Support NeoGAF

[DeepEnigma]

Shows reviews are ireelevant and have been for years. It began once gaming magazines stopped having world exclusives (except GI) and started dying. Embargoes can die too. Letting reviewers publish less than one day before release is scummy and shows Bethesda didn't want people to see how the game really is (i.e. F3 with a coat of paint).

Pretty much. I said that from the very first showing of it. There is a reason we heard nothing about it until 6 months before it was released. If there were major changes, they would have talked about them much sooner, excited to share some details, IMO.

That clearly satisfies those who do not mind, but there are also those who want the annoying issues and disjoin decisions that plague their games to improve.

Review embargoes need to die for all games in general.

 

[patapuf]

Dropping embargoes will make reviews worse not better.

 

[Hasney]

Dropping embargoes will make reviews worse not better.

Yup, have people rushing to be first rather than knowing they have a deadline.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Dropping embargoes will make reviews worse not better.

Yup, have people rushing to be first rather than knowing they have a deadline.

Then that is their integrity they will have to deal with, and the others that want to be taken seriously will shine through the lesser quality ones. Just like any other journalism in the world not gaming.

 

[CecilRousso]

Shows reviews are ireelevant and have been for years. It began once gaming magazines stopped having world exclusives (except GI) and started dying. Embargoes can die too. Letting reviewers publish less than one day before release is scummy and shows Bethesda didn't want people to see how the game really is (i.e. F3 with a coat of paint).

That last comment is not really accurate, is it? Pretty much every review I have read discusses the difference between this and F3, and many of them makes exactly the comment that it very familiar to Fallout 3, and those who like it describes why they still rate it very high.

 

[TheDanger]

12 hours in and 0 technical issues on xbox one

"12 hours in and I have 0 perception of frame rate drops."

 

[patapuf]

Then that is their integrity they will have to deal with, and the others that want to be taken seriously will shine through the lesser quality ones. Just like any other journalism in the world not gaming.

No, with the way the internet works on something highly anticipated the most reliable way to get clicks is to be first. and clicks = money.

Go ask any journalist what happens when you post reviews a few days late because "integrity".

 

[c1m]

What's up with the Metacritic user "reviews" of Fallout 4? So many negative.

[IMG]http://imageshack.com/a/img905/9648/ZyuUaP.png[/IMG]

 

[Kenzodielocke]

Fallout 4 is less RPG than Fallout New Vegas. Don't really like that.

 

[Cpt Conifer]

Tried to find people's take on the Destructoid review but can't over the 20+ overnight pages. It sounds extremely reasonable to me.

Edit: Nevermind. This handy thing called the thread search function in the top right corner. So thus far it's just the usual accusations of clickbait and a few others stepping in to say "Whoa, don't forget 7.5 is good". What I find particularly interesting, among other things, is how he says it's in between Fallout 3 and NV, and having read the discussions of FO-GAF, I can believe it.

 

[constantstatic]

"12 hours in and I have 0 perception of frame rate drops."

Are you playing the Xbox one version? I have a copy coming In the mail from Amazon but I ended up going with PC. The games running good so far on my 660ti. The performance issue scared me maybe its not as bad as the gaf hive mind has us thinking.

I really want to open my Xbox one version to compare them.

 

[tuxfool]

Fallout 4 is less RPG than Fallout New Vegas. Don't really like that.

I don't see how this is a surprise.

 

[takriel]

Jeez the user reviews on metacritic, so sad!

 

[Ivory Samoan]

PS4 back to 90 on Metacritic - going to see-saw for a while I'd say.

After 10 hours I'm hooked, the only thing I had to get used to was the aiming, doesn't feel like there's any aim assist with controller on PC, if there is: it's very little (heard the same with console too though).

 

[Vitor711]

PS4 back to 90 on Metacritic - going to see-saw for a while I'd say.

After 10 hours I'm hooked, the only thing I had to get used to was the aiming, doesn't feel like there's any aim assist with controller on PC, if there is: it's very little (heard the same with console too though).

