Uncharted 4 - A Thief's |Reviews Thread| Nateness Awaits

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yep, he hasn't ever met a real blond.

Depends on the blonde and the brunette.

Blonde
Angela_Merkel_1.jpg

Brunette

Which one would you prefer? ;)
/s

That being said, Chloe is awful and Elena is amazing. How is this even an argument.

The series is incredibly consistent - 88 -> 96 -> 92 -> 94. The only other series in recent years I can think of that have been consistently is:
The Souls games - 89 -> 89 -> 91 -> 92 -> 89
GTA immediately came to mind though I was thinking from recent times and as GTA III / Vice City / San Andreas came from more than 2 gens behind hence why I didn't mention them.

Rockstar is INCREDIBLY consistent though.

Not that MC means what some people think, but there are other teams that have been pretty consistent, and for over two decades, not just recently.

Nintendo:

Zelda - 95->99->95->96->95->93->91
Mario - 92->91->94->92->97->97->90->93
Metroid - 92->97->92->90->91
Smash - 92->93->92
Mario Kart is pretty good too - 93->83->87->91->82->85->88(87+90 DLC packs) and so is Fire Emblem.

Valve (HL1 96, HL2 96, EP1 87, EP2 90, CSS 88, Portal 90, Portal 2 95, DOTA 2 90), Blizzard (WC3 92+88 expansion, WoW 93 and 90+ expansions, Hearthstone 88, SC 88->93->86->88) and Bioware (BG 91, BG2 95, KotOR 94, JE 89, ME 91, ME2 96, ME3 93) are pretty consistent too.
 
It's not from who have like 150 ms input lag in last few games
But they have other issues? Games are getting more and more complex, so i'm not sure that anyone are able to make everything flawless.

Anyway, both developers make great game that a lot of people appreciate :) Personally i've enjoyed their games a lot, never had any real problems with either framerate or input lag.
 
ba2b0a562fafc8cbd22b40ed728c8197.png


Holy shit man, people can be so rabid on Twitter. Glad Amy shut him down quick. For reference on what that piece of shit is loosely referring to:

7da28a44a917c47f2c0a765fc8c861fa.png
 
What's with this TeamChloe/TeamElena bobbins infesting the thread all of a sudden? Get that waifu wars bullshit outta here.

everybody knows that TeamChase is the right answer
 
Hats off to Amy, amazing to hear such kind words towards Neil and Naughty Dog after a potentially bad divorce is lovely to see.

Not that MC means what some people think, but there are other teams that have been pretty consistent, and for over two decades, not just recently.

Nintendo:

Zelda - 95->99->95->96->95->93->91
Mario - 92->91->94->92->97->97->90->93
Metroid - 92->97->92->90->91
Smash - 92->93->92
Mario Kart is pretty good too - 93->83->87->91->82->85->88(87+90 DLC packs) and so is Fire Emblem.

Valve (HL1 96, HL2 96, EP1 87, EP2 90, CSS 88, Portal 90, Portal 2 95, DOTA 2 90), Blizzard (WC3 92+88 expansion, WoW 93 and 90+ expansions, Hearthstone 88, SC 88->93->86->88) and Bioware (BG 91, BG2 95, KotOR 94, JE 89, ME 91, ME2 96, ME3 93) are pretty consistent too.

Yeah - the Nintendo series you mentioned are great. You missed a couple of Zeldas that drop it down though - Spirit Tracks (87) and the most recent Zelda game Triforce Heroes, a 73. Also, the last Metroid game that came out is at 79 (Other M) and I expect the latest one hitting soon could be a record low for the series. Fire Emblem, Smash and Mario Kart though - so consistently high all the time and I expect the same from the NX iterations.

What saddens me on that list of Nintendo games is their lack of proper Metroid games. It's been 12 years since the last 2D Metroid, 9 years since the last first person Metroid and 6 years since the last Metroid game in general I believe. Very sad.

Bioware is fantastic as well - as an ME fan I hope for great things with Andromeda and I look forward to trying out my first Dragon Age game in Inquisition. As for Valve, happy for their success but the Valve I love and care about died: Other than Portal 2, they have made nothing remotely interesting to me in the last 7 years. Ah, the glory days of Half Life 2 are long gone :(
 
Should be able to get a copy tomorrow from my local game store in Dubai.

Just to check, the game isn't region locked online is it?
 
My friend told me that with all the stolen copies in the UK, you can get banned for playing it early. He was probably just fucking with me. I'll risk it.

If you do, email Sony all the confirmations of purchase and point them in the direction of the company you bought it from. It's their fault not yours.
 
