player games and not other mmo's
IMO if this mmo is average then so is every single other current mmo.
There are no negative reviews on Metacritic that were on or before April 4th.
Actually there are no 'negative' reviews full stop.
Just sayin....
Yeah, you're technically right. I guess I tend to consider 5 and 6 negative. His point was ridiculous either way.
I don't pay that much attention to reviews if I am playing the game myself. But posters on this site want to keep telling us about 6/10 reviews, so I am pointing out that most reviewers think that is a ridiculous score for TESO. Reviews are mixed on TESO because it is trying to do something different, somewhat slower progression (nothing like as slow in the old days), no Auction House and other differences do not go down well with many players. Having been fed on a diet of easyMMO's and MOBA's thats hardly a surprise.
I would put it at an 8+ not a 9 myself.
Digital Spy is not a gaming review site, the rest i have never heard of.
That's why Digital Spy are not reviewing everything from Mario Golf to 2014 FIFA World Cup on this page along with TESO.:
So seems if you have not heard of them you can just ignore the review, if you have heard of them you can pretend they don't do reviews. As I don't have my head in the sand I am afraid I can't agree with you here. The 6/10 reviews exist too, I can understand posters pointing them out to me, but when I have you guys telling me some of my sources don't do reviews that takes the Daggerfall biscuit.
People only post reviews of well known critics and review sites. Its the same for every other MMO released before ESO. Its not some conspiracy against ESO trust me.
Majority of the websites you linked..i am sure many do not even know about. Even for me these sites are unknown.
I have always paid attention to PC gamer, IGN and Gamespot for all my reviewing needs.
True, i only posted IGN's review because to me, along with GS, they're the 2 most well known game reviwing sites. I also posted Zero Punctuation because it's funny.
If anybody wants to read all the scores, they can go to metacritic:
People should just clam it about paid reviews. If you have proof of that linked to anything specific link it otherwise stop with the generic nonsense.
You my friend are living in a world where you don't know what's REALLY going on.
I have one word for you.
EEDAR
Look at their client list, go research what they really do, crazy to see every major game company use them - and not a single company ever talks about them?
Hmm...
Wake up and smell the coffee.
oh and don't bother with /tinfoilhat - you can save that for the conspiracy theorists.
so what about the negative reviews that were done before launch that the community here took as law? if its negative its a good review, positive and its because they got paid.
that's how the mmo community here works.
the problem with a lot of these reviewers is they compare it to single player games and not other mmo's
IMO if this mmo is average then so is every single other current mmo.
There are no negative reviews on Metacritic that were on or before April 4th.
Actually there are no 'negative' reviews full stop.
Just sayin....
Yeah, you're technically right. I guess I tend to consider 5 and 6 negative. His point was ridiculous either way.
No, it's not. PC Gamer and Angry Joe both put out hostile previews before launch, and their subsequent hostile reviews were hardly a surprise. There is a direct mapping between preview and review scores overall. There were good post-launch reviews too (IGN, Strategy Informer). If you're looking to confirm your prejudices you can discount the reviews that disagree with you and promote the ones that agree. If you don't, the claimed pattern that all good reviews are early and all poor ones are late doesn't hold up.
I think that the overall problem with game reviews is twofold: they tend to be superficial, and many reviewers aren't actually reviewing the games on their own terms. Instead, they shape an agenda (e.g. I want this game to be like X) and praise or ding it according to how far it is. An actual review would note what a game was trying to do and evaluate its success. A bad review might begin (as many previews did) by talking about how much they dislike Elder Scrolls games, or MMOs, etc.
so what about the negative reviews that were done before launch that the community here took as law? if its negative its a good review, positive and its because they got paid.
that's how the mmo community here works.
the problem with a lot of these reviewers is they compare it to single player games and not other mmo's
IMO if this mmo is average then so is every single other current mmo.
There are no negative reviews on Metacritic that were on or before April 4th.
Actually there are no 'negative' reviews full stop.
Just sayin....
Yeah, you're technically right. I guess I tend to consider 5 and 6 negative. His point was ridiculous either way.
