VlaudTheImpaler
tl;dr
lol, I'm just gonna repost this here,
Plenty of AAA games in that list.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Halo 5 Review Thread
- Thread starter Twin Tails
- Start date
lol, I'm just gonna repost this here,
Plenty of AAA games in that list.
I know your kidding but metacritic really doesn't matter in the grand scheme. Advanced warfare was at like 82 and still was one of the best sellers last year. And I don't wanna get started on Battlefront which will be coming out soon I think that's gonna get 7-8's across the boards but still will sell boatloads
Product sales and quality don't exactly overlap.
Destiny has a 76 metacritic and is doing very well it seems.
Astral Dog
Member
Im not sure if this is a joke.
Didnt HALO 4 recieved about the same? what about Call of Duty or Destiny?
If an 85 is a death sentence, there's about a dozen games tops you must have played this generation.
Edit: Wait, I just realized this is probably sarcasm.
Pathfinder
Member
Yup, it is.
enigmatic_alex44
Whenever a game uses "middleware," I expect mediocrity. Just see how poor TLOU looks.
The only game that even comes close to AAA on your list is ODST, and even then it was a smaller side story for Halo. You tried.
I've bolded my favorite games off of your list:
Sunset Overdrive: 81
Halo ODST: 83
Dying Light: 74 O_O
Alien Isolation: 78
Alan Wake: 83
Wolfenstein The New Order: 81
Diablo 3: 86
Darksiders I and II: 83
Borderlands: 84
Viva Pinata: 84
The Last Remnant: 66
Dynasty Warriors 6: 60
F.E.A.R.: 85
Condemned: 81
Lost Odyssey: 78
Beautiful Katamari: 73
Enchanted Arms: 69
3 of my favorites got bad scores, but they aren't AAA and weren't expected to sell.
Okay? Destiny is garbage and deserving of the score.
One thing is for sure, we'll read many times "I will wait for the pc/ps4 version" regardless of the scores.
Hockeymac18
Member
Kssio_Aug
Member
I don't know how people will take that post of mine, but that's something I believe its true...
I totally believe multiplatform games are reviewed differently than exclusive games to some reviewers out there. The bias in exclusive titles is something very real in my point of view. I'm not saying that's an exclusive thing for Microsoft or Halo though, it exsits everywhere. But that happens specially in those most anticipated games, and in that case Halo 5 had to deal with two problems: a) some people still can't accept 343, b) and Xbox One is kind of the black sheep of this generation.
The gaming industry is very passionate overall. And that definitely affects people point of view. Multiplatform games are positioned in a much more neutral place.
That's partially the reason why I don't like scores. First they will never measure with precision a quality of a game, and second because it creates very unecessary and unfair score comparison. I much prefer the way Kotaku and Eurogamer do it. It kind of forces you to read it, at least the overall conclusion.
If you want to understand a reviewer point of view you can't just look at the score, you need to read it. And with that score system being so "overvalued" people usually just look at it and simply doesnt care about reading reviewers point of views.
I totally believe multiplatform games are reviewed differently than exclusive games to some reviewers out there. The bias in exclusive titles is something very real in my point of view. I'm not saying that's an exclusive thing for Microsoft or Halo though, it exsits everywhere. But that happens specially in those most anticipated games, and in that case Halo 5 had to deal with two problems: a) some people still can't accept 343, b) and Xbox One is kind of the black sheep of this generation.
The gaming industry is very passionate overall. And that definitely affects people point of view. Multiplatform games are positioned in a much more neutral place.
That's partially the reason why I don't like scores. First they will never measure with precision a quality of a game, and second because it creates very unecessary and unfair score comparison. I much prefer the way Kotaku and Eurogamer do it. It kind of forces you to read it, at least the overall conclusion.
If you want to understand a reviewer point of view you can't just look at the score, you need to read it. And with that score system being so "overvalued" people usually just look at it and simply doesnt care about reading reviewers point of views.
ebullientprism
Member
Man the TR thread will be fantastic. If it reviews well, a ton of salty "Day 1 on the PC/PS4 posts". If it reviews poorly a lot of gleeful posts.
...yeah, there's zero evidence of any of this in any of the dozens of reviews I've read.
It's like the next NPD thread, there will be no avoiding the mess. No matter which scenario, we all lose. I think I'm staying away from that particular review thread
I don't see how the "Day 1 on platform X" in particular is salty, though. If anything, the person is being pretty objective about being excited about a game regardless of having to play it later! Maybe an unnecessary comment, though, but so many people do that already. Tons of threads already have "will pick up on (insert platform here) for (insert reasons here)" for no particularly good reason.
