Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fallout 76 Review - Our Verdict on Bethesda's Wasteland Extravaganza - Fallout 76 Review

16791112

Comments

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    edited November 2018
    Sovrath said:
    TEKK3N said:
    I don't know the reviewer background, but just to put it in perspective, I gave FO4 a 9 (yeah fanboy), but to me FO76 is a 5 at best (same fanboy), though I actually give it a 3 for the effort, because they didn't put any whatsoever.

    Even taking into consideration people personal taste, 7 is way out of order.
    Well, here are the PC reviews for Fallout 4:


    I bet some of those negative reviews (and who knows if they are just trying to downgrade the game "just because") would tell you that a 9 is way out of order.

    Reading some of those negative reviews, people are calling it trash, dumbed down, Terrible Story, and a host of other things.

    Yet you think it was worth a 9.

    Just saying that maybe the reviewer on mmorpg.com thinks it's a 7.

    Difference being Tekken isn't a reviewer for a gaming journalist site.  He's just a random gamer (no offense Tekken).

    If you think that we should literally not hold journalists to a higher standard than random inter forum users, I can get behind the point you're making.  But that doesn't say much about what you think of the skills and talents of the actual gaming journalists.

    image
  • AlbatroesAlbatroes Member LegendaryPosts: 6,595
    Aeander said:
    Albatroes said:

    someone got a nice bag at least....

    I don't normally watch Heelz. I wrote him off as an idiot after he stupidly called Nintendo a scummy developer in one of his Diablo Immortal backlash videos. 

    However, this information is interesting and his nylon bag gag at the end is hilarious.
    Yeah its mostly about picking and choosing with most of these content creators. He was the first one I saw in regards to this particular bag situation information so I thought I'd pass it along. Bethesda saying it would be too expensive to give PAYING customers what they were advertised, but not too expensive to give positive spinners goodies for free. Then again, from a business end, these content creators do save Bethesda a lot of money in the marketing department so a 100$ 'gift' to a couple of hundred of people is a drop in the bucket.
  • rodarinrodarin Member RarePosts: 2,465
    edited November 2018
    TEKK3N said:


    Even taking into consideration people personal taste, 7 is way out of order.
    In your opinion. Not factually, and 7 is as much a valid score as any that you just gave. 
    A REAL review takes a lot of things into account. This one didnt. The author even goes on and on about how buggy it is.Yet still gave it a 7. Meaning ANYTHING buggy gets a pass or should from this person in the future. Ratings on many levels go beyond personal opinion. It isnt a persons opinion that 50% of the quests or public missions are bugged in some way shape or form (made up number could actually be more overall). It also isnt opinion that the game CTD for 100% of the people on a server (meaning the server itself crashes) during certain events. Also 50+% (real number) have personal crashes during same event or similar ones.

    Cash shop items are not opinions. How they are accepted or viewed is however.

    Inability to group with friend or people you are already grouped with isnt an opinion. Crashing when you try to group (due to you being recognized as already grouped even when you arent) isnt an opinion either.

    The list of legit and obvious bugs is long and indepth and it probably still wouldnt cover everything that those bugs mean is wrong with the game 'structurally'.

    Weight limits and too small a stash is opinion. VOIP and open mics are also opinions. But the open mic thing was pretty obviously bad idea.

    So people can debate SOME things as opinion. But there is so much wrong in so many fundamental facets of the game even the most positive opinions shouldnt get it to a 7. If you have 5 categories and three of them are 1s and two  of them are 10s you have 23/50 which is a 4.6.

    But a 'fair' break down would be something like ....

    Performance/stability/bugs: 2
    Grouping feature(s): 3
    Content: 5
    Story/exploration/map: 8 
    Graphics: 6.

    So thats 24/50 which is why I gave it a 5.

    You could also add a misc category to throw in the things that might not fit into the other ones. Like cash shop (or lack of), NPCs (or lack of), voice acting (or lack of), frequency (or infrequency of updates), communications from devs, added content (or lack of) etc.

    I know since every reviewer or their boss is paid by advertising criteria for how games are rated or reviewed is nonexistent these days, and thats why so many are basically based on opinions and not actual issues that can be made with zero opinion whatsoever.
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 27,298
    edited November 2018
    Sovrath said:
    TEKK3N said:
    I don't know the reviewer background, but just to put it in perspective, I gave FO4 a 9 (yeah fanboy), but to me FO76 is a 5 at best (same fanboy), though I actually give it a 3 for the effort, because they didn't put any whatsoever.