No, it's not. PC Gamer and Angry Joe both put out hostile previews before launch, and their subsequent hostile reviews were hardly a surprise. There is a direct mapping between preview and review scores overall. There were good post-launch reviews too (IGN, Strategy Informer). If you're looking to confirm your prejudices you can discount the reviews that disagree with you and promote the ones that agree. If you don't, the claimed pattern that all good reviews are early and all poor ones are late doesn't hold up.
I think that the overall problem with game reviews is twofold: they tend to be superficial, and many reviewers aren't actually reviewing the games on their own terms. Instead, they shape an agenda (e.g. I want this game to be like X) and praise or ding it according to how far it is. An actual review would note what a game was trying to do and evaluate its success. A bad review might begin (as many previews did) by talking about how much they dislike Elder Scrolls games, or MMOs, etc.
You're correct that Angry Joe gave a less than stellar preview before the game came out for the PvE portion. And his later review reflected that. If you'll notice, that had nothing to do with his point.
Either way, I mostly agree with many of the more negative reviews because they largely reflect my own personal experiences in game. You seem to largely disagree with many of the more negative reviews because they don't mesh well with your own in game experiences. People perceive things differently and, believe it or not, this is ok.
And that's what is so terrible about the other guys point. He's saying that the entire community here only accept negative reviews as good reviews and calls all positive reviews paid off. There is no other way for some people (like yourself and the other poster that was originally quoted) to be able to accept the amount of negativity this title is receiving. You need to invent reasons why it is so poorly received instead of accepting that perhaps, in this case, you are interested in something that a large portion of people may not be.
I don't pay that much attention to reviews if I am playing the game myself. But posters on this site want to keep telling us about 6/10 reviews, so I am pointing out that most reviewers think that is a ridiculous score for TESO. Reviews are mixed on TESO because it is trying to do something different, somewhat slower progression (nothing like as slow in the old days), no Auction House and other differences do not go down well with many players. Having been fed on a diet of easyMMO's and MOBA's thats hardly a surprise.
I would put it at an 8+ myself.
just gonna throw this out there but over half of those were done on release day April 4th and Merlin'in Kazan? (Turkey) was done on april 2nd.
Your basicly saying that release date wasn't good enough of a review date? That it should be judged on bugs and not how good the game was up to launch?
No im saying that any review that early isn't actually reviewing at all....as in 1 day isn't playing the game long enough to judge 300 hours of RELEASED content. people have no business toting a lvl7 impression as a REVIEW of an entire game.
Also MMOs(actually any game with an online multipler feature) are an entertainment SERVICE(especially when your paying monthly).......so yes game debilitating bugs(as well as shitty customer service) should be reflected in the games score, but shouldn't have a significant impact(im talking like a 0.5 difference on a 10 scale).When developers put out a game that has so many bugs it actually effects review scoring....its because they a) didn't test enough(you know like an open beta that eso didnt have even though they were using new server tech) or b) they just didn't care(or having money a month early was more important). either way they are at fault and they reap what they sow.
As for ESO i played the game up to lvl45 and feel that anywhere from 6/10-8/10 is probably an accurate score as long as they were done in an appropriate time frame.
I don't pay that much attention to reviews if I am playing the game myself. But posters on this site want to keep telling us about 6/10 reviews, so I am pointing out that most reviewers think that is a ridiculous score for TESO. Reviews are mixed on TESO because it is trying to do something different, somewhat slower progression (nothing like as slow in the old days), no Auction House and other differences do not go down well with many players. Having been fed on a diet of easyMMO's and MOBA's thats hardly a surprise.
I would put it at an 8+ not a 9 myself.
The thing is, the sites that review the game below 8/10 are actually sites I've heard of.
I don't think it's a massive conspiracy: the sites that have the tools to do a proper review and the reviewers that have reviewed MMOs for years are just, flat-out, unimpressed and uninspired by this game.
That lines up perfectly with my own experience. The game is very comfortably a 6 - it's not crap, but someone who takes the Elder Scrolls IP and delivers something that "isn't crap" and nothing more has effectively failed the IP in a huge way.
Different sites tend to carry different weights of importance. For example you can look at car reviews. Car and Driver vs. thecartrends.com. One is going to have much more value simply because of who did the review and how they did it. Also the date of the review has to come in to consideration. I wouldn't trust an MMO review that came out 3 or 4 days after the game simply because it is unlikely a reviewer will see everything.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.