What's with this TeamChloe/TeamElena bobbins infesting the thread all of a sudden? Get that waifu wars bullshit outta here.

everybody knows that TeamChase is the right answer
Well, I was thinking about making a thread dedicated to waifus, but it would probably be frowned upon here, so I decided to start a #TeamElena vs #TeamChloe debacle. :P

Yes, I don't have a girlfriend in real life.
 
Review Scores are dumb. Aggregate sites like Metacritic are dumb but unavoidable. It's so lame.

Review scores and aggregating them are not dumb but actually a quite useful tool in evaluating games to make purchasing decisions.

The problem in these threads is that mostly that's not how the scores are used or discussed. Here, people (a) are already huge fans and will mostly get the game no matter what; (b) pay attention to and dissect things that are statistically insignificant, such as difference between 93 and 95, or the reasoning for a single review score. In these threads, scores are treated like a little sport and, for some, as fanboy fodder too. There's nothing necessarily horribly wrong with that -- as long as people are self-aware and keep that in perspective.

Metacritic is quite useful. It's a very nice pragmatic guide to what games one should buy and in what order. It's not perfect, it's not godly, and doesn't account for all tastes. However, all in all, a highly rated game will be enjoyed more by the average knowledgeable gamer than will a low-rated game. This principle generally holds; thus the system does its job. Sure, there will be fuckup like GTA IV and Ass Creed III, but all in all it's pretty good.

"Review scores are dumb" is throwing the baby out with the bath water, a knee-jerk overreaction to unreasonable people not using the system the way it's meant to be used.

Some sites lamely went with "review scores are dumb" and stopped giving them out. Their reasoning for doing so don't really hold up, but since plenty of other sites remain, it's no huge loss. What amuses me is that some of those sites, such as Eurogamer, have since then adopted essentially a score system -- just not a numeric one, thus avoiding Metacritic. It's amusing, because it subtly confirms their own belief in the usefulness of scores, even if they don't like Metacritic itself, or how score scales are calibrated elsewhere (namely that game reviews average around 70 instead of 50).
 
This thread is now depressing me, I keep checking Amazon hoping they have changed their dispatch estimate. Nope dispatching Monday.
 
This thread is now depressing me, I keep checking Amazon hoping they have changed their dispatch estimate. Nope dispatching Monday.

same here but with shop to, they've even put up a note saying.

"We have just been advised by SONY that they have placed a shipping restriction on Uncharted 4 for all retailers, these will now be shipped on Monday the 9th. This should not affect delivery of the item for release but some delays can occur within the postal service on rare occasions."

why do i have to have my order with a retailer sticking to this restriction....
 
It's half twelve and the postman hasn't been yet. I don't think I'm playing this today.

106807-Grumpy-Cat-FUCK-gif-Imgur-TkEG.gif


I'll never forgive you Royal Mail, you shower of bastards you.
 
I just got to chapter 8 but need a break.

The trophies aren't up yet, i've unlocked some but they aren't in my list yet.

I guess that, MP and the dlc code in the box will all be unlocked on tuesday.
 
same here but with shop to, they've even put up a note saying.

"We have just been advised by SONY that they have placed a shipping restriction on Uncharted 4 for all retailers, these will now be shipped on Monday the 9th. This should not affect delivery of the item for release but some delays can occur within the postal service on rare occasions."

why do i have to have my order with a retailer sticking to this restriction....

On rare occasions? Are they using Royal Mail? Because my parcels are often delayed with them, and I don't live up a mountain.
 
I'm so conflicted. My copy has just turned up. But it's SO sunny outside (and this is England so it's like a miracle or something) I think I'm gonna have to wait until tonight. Beer and sunshine wins for now.
 
Review scores and aggregating them are not dumb but actually a quite useful tool in evaluating games to make purchasing decisions.

The problem in these threads is that mostly that's not how the scores are used or discussed. Here, people (a) are already huge fans and will mostly get the game no matter what; (b) pay attention to and dissect things that are statistically insignificant, such as difference between 93 and 95, or the reasoning for a single review score. In these threads, scores are treated like a little sport and, for some, as fanboy fodder too. There's nothing necessarily horribly wrong with that -- as long as people are self-aware and keep that in perspective.

Metacritic is quite useful. It's a very nice pragmatic guide to what games one should buy and in what order. It's not perfect, it's not godly, and doesn't account for all tastes. However, all in all, a highly rated game will be enjoyed more by the average knowledgeable gamer than will a low-rated game. This principle generally holds; thus the system does its job.

"Review scores are dumb" is throwing the baby out with the bath water, a knee-jerk overreaction to unreasonable people not using the system the way it's meant to be used.