    Even taking into consideration people personal taste, 7 is way out of order.
    Well, here are the PC reviews for Fallout 4:


    I bet some of those negative reviews (and who knows if they are just trying to downgrade the game "just because") would tell you that a 9 is way out of order.

    Reading some of those negative reviews, people are calling it trash, dumbed down, Terrible Story, and a host of other things.

    Yet you think it was worth a 9.

    Just saying that maybe the reviewer on mmorpg.com thinks it's a 7.

    Difference being Tekken isn't a reviewer for a gaming journalist site.  He's just a random gamer (no offense Tekken).

    If you think that we should literally not hold journalists to a higher standard than random inter forum users, I can get behind the point you're making.  But that doesn't say much about what you think of the skills and talents of the actual gaming journalists.
    As I said earlier, I think a reviewer should give their opinion. Them being professional, to me, means it will be well written, it will be clear, that it won't be "influenced by others" even if those others are other players.

    It will give good information that is useful. If other players think it's useful and if they continue to think it's useful then they will most likely continue to be professional reviewers.

    edit: I just don't think a good, professional reviewer should be selling out his/her opinion to the general public so it can feed their frenzy.





  • AlbatroesAlbatroes Member LegendaryPosts: 6,595
    "If that is what you are looking for and you can be gracious as well as honest with where the game is presently at, Fallout 76 is worth checking out. If you are on the fence, I would recommend waiting to see how Bethesda handles updates and patches. That should give you a sense of where the game is at and what kind of attention it will be receiving."

    This was probably the most important part of the article imo. Yeah, I feel the score is a bit too 'gracious' but the reviewer also isn't telling anyone to rush out and buy it even though they feel its a 7. They say to wait it out for future updates/fixes if anyone is still hesitating to pick it up which I think most people only care about that part when they look at reviews anyway, "Is it worth buying now or can I wait?"
    Sovrathmaskedweasel
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    Sovrath said:
    Sovrath said:
    TEKK3N said:
    I don't know the reviewer background, but just to put it in perspective, I gave FO4 a 9 (yeah fanboy), but to me FO76 is a 5 at best (same fanboy), though I actually give it a 3 for the effort, because they didn't put any whatsoever.

    Even taking into consideration people personal taste, 7 is way out of order.
    Well, here are the PC reviews for Fallout 4:


    I bet some of those negative reviews (and who knows if they are just trying to downgrade the game "just because") would tell you that a 9 is way out of order.

    Reading some of those negative reviews, people are calling it trash, dumbed down, Terrible Story, and a host of other things.

    Yet you think it was worth a 9.

    Just saying that maybe the reviewer on mmorpg.com thinks it's a 7.

    Difference being Tekken isn't a reviewer for a gaming journalist site.  He's just a random gamer (no offense Tekken).

    If you think that we should literally not hold journalists to a higher standard than random inter forum users, I can get behind the point you're making.  But that doesn't say much about what you think of the skills and talents of the actual gaming journalists.
    As I said earlier, I think a reviewer should give their opinion. Them being professional, to me, means it will be well written, it will be clear, that it won't be "influenced by others" even if those others are other players.

    It will give good information that is useful. If other players think it's useful and if they continue to think it's useful then they will most likely continue to be professional reviewers.

    edit: I just don't think a good, professional reviewer should be selling out his/her opinion to the general public so it can feed their frenzy.


    Nobody said anything about selling out.  The game's not very good.  We have enough data to say that with about as much objectivity as you can make such a value judgement with.

    There's nothing selling out about being willing to unapologetically call a spade a spade when you review something.

    Trying to down play real flaws or issues because you're afraid of feeding a "frenzy" seems more disingenuous to me.

    image
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 27,298
    edited November 2018


    Nobody said anything about selling out.  The game's not very good.  We have enough data to say that with about as much objectivity as you can make such a value judgement with.

    There's nothing selling out about being willing to unapologetically call a spade a spade when you review something.

    Trying to down play real flaws or issues because you're afraid of feeding a "frenzy" seems more disingenuous to me.
    Except he thinks it's good with his caveats.

    Him having his own opinion and explaining his opinion is more important than him aligning with everyone else because he feels he has to.

    Like I said, I read reviews, I mull things over, I take into account what people say and then I make my own decisions.

    Look at Gothic II. Players and Pros on metacritic (for what that's worth) seem to overwhelmingly love it.


    So it MUST be good.

    But there are two bad reviews. One from a pro and one from a player. And those resonate with me more. My personal opinion is it's crap.

    Torval



  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    edited November 2018
    Sovrath said:


    Nobody said anything about selling out.  The game's not very good.  We have enough data to say that with about as much objectivity as you can make such a value judgement with.

    There's nothing selling out about being willing to unapologetically call a spade a spade when you review something.

    Trying to down play real flaws or issues because you're afraid of feeding a "frenzy" seems more disingenuous to me.
    Except he thinks it's good with his caveats.

    Him having his own opinion and explaining his opinion is more important than him aligning with everyone else because he feels he has to.

    Like I said, I read reviews, I mull things over, I take into account what people say and then I make my own decisions.

    Look at Gothic II. Players and Pros on metacritic (for what that's worth) seem to overwhelmingly love it.


    So it MUST be good.

    But there are two bad reviews. One from a pro and one from a player. And those resonate with me more. My personal opinion is it's crap.

    We could go in circles forever Sov.  He may be the type that is more tolerant of bugs than most.  But that's really irrelevant as soon as he became the journalist reviewer and not the gamer reviewer.  Down playing or failing to acknowledge the sheer amount or severity because you personally don't mind them is a disservice when your goal is to inform readers of what they should expect to experience with a game.

    It's a review of the game, warts and all.  Not a review of the writer's opinion.  The distinction is important when trying to inform readers.

    image
  • SovrathSovrath Member LegendaryPosts: 27,298
    edited November 2018
    Sovrath said:


    Nobody said anything about selling out.  The game's not very good.  We have enough data to say that with about as much objectivity as you can make such a value judgement with.

    There's nothing selling out about being willing to unapologetically call a spade a spade when you review something.

    Trying to down play real flaws or issues because you're afraid of feeding a "frenzy" seems more disingenuous to me.
    Except he thinks it's good with his caveats.

    Him having his own opinion and explaining his opinion is more important than him aligning with everyone else because he feels he has to.

    Like I said, I read reviews, I mull things over, I take into account what people say and then I make my own decisions.

    Look at Gothic II. Players and Pros on metacritic (for what that's worth) seem to overwhelmingly love it.


    So it MUST be good.

    But there are two bad reviews. One from a pro and one from a player. And those resonate with me more. My personal opinion is it's crap.

    We could go in circles forever Sov.  He may be the type that is more tolerant of bugs than most.  But that's really irrelevant as soon as he became the journalist reviewer and not the gamer reviewer.  Down playing or failing to acknowledge the sheer amount or severity because you personally don't mind them is a disservice when your goal is to inform readers of what they should expect to experience with a game.

    It's a review of the game, warts and all.  Not a review of the writer's opinion.  The distinction is important when trying to inform readers.
    I'm not saying he should downplay bugs, he should include them. But that doesn't mean that he doesn't like the game.

    For the player reading his review they should take into account everything he says. If he (or any reviewer) says there are bugs then those players who will fly off the handle because of that sort of thing needn't even try the game. For those players who are more forgiving they can look to what he sees as positives and if that resonates with them they might be inclined to try it.





  • maskedweaselmaskedweasel Member EpicPosts: 10,237
    rodarin said:
    TEKK3N said:


    Even taking into consideration people personal taste, 7 is way out of order.
    In your opinion. Not factually, and 7 is as much a valid score as any that you just gave. 
    A REAL review takes a lot of things into account. This one didnt. The author even goes on and on about how buggy it is.Yet still gave it a 7. Meaning ANYTHING buggy gets a pass or should from this person in the future. Ratings on many levels go beyond personal opinion. It isnt a persons opinion that 50% of the quests or public missions are bugged in some way shape or form (made up number could actually be more overall).
    50% of quests aren't even remotely bugged, I've played most of them. In general one major bug prevented people from progressing. Some events that crop up have issues, some of the time, but because they are repeatable, and the issues are rare, most people aren't affected by them, and therefore, a reviewer may never have encountered one of those missions at all. There's a fact for ya.
    It also isnt opinion that the game CTD for 100% of the people on a server (meaning the server itself crashes) during certain events.
    Wouldn't matter because he didn't CTD on those missions, WHY? Because he played the PS4 version. He might have crashed to the home screen, but thus far, there isn't a single mission that repeatedly causes CTD. I've played most of them, as stated, and there isn't a single thing I can do that repeatedly gives me crashes, and I play the game on the same platform as the reviewer.
    Also 50+% (real number) have personal crashes during same event or similar ones.
    What magical event is this specifically? It sounds like you know, and if you do, great, but if this is happening on PC, then sure, the PC version should have a lower rating, but this doesn't happen on the PS4 version. Not when Nukes are launched, not when you're fighting in the blast zone, not when White Springs Resort gets overrun.