I mean, there's some real odd selective picking going on with Metacritic's list of reviews. I've seen a bunch of 7/10s from medium sized outlets that are just missing.

But then again, I'd like to see Bethesda get dinged more for the tech issues and combat so am secretly hoping for a score in the high 80s so that they might finally invest some money improving these things - their games sell like CRAZY, yet their team is still tiny. Not so impartial bias from me.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I mean, there's some real odd selective picking going on with Metacritic's list of reviews. I've seen a bunch of 7/10s from medium sized outlets that are just missing.

But then again, I'd like to see Bethesda get dinged more for the tech issues and combat so am secretly hoping for a score in the high 80s so that they might finally invest some money improving these things - their games sell like CRAZY, yet their team is still tiny. Not so impartial bias from me.

Definitely agree. Especially when it is a reoccurring trend.

 

[Jebusman]

I mean, there's some real odd selective picking going on with Metacritic's list of reviews. I've seen a bunch of 7/10s from medium sized outlets that are just missing.

But then again, I'd like to see Bethesda get dinged more for the tech issues and combat so am secretly hoping for a score in the high 80s so that they might finally invest some money improving these things - their games sell like CRAZY, yet their team is still tiny. Not so impartial bias from me.

Are they actually missing missing? Or just split between the different platforms.

And have those outlets had their reviews picked up by Metacritic before? I'm kind of curious.

 

[Dinjoralo]

I mean, there's some real odd selective picking going on with Metacritic's list of reviews. I've seen a bunch of 7/10s from medium sized outlets that are just missing.

But then again, I'd like to see Bethesda get dinged more for the tech issues and combat so am secretly hoping for a score in the high 80s so that they might finally invest some money improving these things - their games sell like CRAZY, yet their team is still tiny. Not so impartial bias from me.

How do reviews get put on a games metacritic page, anyway?

Also, why do people care so much about F4's metacritic score being below 90?

 

[Wagram]

Are they actually missing missing? Or just split between the different platforms.

And have those outlets had their reviews picked up by Metacritic before? I'm kind of curious.

Seems like they're being split between platforms, which is skewing the score to be higher than it should.

 

[usp84]

Seems like they're being split between platforms, which is skewing the score to be higher than it should.

Doesnt Opencritic aggregate all reviews regardless of platform? The score there is 88 now

 

[Shake Appeal]

Jeez the user reviews on metacritic, so sad!

Sad?

 

[Azzanadra]

Jeez the user reviews on metacritic, so sad!

How is it sad? With games like The Witcher 3, Bethesda no longer gets freebies on writing, graphics and performance issues just because their games are "big".

 

[DeepEnigma]

How do reviews get put on a games metacritic page, anyway?

Also, why do people care so much about F4's metacritic score being below 90?

Because it is one of the key factors forcing developers to change their repeated issues.

 

[Jebusman]

So does Metacritic actually list anywhere how they weight the sites differently, if at all? Or any insight into how they pick and choose with outlets?

Because their Xbox One and PS4 scores are actually pretty close to just the averages (Xbox is 91.39 versus 91 reported, PS4 is 89.2 versus 90 reported), only the PC one is off by more than a point (87.4 versus 89 reported), and it has the least reviews.

 

[Mr. Tibbs]

I mean, there's some real odd selective picking going on with Metacritic's list of reviews. I've seen a bunch of 7/10s from medium sized outlets that are just missing.

But then again, I'd like to see Bethesda get dinged more for the tech issues and combat so am secretly hoping for a score in the high 80s so that they might finally invest some money improving these things - their games sell like CRAZY, yet their team is still tiny. Not so impartial bias from me.

Bethesda put reviewers that consistently give them low scores on the shit list. For example, after giving Rage a 4/10 and Skyrim a 7/10, Bethesda refused to cooperate with Tom Chick and QuartertoThree. Pete Hines and co. believe in the 8-10 scale.

i don't have a problem with people finding flaws with the game. There's no planet on which The Evil Within is a 5.

 

[DarthWalden]

How is it sad? With games like The Witcher 3, Bethesda no longer gets freebies on writing, graphics and performance issues just because their games are "big".