Some sites lamely went with "review scores are dumb" and stopped giving them out. Their reasoning for doing so don't really hold up, but since plenty of other sites remain, it's no huge loss. What amuses me is that some of those sites, such as Eurogamer, have since then adopted essentially a score system -- just not a numeric one, thus avoiding Metacritic. It's amusing, because it subtly confirms their own belief in the usefulness of scores, even if they don't like Metacritic itself, or how score scales are calibrated elsewhere (namely that game reviews average around 70 instead of 50).

Thank you! I find the whole "review scores are useless/should be completely done away with" to be incredulous. It's such a reductive way to look at things.

The common rebuttal seems to be: "Everyone should try the game out for themselves." Which completely overlooks the predominant reason why reviews exist in the first place; Not everyone has time or means to do that.

Or the whole "metacritic (or reviews in general) is not an accurate representation of actual quality". When in actual fact, it's the closest thing we have to a tangible representation of a game's quality. More often than not, a game that receives critical acclaim is a game that's definitely worth playing. Middling/mediocre scores indicates a divisive game. And if the game is widely panned? Chances are the majority of people probably won't enjoy it much either.

"All reviews are subjective. Thus, this obviously reflects the uselessness of metacritic". This dicounts the fact that metacritic is an agglomeration of reviews and this argument tries to handwave the importance of the majority view. While it might not always be in line with an individual's personal preference, the majority view is extremely useful in determining the general consensus on a particular game. If someone doesn't think the game is that great/bad, then /they/ are the outlier.
 
Hats off to Amy, amazing to hear such kind words towards Neil and Naughty Dog after a potentially bad divorce is lovely to see.



Yeah - the Nintendo series you mentioned are great. You missed a couple of Zeldas that drop it down though - Spirit Tracks (87) and the most recent Zelda game Triforce Heroes, a 73. Also, the last Metroid game that came out is at 79 (Other M) and I expect the latest one hitting soon could be a record low for the series. Fire Emblem, Smash and Mario Kart though - so consistently high all the time and I expect the same from the NX iterations.

What saddens me on that list of Nintendo games is their lack of proper Metroid games. It's been 12 years since the last 2D Metroid, 9 years since the last first person Metroid and 6 years since the last Metroid game in general I believe. Very sad.

Bioware is fantastic as well - as an ME fan I hope for great things with Andromeda and I look forward to trying out my first Dragon Age game in Inquisition. As for Valve, happy for their success but the Valve I love and care about died: Other than Portal 2, they have made nothing remotely interesting to me in the last 7 years. Ah, the glory days of Half Life 2 are long gone :(

I only counted main chapters for those series (initially i was going to use 3D games only because the 2D ones were a bit tricky to find for some series, had to use the GBA remakes for ALTTP, SMW and SMW2YI), so TH and ST (and PH, which has 90 on MC and i didn't count that either) didn't fit because they are spin-offs of ALBW and WW. Forgot about Other M, but to be fair, it's not a game internally developed by Nintendo (Team Ninja made it).

Sadly, i have to agree about Valve. It's a shame that they're mostly focused on Steam and DOTA2, because when they make a new game it's usually very good (and i say this despite not liking Portal 2 that much, but i can still see its qualities).

Hopefully Bioware will deliver with Andromeda.


Thank you! I find the whole "review scores are useless/should be completely done away with" to be incredulous. It's such a reductive way to look at things.

The common rebuttal seems to be: "Everyone should try the game out for themselves." Which completely overlooks the predominant reason why reviews exist in the first place; Not everyone has time or means to do that.

Or the whole "metacritic (or reviews in general) is not an accurate representation of actual quality". When in actual fact, it's the closest thing we have to a tangible representation of a game's quality. More often than not, a game that receives critical acclaim is a game that's definitely worth playing. Middling/mediocre scores indicates a divisive game. And if the game is widely panned? Chances are the majority of people probably won't enjoy it much either.

"All reviews are subjective. Thus, this obviously reflects the uselessness of metacritic". This dicounts the fact that metacritic is an agglomeration of reviews and this argument tries to handwave the importance of the majority view. While it might not always be in line with an individual's personal preference, the majority view is extremely useful in determining the general consensus on a particular game. If someone doesn't think the game is that great/bad, then /they/ are the outlier.
I strongly disagree with this line of thinking, simply because reviews are made by gamers like us. They don't have a "degree in videogames" that sets their opinions apart from ours, and i actually believe that many people on forums have more experience or are able to judge games better than many reviewers. That's why i don't care about MC, but only about reviews from website i have reasons to trust, and those of friends who know their shit (and of course mine). An hypotetical GAFCritic for PS/Nintendo/Xbox/PC games would have the exact same weight as Metacritic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom