This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

First game in a while not to lose to hype?

#11GarhinderPosted 9/16/2013 11:17:05 AM
What do you mean? It has received high ratings from "professional reviewers", and those mean ****.

Ch3wy posted...
jake-sf posted...
Pretty much what I was going to say. Professional reviews say its good? Shockers. Who cares? That has nothing to do whatsoever about it living to the hype or not. Player reviews will say that.


Professionals are just players who are lucky enough to get paid for writing on a blog.


Fixed that for you.
#12BogePosted 9/16/2013 1:16:22 PM(edited)
I think game reviewers are basing their review off what kind of games have been recently released. Like withdrawl. They haven't played a really great game for a while, so when a decent one shows up, they go,"Oh man! This game is amazing! I've never seen anything like it!!" Compared to the previous best game they play that month, it's a 10. They need to compare to the best games they've ever played. GTA has never been a 10 quality game for a couple simple reasons, the story/characters in the game SUCK! The missions in the game are repetitive. These deduct from the overall experience and the game shouldn't be a 10/10 which is perfect. I don't believe in a perfect rating ever. If there is even the slightest issue with the game (framerate dips), that should be a deduction. I rate games like judges in Olympic gymnastics rate a performance. Start at 10 and then deduct for every single little thing.

I personally rate the GTA games about 7/10. I can see them rating around 9/10 for most people, but 10/10 is just too far and it seems withdrawl is the cause of that. What has come at that has been worth a rats turd in the past year? The Last of Us is all I can think of. Serious withdrawl.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/reviews/10598-Grand-Theft-Auto-5-Review-People-Suck

"The three men you take control of throughout the game aren't even anti-heroes. They're just scumbags."

Now that's a review I can get behind, someone that has their head screwed on straight.
---
Don't lie to someone who trusts you.
Don't trust someone who lies to you.
#13dekouPosted 9/16/2013 1:15:07 PM
Rome 2: Total War got an 80+ Metacritic score despite being broken in almost every possible way. Dragon Age 2 has 82. So yeah, professional video game reviews aren't particularly trustworthy. If a game is AAA and not mind-numbingly awful, it's practically guaranteed to get at least 80.
#14Ch3wyPosted 9/16/2013 1:19:43 PM
Boge posted...
I think game reviewers are basing their review off what kind of games have been recently released. Like withdrawl. They haven't played a really great game for a while, so when a decent one shows up, they go,"Oh man! This game is amazing! I've never seen anything like it!!" Compared to the previous best game they play that month, it's a 10. They need to compare to the best games they've ever played. GTA has never been a 10 quality game for a couple simple reasons, the story/characters in the game SUCK! The missions in the game are repetitive. These deduct from the overall experience and the game shouldn't be a 10/10 which is perfect. I don't believe in a perfect rating ever. If there is even the slightest issue with the game (framerate dips), that should be a deduction. I rate games like judges in Olympic gymnastics rate a performance. Start at 10 and then deduct for every single little thing.

I personally rate the GTA games about 7/10. I can see them rating around 9/10 for most people, but 10/10 is just too far and it seems withdrawl is the cause of that. What has come at that has been worth a rats turd in the past year? The Last of Us is all I can think of. Serious withdrawl.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/reviews/10598-Grand-Theft-Auto-5-Review-People-Suck

Now that's a review I can get behind, someone that has their head screwed on straight.


Did you even read that review?

"Best game of the decade, but the characters are meanies!"

Or an actual quote: "If only the morally reprehensible script written by Dan Houser lived up to the achievements in game-making that Grand Theft Auto V otherwise embodies, it would be not just the game of the year but of the decade."

The absolute only reason they reviewed it 3.5/5(not that that's a bad score) is because of political correctness.
---
Every time you point out that something is an opinion Jesus shoots a kitten in the face.
#15Ch3wyPosted 9/16/2013 1:21:03 PM
By the way I do agree that professional review scores are too high, but it's the words that are often better than user reviews.

Also user reviews on metacritic for big budget titles are usually only 10/10 or 0/10.
---
Every time you point out that something is an opinion Jesus shoots a kitten in the face.
#16BogePosted 9/16/2013 1:30:28 PM(edited)
User reviews are useless because of the fanboism.

Yes, I read the whole review and your quote is way off. They said it could have been game of the decade if they'd have some half decent characters in the game, but because most of the game you're stuck with these piles of crap which you couldn't care less about, it completely mars the experience.

"they wasted it on portraying characters you don't want to spend five minutes with, let alone the hours it would take to play through the game's story."

In other words, playing as these characters in this story is NOT FUN AT ALL.
---
Don't lie to someone who trusts you.
Don't trust someone who lies to you.
#17Ch3wyPosted 9/16/2013 1:33:24 PM
Boge posted...
User reviews are useless because of the fanboism.

Yes, I read the whole review and your quote is way off. They said it could have been game of the decade if they'd have some half decent characters in the game, but because most of the game you're stuck with these piles of crap which you couldn't care less about, it completely mars the experience.

"they wasted it on portraying characters you don't want to spend five minutes with, let alone the hours it would take to play through the game's story."

In other words, playing as these characters in this story is NOT FUN AT ALL.


Not fun at all for an overly PC soccer mom, maybe. But everyone else seems to be enjoying playing as them.

They just didn't like the characters because they were evil.
---
Every time you point out that something is an opinion Jesus shoots a kitten in the face.
#18akuma634Posted 9/16/2013 1:34:58 PM
I laugh at the idea of publishers paying internet critics for high review scores. That would be a complete waste of money and it wouldn't fool anybody when a handful of reviews give a game a 10 and 80 critics give it a 3/10 or lower. It's time to take off the tinfoil hat.
---
http://www.last.fm/user/akuma634
#19BogePosted 9/16/2013 1:40:01 PM(edited)
Ch3wy posted...
Boge posted...
User reviews are useless because of the fanboism.

Yes, I read the whole review and your quote is way off. They said it could have been game of the decade if they'd have some half decent characters in the game, but because most of the game you're stuck with these piles of crap which you couldn't care less about, it completely mars the experience.

"they wasted it on portraying characters you don't want to spend five minutes with, let alone the hours it would take to play through the game's story."

In other words, playing as these characters in this story is NOT FUN AT ALL.


Not fun at all for an overly PC soccer mom, maybe. But everyone else seems to be enjoying playing as them.

They just didn't like the characters because they were evil.


Funny you mention that:

The escapist review by - Greg Tito 7/10
IGN review by - Keza McDonald (female) 10/10
---
Don't lie to someone who trusts you.
Don't trust someone who lies to you.
#20Snuckie7Posted 9/16/2013 1:40:06 PM
http://i.imgur.com/SLQJc.gif
---
Intel Core i7 3820 | EVGA X79 SLI K2 | MSI 7950 Twin Frozr III | Samsung / 840 120GB / 8GB RAM | 1TB WD Caviar Blue | Corsair / 550D / H70 | Silencer MKIII 600W