Read several review's, specially the IGN/GameSpot outliers, and I can see a very clear pattern. The shortcomings the IGN reviewer mentions are indeed somewhat reflected in most other reviews, including some/most of the 10/10 full of praise ones. It's just that it seems that this issues aggravated the IGN guy more than the other reviewers , which actually makes it a VERY GOOD review. IGN guy gives a very honest and clear take on why the aggravating issues affected his gameplay, while at the same time expressing true awe and amazement for the things the game does right. One very good thing too is that IGN goes out of it way to make the review spoiler free, which is more to say than.....
The GameSpot review. Man, this GS guy comes through as someone who decided to dislike the game from the get go. There is this pedantic, "holier than thou" tone all over the review, as if the reviewer thinks HE could have made a better game than Bethesda did. You can literally perceive this from the very first lines/paragraphs of it, and it doubles down as you continue t9 read. But THE MOST EGREGIOUS ASPECT OF THE GAMESPOT REVIEW IS THAT IS NOT SPOILER FREE!!!! Man , how I wish I wouldn't have read it... there's a couple of things there that didn't really need to be mentioned for any other reason than to negatively affect the gameplay experience of the reader. And the worst part is that the review itself doesn't warn you about this.
DO YOURSELF A FAVOR, DO NOT READ THE GS REVIEW IF U WANT TO STAY SPOILER FREE. Also, it is very evidently written full of bile and condescension towards the game creators. If you want an honest take of the negatives of the game, read IGN's ... is it miles and leaps beyond GameSpot in terms of honesty, you can truly feel how the guy REALLY wanted the game to be better but laments that those issues are there preventing it from being what it could have been.
Comments 1
Re: Roundup: Here's What The Critics Think Of Starfield So Far
Read several review's, specially the IGN/GameSpot outliers, and I can see a very clear pattern. The shortcomings the IGN reviewer mentions are indeed somewhat reflected in most other reviews, including some/most of the 10/10 full of praise ones. It's just that it seems that this issues aggravated the IGN guy more than the other reviewers
, which actually makes it a VERY GOOD review. IGN guy gives a very honest and clear take on why
the aggravating issues affected his gameplay, while at the same time expressing true awe and amazement for the things the game does right. One very good thing too is that IGN goes out of it way to make the review spoiler free, which is more to say than.....
The GameSpot review. Man, this GS guy comes through as someone who decided to dislike the game from the get go. There is this pedantic, "holier than thou" tone all over the review, as if the reviewer thinks HE could have made a better game than Bethesda did. You can literally perceive this from the very first lines/paragraphs of it, and it doubles down as you continue t9 read. But THE MOST EGREGIOUS ASPECT OF THE GAMESPOT REVIEW IS THAT IS NOT SPOILER FREE!!!! Man , how I wish I wouldn't have read it... there's a couple of things there that didn't really need to be mentioned for any other reason than to negatively affect the gameplay experience of the reader. And the worst part is that the review itself doesn't warn you about this.
DO YOURSELF A FAVOR, DO NOT READ THE GS REVIEW IF U WANT TO STAY SPOILER FREE. Also, it is very evidently written full of bile and condescension towards the game creators. If you want an honest take of the negatives of the game, read IGN's ... is it miles and leaps beyond GameSpot in terms of honesty, you can truly feel how the guy REALLY wanted the game to be better but laments that those issues are there preventing it from being what it could have been.