The witcher 3 launched without performance Issues?

 

[super6646]

Bethesda put reviewers that consistently give them low scores on the shit list. For example, after giving Rage a 4/10 and Skyrim a 7/10, Bethesda refused to cooperate with Tom Chick and QuartertoThree. Pete Hines and co. believe in the 8-10 scale.

Shit list... that made my day. XD

 

[DeepEnigma]

The witcher 3 launched without performance Issues?

Of course it did... however their patching service was second to none, which earned lots of points with their gaming community. You will be lucky if Bethesda does 1/10th of that (if their patterns are anything to go by).

CDPR pretty much set the standard on patch support (by not only tweaking things the community wanted well after the game has launched, but also added free content to them).

I have yet to play The Witcher 3 as well, not sure if I will ever. But that was some good support.

 

[SEGAvangelist]

Bethesda put reviewers that consistently give them low scores on the shit list. For example, after giving Rage a 4/10 and Skyrim a 7/10, Bethesda refused to cooperate with Tom Chick and QuartertoThree. Pete Hines and co. believe in the 8-10 scale.

Well using the full 10 point scale just to be different does screw up overall metacritic scores. That's why I'm against it in general. Also... Tom Chick is pretty ridiculous with some of his scores.

 

[Azzanadra]

The witcher 3 launched without performance Issues?

True enough, but I think DeepEnigma nailed it. I would also like to add that as bad as TW3's issues were, no game has given me more trouble than Skyrim. I will give Fallout 4 a week before I truly begin to say that FO4 is worse, because right now I'm getting at 15-20 FPS on a PC that could max out TW3 at 30-60 Fps (Novigrad put quite the burden on my CPY, but my CPU is old anyways).

 

[DeepEnigma]

Well using the full 10 point scale just to be different does screw up overall metacritic scores. That's why I'm against it in general. Also... Tom Chick is pretty ridiculous with some of his scores.

I will also say reviewers who only use 7-10 out of a 10 point scale are just as ridiculous.

Makes people think 1-6 is shit, so they are scared to use them, when it is like, WTF are those numbers there for then? 5 out of ten is average on any spectrum. Math does not lie.

Yet in the gaming world, 7 is average... /sigh.

I will agree with that.... though these days the scores are either "10" or "0", so it might also be a balancing act, either way both of these attitudes ("OMG best game ever" or "fuck this,") are both toxic.

Yep yep.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

How is it sad? With games like The Witcher 3, Bethesda no longer gets freebies on writing, graphics and performance issues just because their games are "big".

I think it's sad because there are so many idiots just shitbombing the score with 0 and 1 scores because they feel insulted by the game's existence for one reason or another.

Happens with every high profile game, of course, but it's never not sad to see that there are people who behave like that out there.

 

[Azzanadra]

I think it's sad because there are so many idiots just shitbombing the score with 0 and 1 scores because they feel insulted by the game's existence for one reason or another.

Happens with every high profile game, of course, but it's never not sad to see that there are people who behave like that out there.

I will agree with that.... though these days the scores are either "10" or "0", so it might also be a balancing act, either way both of these attitudes ("OMG best game ever" or "fuck this,") are both toxic.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

I will agree with that.... though these days the scores are either "10" or "0", so it might also be a balancing act, either way both of these attitudes ("OMG best game ever" or "fuck this,") are both toxic.

Both extremes that are doing it simply for score manipulation purposes are equally stupid, I agree.

There are plenty of people posting legitimate impressions/scores, of course, and that will only increase as time goes on.

The only user reviews I really pay attention to these days (outside of forum impressions) are the ones posted on Steam, though. Shitheads flock to Metacritic like they do to YouTube comments since they know they can reach a bigger audience.

 

[Real Hero]

Fallout 4 is less RPG than Fallout New Vegas. Don't really like that.

Of course it is, along with bugs that shouldn't be a surprise

 

[eot]

Doesnt Opencritic aggregate all reviews regardless of platform? The score there is 88 now

Metacritic doesn't do a straight average though, they do a weighted one.