    Cash shop items are not opinions. How they are accepted or viewed is however.
    So you want a score on a cash shop? Factually they can write what's in it, sure, but how that affects them or what they think about it is really all that matters, it's all opinion. Fact on what's in a cash shop doesn't bias a score, it's just a thing that IS. It's like saying a grocery store sells genetically modified mustard. It's a fact they sell it, whether you think they should or not is really the whole basis of the review on the store.
    Inability to group with friend or people you are already grouped with isnt an opinion.
    Isn't experienced by everyone. Maybe on the PC, but it's only happened to me once on PS4, and that was before the patch. Once in over 60 hours....
    Crashing when you try to group (due to you being recognized as already grouped even when you arent) isnt an opinion either.
    Oh it's a fact that it happens, when it happens to you, but you can only base your score on experiences YOU'VE had right? If they've never had the issue, should they score something based on it?

    The list of legit and obvious bugs is long and indepth and it probably still wouldnt cover everything that those bugs mean is wrong with the game 'structurally'.

    Weight limits and too small a stash is opinion. VOIP and open mics are also opinions. But the open mic thing was pretty obviously bad idea.
    And sure it's a bad idea because people on PC like PTT, but on the PS4, open mics are still a thing with no PTT. Whether people like that or not is up to them, but another important distinction on PS4, is that Sony has their own group chat system built in. When players are grouped through PSN, they don't have to hear anyone else on open mics. Another major shift from the PC version.

    So people can debate SOME things as opinion. But there is so much wrong in so many fundamental facets of the game even the most positive opinions shouldnt get it to a 7. If you have 5 categories and three of them are 1s and two  of them are 10s you have 23/50 which is a 4.6.

    But a 'fair' break down would be something like ....

    Performance/stability/bugs: 2
    Grouping feature(s): 3
    Content: 5
    Story/exploration/map: 8 
    Graphics: 6.

    So thats 24/50 which is why I gave it a 5.

    You could also add a misc category to throw in the things that might not fit into the other ones. Like cash shop (or lack of), NPCs (or lack of), voice acting (or lack of), frequency (or infrequency of updates), communications from devs, added content (or lack of) etc.

    I know since every reviewer or their boss is paid by advertising criteria for how games are rated or reviewed is nonexistent these days, and thats why so many are basically based on opinions and not actual issues that can be made with zero opinion whatsoever.

    So as you see, a lot of what you said, is pretty ridiculous. The issues you may have experienced and are solely based on a version the reviewer didn't play, shouldn't be counted against the game. Factually, a reviewer should ONLY base their score on what they experienced. If all these bugs you've mentioned, repeatable crashes, are apparent in the PC version, well I'm terribly sorry, but, I can't repeat a crash doing the same things over and over on my PS4 version.
    If you'd like reviewers to lie to you just to pander to the mob, that isn't what reviews are about. While it's completely possible for a reviewer to miss the mark, I don't think a 7 is so far off the mark that it deserves such hostility. Again, if I reviewed it, I'd give it a 6. Because the bugs I experience are an annoyance, the stash size angers me but is manageable, but overall the exploration and fun I have with my friends far outweighs it.
    Maybe if I was on the PC version, I would say different, but I'm not, so I can't. That is a fact.



  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,483
    edited November 2018
    Sovrath said:
    Sovrath said:


    Nobody said anything about selling out.  The game's not very good.  We have enough data to say that with about as much objectivity as you can make such a value judgement with.

    There's nothing selling out about being willing to unapologetically call a spade a spade when you review something.

    Trying to down play real flaws or issues because you're afraid of feeding a "frenzy" seems more disingenuous to me.
    Except he thinks it's good with his caveats.

    Him having his own opinion and explaining his opinion is more important than him aligning with everyone else because he feels he has to.

    Like I said, I read reviews, I mull things over, I take into account what people say and then I make my own decisions.

    Look at Gothic II. Players and Pros on metacritic (for what that's worth) seem to overwhelmingly love it.


