@BlueOcean Yeah. If I were to guess he probably just got tired of these sites. He was called a troll by basically all 3 forums, regularly. And I don't think he was too enthused with the new consoles limitations compared to high end PC, so he may not play console at all right now anyway. Especially with everything MS being PC by default and Sony moving their stuff to PC over time, he's probably just shifted over to all PC communities if I were to guess. He may still respond to your tag though!
@SplooshDmg I think a fair amount of the skepticism about Game Pass performance is down to Microsoft always shouting from the rooftops about their big accomplishments
You're pessimistic about everything Xbox but you tend to generalise like it's not coming from you but are common beliefs that nobody else have heard of.
After a very well received multiplayer and campaign previews, you also said that Halo Infinite would get either 70-79 or 80-89! 70-79 is like way too low.
@BlueOcean Idk,I kinda agree with grumbles metacritic prediction. There's anti 343 bias, there's backlash from the anti f2p fans, there's ponies trolling, there's the "the e3 20 presentation sucked" bias, and it's an fps in 2021. I think it'll shed a lot of points in the reviews. Even if it's a great game the politics about and just the trends of review bias by genre sorrt of guarantee points will be lost. That's why I've always hated metacritic. It's not going to tell a deep story and it's not going to be especially unique even if it's fresh, and just being halo critics will be more prone to deep dive into the games technicalities while all that gets glossed over on story driven games.
Heck even doom eternal is sitting at 88... Doom Eternal is literally the most perfect fps ever. It's the ideal specimen of the rubric. If Halo can top eternal I'll have no faith left in reviews even if I love the game.
@NEStalgia Yes but I think it's funny that kind of sentences he usually writes like the one I quoted where he assumes that most people are reaching the same negative conclusions like Microsoft don't publish Game Pass figures not because they're waiting to reach 30 million or anything but because the number is decreasing or it's disappointing.
In regard to Halo Infinite, yes, it's not indie and it's not a cinematic interactive film published by Sony so even if it's better as a game than anything that Sony has published for PS5, it probably will not review as well but 70-79, you can't predict that without adding that it would be outrageous! I'm sure that the game will be great, both campaign and multiplayer and probably not because of 343 but because of all the help they have received and what they've learnt while burning Microsoft's money.
I'm playing Doom Eternal for the first time. It's like a very hardcore version of Metroid Prime. It has very similar gameplay elements but maximised: 3D platforming, frenetic battles in closed areas, different enemies with different weak points, upgradeable weapons, exploration... The general gameplay is more Metroid Prime than Doom 2016 and it adds the classic Doom elements on top of that. It's a great game and very intense. Actually, the battle areas are fun because there is a lot of strategy involved, more than in the Metroid Prime series or any other Doom. You need to know very well your weapons. Doom Eternal is an evolution of Doom.
@BlueOcean The perpetual cynicism has charm I can relate to
It's weird, I remember when every game was an fps and the next fps was always the big hyped game. Now fps is kind of a niche genre that the media doesn't care about. Media generally expects a "top tier" game is linear and narrative, focused on telling a story. Honestly I think it's games media that changed more than anything else. Back in the day games media was just games fans that got into it. Once it became big business, traditional media companies started buying it. They brought in journalism school types. I think I'd rather do lunch at a cannibalism convention then your average journalism school type. The result is a mix of reviewing games and films, and often just rewarding the popularity of a game
Though I think Halo will be wildly popular, but will miss out on the bonus points that let it review on emotion rather than picking apart gameplay.
Guaranteed if it were announced as the last Halo and the end of the revered franchise it would pick up 10 emotion points in reviews universally.
@BlueOcean Well if you were to visit the Halo Waypoint forums or the Halo subreddit you'd get the impression that Halo Infinite is the worst game ever.
I prefer the review scale that ditches scores such that the actual review itself is considered the important part but if I had to give a score to Infinite based on what I've played so far (of course just the multiplayer for awhile), I'd probably give it around 85.
When I mentioned I thought the metacritic score would be either 70-79 or 80-89, it's that the range I think it would be in covers both, namely 78-85. I think it'll all come down to how much the reviewers value multiplayer character customization and whether the campaign suffers from "Ubisoft open world" problems.
@Grumblevolcano So you decided to discount 15 points to Halo Infinite Multiplayer because there is cosmetical DLC.
@NEStalgia That's the sad thing about reviews these days, any game (AAA or AA) is rated very high even if they world is empty and the gameplay rough if it's tells a story you could watch on Netflix. That alone deserve the "game of the year" award.
@BlueOcean 3 for the monetization, 6 for the desync problem and 6 for the lack of modes and maps.
The synchronisation problems are expected in a beta. The modes and maps will be added dynamically because Halo Infinite is a game as service. This is the beta of the first season. The game has not even been released.
@BlueOcean There won't be an update to Infinite until December 8th so reviewers will be using the current multiplayer build for their reviews. Naturally the standard review structure of reviewing a game for launch and then not updating it in the future means live service games will always get the shortest straw in the sense that post-launch improvement is not recognized.
Like if you wanted to use reviews to figure out if Fallout 76 was worth playing, most of the reviews will be about the launch version in 2018. Meaning in a sense the most accurate review of Fallout 76 you could see is downloading the game yourself for no extra cost if you have Game Pass.
I agree about preferring reviews that ditch scores. Back when I was a critic I poured rediculous time writing detailed descriptions and a look at who would and wouldn't like what In the game, so you'd read the review and get a sense of if a game was for you. Several reviews, I got emails from the devs thanking me for the detailed, balanced look that they got nowhere else. Not indies, major studios. One was from a Microsoft studio, pre Phil, pre Xbox even, basically correcting my benefit of the doubt and telling me that basically Microsoft effed up their studio and forced them to do it badly.
But what did metrics show? Few ever read any of it they just clicked to the score, then complained about it... We didn't do metacritic. The whole thing was a disgrace from day one. It was becoming clear you had to be on metacritic to be relevant, but It was always a manipulated dump heap that we watched ruin the review business in real-time.
@BlueOcean Technically being GaaS drops 10 points right there. It's just not a winning formula for the current reviewer tends. The publishers don't care they'll laugh all the way to the mtx bank, but for the metacritic score it'll definitely hurt it, fair or not.
Then again acnh not perfect scores and half the game was missing for 18 months. Incomplete is fine if it's got enough furries? 馃
My prediction was 90, it's 87 this far (early days).
@NEStalgia Considering the harsh reviews that incomplete games that became great games eventually got at launch, e.g., Sea of Thieves or State of Decay 2, Animal Crossing New Horizons getting 90 at launch is a joke but reviews are a joke these days. Every Mario and Zelda game gets a similar 99 score: Skyward Sword, Breath of the Wild, Super Mario 3D World, Super Mario Odyssey. As a long-time Mario and Zelda fan I wonder how can all the games get the same score. Every Sony game ticks the check boxes of adventure, linear, cinematic and simple gameplay and gets 95+. An indie game with a controversial story and no gameplay will be ranked higher than Doom Eternal. Reviews with scores would be fine if all genres and publishers were given the same credit but since they depend on the genre and publisher, they are utterly unfair. Nintendo and Sony will always win the scores and those affect sales to some degree.
@BlueOcean I still find it abhorrent that indies at mixed price points are reviewed alongside AAA games. It's not totally fair to have different groups for different budget products, but at the same time, price matters in a review and an objective score isn't possible, it's a different scale. it used to be indies were universally hurt by this. They weren't called "indies" back then, they were "budget titles." And they were always vastly inferior to their big studio counterparts in most regards, so they had lower scores, But they were half the price. Surely comparing them as the same product wasn't fair. Then someone got the slick marketing idea to call budget titles "indies" and channel garage rock band emotions into it. They're no longer cheap video games on a lower tier....now they're underground and sticking it to the man. It's raw passion, maaan. Not like those sellouts with major labels. Now suddenly indie is revered, it's edgy, it's anti-establishment (insert anrchy.gif.) Now suddenly indies get boosted scores despite playing in a different price pool, you can now see the effort and talent that though not fully realized by having a budget of $100 and a worn out pair of shoes, you can see what COULD have been with a $90M budget, so we'll give them the full score as though they did that, and a few extra points because we have to support the underdogs and fight the fight against the man, maan.
It works for movies, because box office price is one price across the board (theater pending), so everything is a comparison against equals. If you were to rate most indies as $70 games they would NOT fare favorably against big AAA platform titles. There really needs to be a different criteria for measuring games against different price points and categories. I don't believe in the whole "gatekeeping" idea that indies are just games too. They're not, and they're not priced the same, and that's ok. They should be treated for what they are, not thrown into one amorphous "games" box. But that's precisely what Metacritic tries to do by nature.
@NEStalgia I agree. For example, I tried A Night in the Woods (88/100) and I didn't like the story or "gameplay", so stopped playing. I tried Haven (78/100) but I didn't like the gameplay nor the world, so I stopped playing. I tried Sable (71/100) but stopped playing after a short while. Some reviewers make you believe that indie games are the games of the year. Excuse me? Well, one in a long while, of course but so many, so good, so well-reviewed, so often? Meanwhile, Ubisoft's massive games (Assassin's Creed Valhalla, Immortals Fenys Rising) that are better than Nintendo's games these days get the same scores as questionable "indie" games.
Reviewers rank games according to:
路 publisher/title
路 genre
路 story (controversial gets extra points)
And ignore the most important aspects:
路 gameplay (I mean, they are games!)
路 graphics
路 sound/music
@BlueOcean It's unfortunately very true. More importantly they're prone to pick apart valid design problems of a game that stands on its design, but ignore glaring design problems of a game that stands on it's story and presentation. It goes back to a story/presentation focused game gets a review score based on emotion while a design driven game gets a review score based on analysis, more times than not. A nostalgic game (including anything Nintendo) gets an immediate emotion score. Maybe Halo is included in that this time. An indie gets sympathy points. There's just no real standard by which things are reviewed even by the same reviewer. Or, where an outlet does separate, say, indie vs AAA games, Metacritic doesn't, pooling it all into one giant blob.
@NEStalgia It's really a shame. Good point about emotion and sympathy points. That would explain many things. Did you know that reviewers got a letter from Nintendo in order to be emotional about Breath of the Wild?
Forums
Topic: Uhh guys, my series x just died
Posts 161 to 180 of 240
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.