Comments
IGN 7/10. Gave it a great review.
http://www.ign.com/videos/2014/04/21/the-elder-scrolls-online-review
My review on PC Gamer and Gamespot reviews...
As far as PC gamer and Gamespot PC Gamer use just a blogger, who wanted more sandbox PVP then the RPG side of the game and doesn't like questing at all, and as far as Gamespot goes, the guy who did the review slapped every Elder Scrolls fans in the face by bashing on oblivion IV (even when gamespot gave Oblivion 9/10 long ago) and wanted nothing more then a sandbox game so he gave it a 6/10.
When you have a list as long as the OP shows praising a game, I think its safe to say, two of the three you listed is pretty much wrong, and I just listed the reasons why they gave their poor reviews because I read them already and they wanted completely different game genres.
Your basicly saying that release date wasn't good enough of a review date? That it should be judged on bugs and not how good the game was up to launch?
The current metacritic rating is 74
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/the-elder-scrolls-online
You can just read the reviews for yourself. A 'good' rating is considered 85+
Ridiculous, with that mindset I would have missed a lot of awesome movies on rotten tomatoes and skipped a lot of good games. Most of these so called professional reviews are ratings based on things I couldn't give a crap about including Bill on this site who will probably give the game a 7 out of 10.
There Is Always Hope!
You've never heard of Digital Spy, the escapist, eurogamer, and gaming revolution? You must be new to gaming. Regardless a popular site doesn't make the review any more valid, especially when it's premise is comparing to a single player game which ZENIMAX said months ago that they weren't trying to make Skyrim Online. Unrealistic people from all spectrums of life just can't accept that.
There Is Always Hope!
People should just clam it about paid reviews. If you have proof of that linked to anything specific link it otherwise stop with the generic nonsense.
There Is Always Hope!
There we agree. People tend to say that great scores are paid while abysmal scores are paid by other companies but so far have no-one I seen actually proved it for any game.
I still usually ignore 10/10 and 0/10 reviews, since I never played the perfect MMO while anything that actually starts up deserve at least a 1/10 even if it sucks badly. Some reviews tend to ignore all good or bad stuff in the games the review.
In ESOs case it is pretty clear that PvPers seems to rate the game higher than PvErs though, even though good reviewers should put equal focus on both.
Fun fact: Reviews that get paid off (mostly PR, good PR = more details = more money) to give high scores at times have quite morally uncertain writers that sneak in more subtle jabs to make up for having to review a game higher then it deserves. Fun link http://www.zeldainformer.com/news/former-ign-employee-admits-review-scores-are-skewed-due-to-public-relations#.U1xr0fldUgg or heck if you like to see tons of bias support of stuff/backlash against other stuff, turn on Fox News and tell me people are fair and balanced with stuff and not one sided (and laugh at them cause its quite hilarious how they portray it)
Come on now, even an outside like me easily sees how flawed ESO is in its design and principles. Most TES fans I know pretty much are quick to dismiss it as a 'weak TES game" with the MMO aspect often as a handicap in attempt to give it more of a benefit of the doubt. When reviews are out there praising its graphics (which btw, aren't that great. Average compared to most recent mmos released in the last 2 years) and seem to ignore its blatent flaws, no one can really take them seriously.
In a way, it really makes me wish I had the funding to do my own review of games from a realistic standpoint. If only I had magic powers to take away my own Bias for/against games to make me feel credible enough to give an accurate 'judgement' of a game, but then again I think that is impossible given human nature. XD
actually, that's exactly why I wrote my response, because I think you are living in a fantasy world dreaming up stuff that may not exist. Again, you posted your unsupported claim, so unless you have proof to a site with a review that has anything to do with the OP you shouldn't post fantasy. I shouldn't have to do your research. How many times have people like you said this site is paid for their positive reviews. Every time the site denies it. Then when they give the score a 7, I'm sure you'll be like "what a great review, I agree". There will be no nonsense about payment then.
There Is Always Hope!
Thanks, though what is odd is that I've seen threads where people claim the PVP is empty and everyone is in PVE, so I don't know what to believe anymore lol. I'm enjoying the PVE a lot, haven't tried the PVP at all, but I guess I'll give it a go at end level.
There Is Always Hope!