 

[Trace]

Fallout 4 is less RPG than Fallout New Vegas. Don't really like that.

There was no chance it was going to be more RPG. The more stats, min/maxing, and roleplaying required the less it will sell. Fallout 4 will probably double or triple FNV's sales.

 

[Denton]

I think it's sad because there are so many idiots just shitbombing the score with 0 and 1 scores because they feel insulted by the game's existence for one reason or another.

Happens with every high profile game, of course, but it's never not sad to see that there are people who behave like that out there.

How come Witcher 3 didn't suffer from shitbombing? It's a high profile game. Divinity same thing, user score on PC version is identical to critic score, also quite high profile.

 

[Anno]

How come Witcher 3 didn't suffer from shitbombing? It's a high profile game. Divinity same thing, user score on PC version is identical to critic score, also quite high profile.

I think D:OS was in the 6s at some point right after launch. Might just even out in time as people come by ready to post "real" reviews. Either way, anything that can be rated by people who don't own the thing seems pretty useless. I imagine half of NMA has already rated this a 0.

 

[bananafactory]

I think it's sad because there are so many idiots just shitbombing the score with 0 and 1 scores because they feel insulted by the game's existence for one reason or another.

Happens with every high profile game, of course, but it's never not sad to see that there are people who behave like that out there.

This happens to almost every major game release. The reviews are all 0s or 10s

 

[Mattenth]

Doesnt Opencritic aggregate all reviews regardless of platform? The score there is 88 now

Yes. You can filter to see per-platform reviews using the buttons in the top of the frame.

 

[tuxfool]

you guys are giving a lot of weight to user reviews for any game on metaritic. it is meant to be ignored.

Actually it can be useful to see longer term trends. Their value as a score only starts to be useful after a significant amount of time has passed.

Additionally, it can be useful as part of a greater sampling of various places like Steam Reviews.

 

[Yasae]

Wait until you have a few thousand user scores as opposed to a few hundred. There will likely still be a noticeable score gap. Why? Reviews have been obtuse.

Actually it can be useful to see longer term trends. Their value as a score only starts to be useful after a significant amount of time has passed.

Additionally, it can be useful as part of a greater sampling of various places like Steam Reviews.

Mind reading SOB.

 

[Afrocious]

I might get F4 when I see some sweet deals, but the fact Bethseda made it completely in house meant it wouldn't be in the same playing field as New Vegas.

 

[SURGEdude]

Bethesda put reviewers that consistently give them low scores on the shit list. For example, after giving Rage a 4/10 and Skyrim a 7/10, Bethesda refused to cooperate with Tom Chick and QuartertoThree. Pete Hines and co. believe in the 8-10 scale.

Uggg Pete Hines needs a filter.

 

[Messofanego]

Bethesda put reviewers that consistently give them low scores on the shit list. For example, after giving Rage a 4/10 and Skyrim a 7/10, Bethesda refused to cooperate with Tom Chick and QuartertoThree. Pete Hines and co. believe in the 8-10 scale.

Man, this makes me think less of Pete Hines. Not cool.

 

[tuxfool]

Man, this makes me think less of Pete Hines. Not cool.

People still have good opinions of that fellow?

 

[samn]

Man, this makes me think less of Pete Hines. Not cool.

This is the Pete Hines that insisted Skyrim on PS3 ran well.

 

[SEGAvangelist]

I will also say reviewers who only use 7-10 out of a 10 point scale are just as ridiculous.

Makes people think 1-6 is shit, so they are scared to use them, when it is like, WTF are those numbers there for then? 5 out of ten is average on any spectrum. Math does not lie.

Yet in the gaming world, 7 is average... /sigh.

It's an established standard, though. Might as well use 7-10 as a sort of 1-4 stars style system if most other publications are using it that way. Going against it for clicks is so annoying, IMO.

 

[Gurgelhals]

There was no chance it was going to be more RPG. The more stats, min/maxing, and roleplaying required the less it will sell. Fallout 4 will probably double or triple FNV's sales.

The real achievement here is that they even managed to make it less RPG than Fallout 3.