Support NeoGAF

[Zen_Arcade]

Oh I love this game! Let me do Witcher 3:

General consensus:

Game has bugs (lots)
FPS issues on console (worse on PS4)
Graphically downgraded from reveal
Good side quests but relatively boring main scenario.

I just decribed a 7.8 game from someone else other than CDPR.

I mean, if your point is that the video game sites do a shitty job at reviewing a lot of hyped up triple a releases then you're kind of preaching to the choir. It's obvious that Bethesda isn't the only company who gets a pass for the issues their games have. But they're definitely one of them.

 

[bananafactory]

I'd actually like to know what it is people like so much about these games. I played Skyrim for about 80 hours according to steam, and in hindsight, I couldn't remember any of part of the game standing out and making the game worth the several dozen times the game crashed and burned. It wasn't so much "bad" aside from that, more just straight-up dull.

People like the exploration and gameplay.

If you don't, these games aren't for you

 

[ZangBa]

I like how people only think reviews they agree with are fair.

DSP is a tool though. I don't think his criticism is fair at all.

What does that even mean? I'm a reasonable person, so of course I'm going to expect reviews to point out flaws, and be more critical of games for it. This is the exact opposite of what's going on in regards to the performance right now with the mainstream reviews.

That and I don't always agree with him, but respect his reviews because they are in depth, and he has all the evidence on his channel to support his views.

 

[ReadingRambo]

I mean, if your point is that the video game sites do a shitty job at reviewing a lot of hyped up triple a releases then you're kind of preaching to the choir. It's obvious that Bethesda isn't the only company who gets a pass for the issues their games have. But they're definitely one of them.

I was just pointing out the absurdity of anyone defending scores by saying we just "don't get the logic". It's because there isn't any.

 

[old manatee]

I'M NOT SALTY; I'M JUST DISAPPOINTED.

 

[Interfectum]

I mean, if your point is that the video game sites do a shitty job at reviewing a lot of hyped up triple a releases then you're kind of preaching to the choir. It's obvious that Bethesda isn't the only company who gets a pass for the issues their games have. But they're definitely one of them.

Yet Witcher 3 might very well win GAF's GOTY or come very close. So were these "video game sites" wrong in the end?

 

[Odrion]

I may have to bust out this badboy for long sessions on PS4.

The poor PS4 controller is going to have a bad time. Alternatively I guess I could switch between my other charged ones, but it feels weird to switch controllers halfway through a session. Then the controller is cold. lol

Consider opening and replacing the battery with a better one. It's actually quite easy.

 

[Steel]

Its absurd how little technical issue seem to matter with reviewers.

I really dont get it.

I wouldn't want them to put undue weight on graphics(That being said, they occasionally do). On the other hand, not putting any weight on the writing is..... Yeah....

 

[DeaviL]

They did dun did it again.
Playing the game over 60hz still fucks it up.

My only fear validated.

 

[Mikey Jr.]

This thread deserves the glory of this gif

I love this fucking gif.

 

[Papacheeks]

I am talking interaction with the world. Fallout 4 has far more actions regarding environments and especially with the new modding/building systems.

Correct but like some reviewers have pointed out it ultimatley doesn't all mesh together. The building system from some reviews is nothing special nor add's anything meaningful, it's just kind of there to distract you.

Everything in the witcher 3 from gwent, to horse races, monster hunting, are all spun together, and fit together.

There's a sub story line involving a conspiracy over gwent. I havn't even dabbled in the card game and I've got 70 hours logged into the game.

The bar for what can be achieved for a cohesive world was set with witcher 3. Maybe it didn't set a record for graphics, but for how large it was you could fight underwater, sail a ship, ride your horse, fight from your horse, desemate villages.

Game to me has broken more ground than what I'm seeing from Fallout 4.

Just my opinion take it with huge amounts of salt.

 

[Dinjoralo]

People like the exploration and gameplay.

If you don't, these games aren't for you

I mean, I like 'gameplay' as much as the next guy...
If you mean the combat, that was pretty much trash in Skyrim. I will admit, the way the character in F4 seems to control in F4 seems a lot less janky than F3 and Skyrim, from the footage I've seen.

 

[D-VoN]

Reviews are mostly positive but I'm sure we all saw that coming, even with the bugs.