    So it MUST be good.

    But there are two bad reviews. One from a pro and one from a player. And those resonate with me more. My personal opinion is it's crap.

    We could go in circles forever Sov.  He may be the type that is more tolerant of bugs than most.  But that's really irrelevant as soon as he became the journalist reviewer and not the gamer reviewer.  Down playing or failing to acknowledge the sheer amount or severity because you personally don't mind them is a disservice when your goal is to inform readers of what they should expect to experience with a game.

    It's a review of the game, warts and all.  Not a review of the writer's opinion.  The distinction is important when trying to inform readers.
    I'm not saying he should downplay bugs, he should include them. But that doesn't mean that he doesn't like the game.

    For the player reading his review they should take into account everything he says. If he (or any reviewer) says there are bugs then those players who will fly off the handle because of that sort of thing needn't even try the game. For those players who are more forgiving they can look to what he sees as positives and if that resonates with them they might be inclined to try it.


    I don't disagree.  I just also feel that if my job is to review a title for an audience, I should take into account that audience doesn't share the same biases or preferences I do and review accordingly.

    image
  • AeanderAeander Member LegendaryPosts: 4,826
    edited November 2018
    Sovrath said:
    Sovrath said:


    Nobody said anything about selling out.  The game's not very good.  We have enough data to say that with about as much objectivity as you can make such a value judgement with.

    There's nothing selling out about being willing to unapologetically call a spade a spade when you review something.

    Trying to down play real flaws or issues because you're afraid of feeding a "frenzy" seems more disingenuous to me.
    Except he thinks it's good with his caveats.

    Him having his own opinion and explaining his opinion is more important than him aligning with everyone else because he feels he has to.

    Like I said, I read reviews, I mull things over, I take into account what people say and then I make my own decisions.

    Look at Gothic II. Players and Pros on metacritic (for what that's worth) seem to overwhelmingly love it.


    So it MUST be good.

    But there are two bad reviews. One from a pro and one from a player. And those resonate with me more. My personal opinion is it's crap.

    We could go in circles forever Sov.  He may be the type that is more tolerant of bugs than most.  But that's really irrelevant as soon as he became the journalist reviewer and not the gamer reviewer.  Down playing or failing to acknowledge the sheer amount or severity because you personally don't mind them is a disservice when your goal is to inform readers of what they should expect to experience with a game.

    It's a review of the game, warts and all.  Not a review of the writer's opinion.  The distinction is important when trying to inform readers.
    I'm not saying he should downplay bugs, he should include them. But that doesn't mean that he doesn't like the game.

    For the player reading his review they should take into account everything he says. If he (or any reviewer) says there are bugs then those players who will fly off the handle because of that sort of thing needn't even try the game. For those players who are more forgiving they can look to what he sees as positives and if that resonates with them they might be inclined to try it.


    Perhaps this is a situation where something like Angry Joe's badass seal of approval might be warranted.

    If a game were reviewed even negatively by a more objective critic, this reviewer and Bill Murphy could add a Bill Murphys (or whoever's) seal of approval/guilty pleasure stamp on it and provide a little balance.

    Maybe all of the journalists who played a game being reviewed here can put their stamp of like/dislike on it without having to write their own review.
    MadFrenchie
  • RaquisRaquis Member UncommonPosts: 976
    Damien Gula you are a lying piece of s**t go f**K yourself its a disaster you should be sued if anyone buys this game on your lies wanker retarded fool!
  • DEXA88DEXA88 Member UncommonPosts: 105
    Who paid for that advertising is what i wonder ? Everyone else gives score arround 3 out of 10 yet you rate it about 7 not to mention it sticks on the front page for days now must be sponsored by bethesda. And if they have to pay someone to uplift them thats even more pathehic!
  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 13,040
    edited December 2018
    For those keeping track the metacritic critics' reviews for all 3 platforms so far are as follows:

    70+ (Green): 7 (6.5%)
    50-70 (Yellow): 66 (62%)
    Below 50 (Red): 34 (31.5%)

    The PC average is actually the highest at 54 and XB1 lowest at 49.

    This is the gaming media, not the user scores.

    Some notable sites...

    Gamespot gave it a 4/10 as did Destructoid
    Games Radar gave it a 2.5/5 and IGN gave it a 5/10

    Say what you will but in the gaming review universe those are heavy hitters.