Digital Spy is not a gaming review site, the rest i have never heard of.
Expresso gave me a Hearthstone beta key.....I'm so happy
Actually there are no 'negative' reviews full stop.
Just sayin....
Yeah, you're technically right. I guess I tend to consider 5 and 6 negative. His point was ridiculous either way.
That's why Digital Spy are not reviewing everything from Mario Golf to 2014 FIFA World Cup on this page along with TESO.:
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/review/#~oCDJRRQBaksdEV
So seems if you have not heard of them you can just ignore the review, if you have heard of them you can pretend they don't do reviews. As I don't have my head in the sand I am afraid I can't agree with you here. The 6/10 reviews exist too, I can understand posters pointing them out to me, but when I have you guys telling me some of my sources don't do reviews that takes the Daggerfall biscuit.
In my view Metacritic is ALWAYS the best. It doesn't get any better than an aggregation of all the reviews into one score.
but this does make you a conspiracy theorist...
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
No, it's not. PC Gamer and Angry Joe both put out hostile previews before launch, and their subsequent hostile reviews were hardly a surprise. There is a direct mapping between preview and review scores overall. There were good post-launch reviews too (IGN, Strategy Informer). If you're looking to confirm your prejudices you can discount the reviews that disagree with you and promote the ones that agree. If you don't, the claimed pattern that all good reviews are early and all poor ones are late doesn't hold up.
I think that the overall problem with game reviews is twofold: they tend to be superficial, and many reviewers aren't actually reviewing the games on their own terms. Instead, they shape an agenda (e.g. I want this game to be like X) and praise or ding it according to how far it is. An actual review would note what a game was trying to do and evaluate its success. A bad review might begin (as many previews did) by talking about how much they dislike Elder Scrolls games, or MMOs, etc.
You're correct that Angry Joe gave a less than stellar preview before the game came out for the PvE portion. And his later review reflected that. If you'll notice, that had nothing to do with his point.
Either way, I mostly agree with many of the more negative reviews because they largely reflect my own personal experiences in game. You seem to largely disagree with many of the more negative reviews because they don't mesh well with your own in game experiences. People perceive things differently and, believe it or not, this is ok.
And that's what is so terrible about the other guys point. He's saying that the entire community here only accept negative reviews as good reviews and calls all positive reviews paid off. There is no other way for some people (like yourself and the other poster that was originally quoted) to be able to accept the amount of negativity this title is receiving. You need to invent reasons why it is so poorly received instead of accepting that perhaps, in this case, you are interested in something that a large portion of people may not be.
At least the "critics" score on Metacritic. The user score is IMO always suspect for popular/hyped/hated games.
No im saying that any review that early isn't actually reviewing at all....as in 1 day isn't playing the game long enough to judge 300 hours of RELEASED content. people have no business toting a lvl7 impression as a REVIEW of an entire game.
Also MMOs(actually any game with an online multipler feature) are an entertainment SERVICE(especially when your paying monthly).......so yes game debilitating bugs(as well as shitty customer service) should be reflected in the games score, but shouldn't have a significant impact(im talking like a 0.5 difference on a 10 scale).When developers put out a game that has so many bugs it actually effects review scoring....its because they a) didn't test enough(you know like an open beta that eso didnt have even though they were using new server tech) or b) they just didn't care(or having money a month early was more important). either way they are at fault and they reap what they sow.
As for ESO i played the game up to lvl45 and feel that anywhere from 6/10-8/10 is probably an accurate score as long as they were done in an appropriate time frame.
The thing is, the sites that review the game below 8/10 are actually sites I've heard of.
I don't think it's a massive conspiracy: the sites that have the tools to do a proper review and the reviewers that have reviewed MMOs for years are just, flat-out, unimpressed and uninspired by this game.
That lines up perfectly with my own experience. The game is very comfortably a 6 - it's not crap, but someone who takes the Elder Scrolls IP and delivers something that "isn't crap" and nothing more has effectively failed the IP in a huge way.
before i play a game i always refer to critics to tell me what i should play or not...
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.
I'm waiting for the PS4/Xbox One versions anyway. Let the PC people be beta testers for the console versions.
I find that when games are simultaneously developed for both console and PC that the console version usually plays or runs better or both.