However, on this that I'm torn on is the soundtrack. I hear that they are reusing some of the previous soundtracks. I hope it's just them including them rather than reusing them.

 

[mjc]

This gif is backwards. Resolution is the same for both consoles, but the framerate is reportedly better on PS4 than Xbox One. If anything, the Xbox One side needs to stop abruptly.

 

[NotoriousPUG]

I'd actually like to know what it is people like so much about these games. I played Skyrim for about 80 hours according to steam, and in hindsight, I couldn't remember any of part of the game standing out and making the game worth the several dozen times the game crashed and burned. It wasn't so much "bad" aside from that, more just straight-up dull.

Well you played the worst one so that is probably part of the problem. That game is incredibly shallow.

 

[Matrix XII]

In this journey through the wasteland, you and that controller will become one. The others, though shiny, responsive, and clean will no longer be worthy. Souless husks they will now be to you and must be cast into the depths of oblivion as they do not even deserve what little pity your weary eyes would give them. Where some would see sticky triggers and deteriorating thumbsticks, I only see badges of honor and when it must be laid to rest, you will find out where the red fern grows.

Thank you for the wise words sir, I shall live by them. *salute*

 

[tanooki27]

all the big boys (gamespot, polygon, eurogamer, etc) are checking in with an enthusiastic thumbs up. worth some measure of the hype, it seems

 

[Jobbs]

A lot of the negative replies in this thread revolve around technical issues. Some reviews report that there are bugs or frame drops but they still loved the game -- And that, according to some in this thread, is not valid. You aren't allowed to love a game if it has any technical issues.

I am not a reviewer, I am not tasked with writing reviews for any publication, and I just generally have no agenda. One of my favorite games is Dragon's Dogma. This is completely honest; I just loved the game. If I had to write a review, I would be obligated to mention that the game had serious framerate issues. That didn't stop it from being one of my favorite games and I'd probably have given it something in the 9 range.

Is my opinion not valid? Is it not actually one of my favorite games because it had framerate problems?

 

[Zen_Arcade]

Yet Witcher 3 might very well win GAF's GOTY or come very close. So were these "video game sites" wrong in the end?

GOTY deliberations have the benefit of judging the game after these issues are fixed or otherwise dealt with with patches. We live in an age where a game can be improved, and deserves higher marks if the developer does so. I also don't know if anything bug wise in Witcher 3 is as bad as bugs I've seen and heard about in previous Bethesda games.

Day one reviews, a system that exists to make judgement for the consumer of which they should purchase something or not, do not. They should be judging on how the game functions the day it releases. Warts and all. This is why I'm in favor of sites updating review scores if they have the ability to, and if there are drastic changes made within a game. This is a medium where the product can constantly evolve, and reviews should do their best to keep up with that evolution, because the entire purpose of reviews is to inform the consumer.

 

[DLaicH]

I'd actually like to know what it is people like so much about these games. I played Skyrim for about 80 hours according to steam, and in hindsight, I couldn't remember any of part of the game standing out and making the game worth the several dozen times the game crashed and burned. It wasn't so much "bad" aside from that, more just straight-up dull.

I've never put more than about 10 hours into a Bethesda game, so I can't offer an answer from personal experience, but clearly there was something about Skyrim that you found compelling enough to put 80 hours into it.

 

[Sjefen]

Just saw the Gametrailers review, he makes it sound sooo good."It has its flaws but you cant stop playing"

 

[thebigmanjosh]

Echoing many of the same sentiments but here is my publication's review: http://seattlechinesetimes.com/2015/11/09/fallout-4-review/

 

[aspiegamer]

I welcome further discussion on exactly how much technical/graphic issues and bugs can or should impact reviews. Some games get a complete free pass (MCC, perhaps a bit here?), but others are absolutely hounded like AC:Unity. Would be interesting to get the views of some professional reviewers on where they draw the line. An actual meta should have and be treated with an extremely high margin of error in situations like this. So even less worthy a dick measurement.

The hell is open critic? Some gaffer made site?

Gamergate, but was pushed heavily on GAF when it launched. It's still the same. Takes review scores and throws them into some unknown proprietary formula with no detailed quality controls. No more or less stupid than Metacritic, except with a massive and undeserved self-righteousness.

 

[SpacePirate Ridley]

Im glad from what I reading in some reviews that they seem to have changed the comapnion system, and make it more than some lousy cargo mule. Giving them quests you need to fullfil to know more about them, etc...
Thats and incredible improvement, so hats off for that. I really hope they continue to expand that aspect in future games.

A lot of the negative replies in this thread revolve around technical issues. Some reviews report that there are bugs or frame drops but they still loved the game -- And that, according to some in this thread, is not valid. You aren't allowed to love a game if it has any technical issues.

I am not a reviewer, I am not tasked with writing reviews for any publication, and I just generally have no agenda. One of my favorite games is Dragon's Dogma. This is completely honest; I just loved the game. If I had to write a review, I would be obligated to mention that the game had serious framerate issues. That didn't stop it from being one of my favorite games and I'd probably have given it something in the 9 range.

Is my opinion not valid? Is it not actually one of my favorite games because it had framerate problems?

When technical issues affect gameplay and bugs that could brake your game and save, of course you need to take it into account.
I was really liking this last month playing skyrim for the first time, until I had a game braking bug that couldnt even be resolved with console tweaking, I have to use a 1 week old save and lost everything. I continued playing, becuase you are right, I was having a good time, but I can tell you that bug soured me a lot (and its not the only one, multiple random ctd, bugged comapanions, bugged quests etc...).
The problem is, we are not talking here about some fps counter that can get to 30 sometimes (some people will of course criticise that, but I have more leeway with those things), but game breaking bugs? bugs nearly on everything becuase that variable wasnt tested right?
Yes, its soemthing to lower a score. You can still say in your review you loved the game though. I would be lying to myself that if I say I was not liking skyrim even with the bugs I encountered.

 

[Horns]

I'd actually like to know what it is people like so much about these games. I played Skyrim for about 80 hours according to steam, and in hindsight, I couldn't remember any of part of the game standing out and making the game worth the several dozen times the game crashed and burned. It wasn't so much "bad" aside from that, more just straight-up dull.

It had to be pretty good if you put 80 hours into it. I usually can't put more than a few hours into a game I consider straight-up dull.

I'm not knocking you. Bethesda has a way of sucking you into their games.

 

[Beelzebufo]

Metascore is slowly going up

 

[Patrick Bateman]

If a reviewer felt a game was a 9 despite the issues, then I don't mind. However, I do think it is a disservice to not mention technical issues at all if they do arise. As long as they properly inform the reader of the issues, then they can score it however they feel. The content of the review is more important than the score to me.

I don't know if I remember it incorrectly, but I actually noticed reviewers mentioning technical issues only fairly recently.
I can't say that I read or heard it that much when the big games for PS3 got released. And those had technical issues, too.

 

[Matrix XII]

Metascore is slowly going up

Yes, back up to 90 now.

I expect it'll settle somewhere around 88 after all is said and done.

 

[big_erk]

GASP it's almost like bugs, while annoying, don't keep us from enjoying games.

All I know is some Fallout bugs are hilarious.

 

[loki 16]

I just saw the Giant Bomb quick look and I can't wait for tonight.

 

[Ullus]

Jeff Gerstmann talking about Fallout 4 in his car: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSOnEk1xgN0

 

[Dinjoralo]

It had to be pretty good if you put 80 hours into it. I usually can't put more than a few hours into a game I consider straight-up dull.

I'm not knocking you. Bethesda has a way of sucking you into their games.

I mean, I know that playtime is divided into three chunks. There was after I got it for Christmas, picking it up again several months later after getting bored with it, then doing that a year later after seeing a bunch of cool looking mods.

 

[bigwinnerx]

I welcome further discussion on exactly how much technical/graphic issues and bugs can or should impact reviews. Some games get a complete free pass (MCC, perhaps a bit here?), but others are absolutely hounded like AC:Unity. Would be interesting to get the views of some professional reviewers on where they draw the line. An actual meta should have and be treated with an extremely high margin of error in situations like this. So even less worthy a dick measurement.
Gamergate, but was pushed heavily on GAF when it launched. It's still the same. Takes review scores and throws them into some unknown proprietary formula with no detailed quality controls. No more or less stupid than Metacritic, except with a massive and undeserved self-righteousness.

I hadn't realized the GobblerGoober angle for that review site and now it all makes way more sense.