    Just thought those who think it's worse on the PC and it's only the regular folks and YT critics bombing it would like to know.


    kitaradMadFrenchie
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED
  • OG_ZorvanOG_Zorvan Member EpicPosts: 1,884
    edited December 2018
    kitaradIselinAeander


    MMORPG.COM took away my swinging cheerleader butt .gif.

  • sexydadeesexydadee Member UncommonPosts: 11
    i think your editor threw you into the wolves when he agreed for you to post this review. now your credibility as a reviewer is gone
    FacelessSavior
  • OG_ZorvanOG_Zorvan Member EpicPosts: 1,884
    parrotpholkdeniterSharneAeanderTacticalZombehFacelessSaviorlaserit


    MMORPG.COM took away my swinging cheerleader butt .gif.

  • parrotpholkparrotpholk Member EpicPosts: 4,602
    OG_Zorvan said:
    More cock in that 5 minutes than in a hen house.....

    Tacos also sound good now.
    OG_Zorvan
  • HarafnirHarafnir Member UncommonPosts: 1,349
    Great review! Excellent writing, witty and smart. I am one of those that have bought everything Fallout since number one (Tactics would be nice to have modernized) but I am holding back on this one. Waiting a few months. I will buy it, I am 100% sure, but I do not want my Fallout fandom to take a hit, just because it suffers from childhood sickness. So, patience, playing Mechwarrior and probably pick it up around Februari. The screaming mob.. I do not really listen to them, they sounded EXACTLY like this when ESO was released, and look at it now.
    Aeander

    "This is not a game to be tossed aside lightly.
    It should be thrown with great force"

  • AstraeisAstraeis Member UncommonPosts: 378

    Cygi said:

    7/10 as an "average"?

    5/10 is an "average".


    (1 + 10) /2 = 5.5 This means 5 is below average.

    It takes one to know one.

  • TEKK3NTEKK3N Member RarePosts: 797
    TEKK3N said:


    Even taking into consideration people personal taste, 7 is way out of order.
    In your opinion. Not factually, and 7 is as much a valid score as any that you just gave. 
    First of all I am not a journalist therefore I am allowed to a certain degree of subjectivity.
    But my point was another.
    As a Bethesda and Fallout fan, I am usually a bit too generous with their titles, yet I could not give this title even a 5, even taking into account my positive bias towards Bethesda.
    So how an 'unbiased' journalist could have give it a 7, is beyond me.

    A journalist not only has to keep their bias to a bare minimum, but also needs to take into account the objective facts, like the sheer amount of bugs that make this game not fit for selling.
    The reviewer did none of that, and the reviewer is not an average Joe like me, it is supposed to be a professional.
    Just pointing that out.

    FO76 is factually an inferior product, regardless how fun it might be for certain people.
    I can have fun with inferior, half backed product too, that's subjective of course.
    But you can't give a game with huge technical and performance problem a good score, because as I mentioned before, fun is relative, while technicality is not.
  • TEKK3NTEKK3N Member RarePosts: 797
    Sovrath said:
    TEKK3N said:

    Well, here are the PC reviews for Fallout 4:


    I bet some of those negative reviews (and who knows if they are just trying to downgrade the game "just because") would tell you that a 9 is way out of order.

    Reading some of those negative reviews, people are calling it trash, dumbed down, Terrible Story, and a host of other things.

    Yet you think it was worth a 9.

    Just saying that maybe the reviewer on mmorpg.com thinks it's a 7.

    Read my post above this one. You are reinforcing my point.
  • AstraeisAstraeis Member UncommonPosts: 378




    Avarix said:




    Reviews are to inform consumers about potential purchases. It should be done with the majority of your viewers in mind. Not the small percent that could enjoy watching paint dry. Personally, I'm tired of reading extended ads instead of actual reviews on gaming sites. 






    How is this review NOT informative? It doesn't conform to people who dislike the game's opinion, and that's not the same thing. What you're looking for is for reviewers to be echo chambers of your own personal thoughts. That's NOT what the idea should be. A critic's role isn't to meet your expectations, but to share with you whether a product met their own.


    He did not say he expected a critic to meet his personal expectation.

    It takes one to know one.

  • AeanderAeander Member LegendaryPosts: 4,826
    Astraeis said:

    Cygi said:

    7/10 as an "average"?

    5/10 is an "average".


    (1 + 10) /2 = 5.5 This means 5 is below average.
    You're ignoring the distinct possibility for a game like Big Rigs to represent a 0.
Sign In or Register to comment.