 

[Fjordson]

I just saw the Giant Bomb quick look and I can't wait for tonight.

Same. Watched it just now on my lunch break lol.

And the companion Jeff shows near the beginning is so dope, had a friend tell me about him also.

 

[Matrix XII]

If only I didn't have to work tomorrow.

IF ONLY.

Spoiler

Pulling an all nighter would break me.

 

[TimeEffect]

A lot of the negative replies in this thread revolve around technical issues. Some reviews report that there are bugs or frame drops but they still loved the game -- And that, according to some in this thread, is not valid. You aren't allowed to love a game if it has any technical issues.

I am not a reviewer, I am not tasked with writing reviews for any publication, and I just generally have no agenda. One of my favorite games is Dragon's Dogma. This is completely honest; I just loved the game. If I had to write a review, I would be obligated to mention that the game had serious framerate issues. That didn't stop it from being one of my favorite games and I'd probably have given it something in the 9 range.

Is my opinion not valid? Is it not actually one of my favorite games because it had framerate problems?

Just wait a week until people play the story and sidequests. I am sure we'll here some criticism for that too. Especially in light of Witcher 3

 

[IcyRhythms]

A lot of the negative replies in this thread revolve around technical issues. Some reviews report that there are bugs or frame drops but they still loved the game -- And that, according to some in this thread, is not valid. You aren't allowed to love a game if it has any technical issues.

I am not a reviewer, I am not tasked with writing reviews for any publication, and I just generally have no agenda. One of my favorite games is Dragon's Dogma. This is completely honest; I just loved the game. If I had to write a review, I would be obligated to mention that the game had serious framerate issues. That didn't stop it from being one of my favorite games and I'd probably have given it something in the 9 range.

Is my opinion not valid? Is it not actually one of my favorite games because it had framerate problems?

TLoU has some of the worst AI(among other problems)I've ever seen in game and the very high praise continues on GAF. I wonder how many of these people complaining about Fallout love that game or possibly think it's the greatest of all time? *shrugs*

As mentioned before, as long as the critics and you the gamer are having fun, they along with yourself will have little to say about some of the issues with a game.

 

[-MD-]

Jeff Gerstmann talking about Fallout 4 in his car: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSOnEk1xgN0

"There's an awesome game in Fallout 4 but it's probably not on PS4 or XB1"

Ouch.

 

[robotrock]

"There's an awesome game in Fallout 4 but it's probably not on PS4 or XB1"

Ouch.

THEY CAN'T KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH IT

 

[Fjordson]

"There's an awesome game in Fallout 4 but it's probably not on PS4 or XB1"

Ouch.

"Overall I really enjoyed it, but it's a shame that it doesn't perform better technically."

Wow. Console versions must be rough.

 

[Jwebster24]

"There's an awesome game in Fallout 4 but it's probably not on PS4 or XB1"

Ouch.

Oh dear.

I really hope it can be improved with a patch (or two).

 

[alexandros]

Jeff Gerstmann talking about Fallout 4 in his car: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSOnEk1xgN0

Man, he really rips on the performance of the console versions.

 

[Blimblim]

We are live streaming the PS4 version right now, in case you want to check it out live
http://www.gamersyde.com/livestream_en.html

 

[-MD-]

Man, he really rips on the performance of the console versions.

Yeah so far it's the majority of the video, he's really down on the performance on consoles.

 

[Kacho]

Man, he really rips on the performance of the console versions.

Yeah that was awesome and hilarious. He seemed to really enjoy the game otherwise.

 

[XenogearsX]

Jeff Gerstmann talking about Fallout 4 in his car: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSOnEk1xgN0

that was awful to listen to, not because of what he said, just the noises and the extended periods of him not talking and just hearing the road

 

[robotrock]

that was awful to listen to, not because of what he said, just the noises and the extended periods of him not talking and just hearing the road

It's not really a focused podcast or anything. It's a man driving to work in his car and he sometimes talks to himself.

 

[Majukun]

read only 2 reviews.. sounds like fallout 3 with a better story and world (but not as good as new vegas) but with a way too vague dialogue system.

 

[old manatee]

"There's an awesome game in Fallout 4 but it's probably not on PS4 or XB1"

Ouch.

SOUNDS LIKE A 9.

 

[-MD-]