Ryouji Gunblade
Member
Everyone will have a different opinion, depending on what you're looking for.
I'm looking for something that doesn't have cringe moments or egghead dialogue. I'm looking for solid weapon balance.
A point system is insignificant, to me at least.
I'm looking for something that doesn't have cringe moments or egghead dialogue. I'm looking for solid weapon balance.
A point system is insignificant, to me at least.
The Antitype
Banned
Yes it will. I dont know if it will get 50+ pages in less than 24h like this one, but it will be fantastic.
Inferno313
Banned
LOL @ Diablo not being AAA.
Dash_Riprock
Member
I am seriously considering skipping class and/or work for that day.
The scores are harmless by themselves. They're just a quick representation of a group of different views. The problem is when people start trying to make them mean more than that. The difference between an 85 and a 90 may be significant for an individual (as we have a tendency to round things up/down to compartmentalise them), but when it's a aggregate having a review or two that causes it to break through the barrier isn't the same thing... but people tend to act like it is. It's especially confusing when talking about weighted averages, as it will often depend on who rates it higher or lower, and not just how many people.
digitalrelic
Banned
Diablo III wasn't anywhere near AAA when it launched. Patches, over time, turned that game from decent to excellent. Hence why the Ultimate Evil Edition has a 90 MC:
http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-4/diablo-iii-ultimate-evil-edition
ROUGE_BLOCK
Member
I'm sorry but this is fucking stupid. Are we really calling it's a death sentence to a game that has an 85 after what over 100 reviews? Also if one game was your precedent for buying a console you should really rethink your buying strategies imo.
Cavaliersfan767
Banned
Halo should never be compared to COD. Halo is Microsoft's flagship series and not released yearly, anything below exceptional is a disappointment. If your comparing the two then that shows how far halo has fallen.
That's not what AAA means
Newtype-001
Member
Man some of you guys fall for such obvious bait.
justsomeguy
Member
I just hope the mods are all over that shit when/if it happens.
Bitch Pudding
Member
brickarts295
Member
So thus this mean Halo 5 is out of the GOTY race?
We got:
MGS V
Bloodborne
Witcher 3
(Most Likely) Fallout 4
(add episodic, Indie or underrated game here) or Arkham Knight
We got:
MGS V
Bloodborne
Witcher 3
(Most Likely) Fallout 4
(add episodic, Indie or underrated game here) or Arkham Knight
RedAssedApe
Banned
dying light with the 74...da faq. where was the outrage over that one?
bananafactory
Banned
I do not think AK will win many GOTY awards, despite having a high MC rating
RichiRamjag
Member
Just shocked that so many care about review scores, good or bad. I mean, I use them as a tool to assist in my decision amongst other criteria, but mainly as a way to gauge general sentiment rather than nitpick about 85 vs 90. Both are genuinely good scores and it's disgusting to see people putting the game down about it as well as feel the need to defend the game and attack the reviewers because they felt it was too low.
Baroquemantic
Member
These review threads are always such utter embarrassments, and this one continues the tradition. What's the point of the "I can't wait for 'other platform's game' review thread" outside of being a sad attempt to start shit and/or incite even more fanboyism than what is already on display. It's like people hope for games to be bad or review poorly, which in my opinion, is incredibly idiotic. And this goes for PlayStation, Xbox, and Nintendo related threads. I'm honestly surprised this thread hasn't been locked, with a new one made in its place.
Sure, that's how we see it... but that mostly works for a single person reviewing... how valid is that when you're talking about how many people are rating it "good" versus "amazing"? If 50 people rate it exactly 9 (they all think it's amazing) and then 3 people rate it 8 (they think it's good), then the average becomes "good" rather than "amazing".
I'm not sure if I'm doing a good job getting my point across here tbh.
You shouldn't be surprised. Remember where you are.
Kssio_Aug
Member
Exactly. But also its because people make them mean more than just a score for that individual perception that Metascore is capable of generating so many reactions, as we can see here. It floods the internet forums every time a big release is launched.
It is just very unfair to take an overall score of, lets say 84 (Halo 5), and at the same time to say it is worse than Halo 4 (87) or Metal Gear Solid 5 (95). All of them have high scores, but the difference is enough to make some people mind. And if you take the reviews and read it you see that most certainly that's not true.
A score system will never be accurate. If I try to evaluate all of the games I played with a score from 1 to 10 I will find it already very difficult to do justice to them. So take different people scores and opinions, with their different senses, emotions, a natural bias, or whatever and take a single number out of it, and that's probably just one of the most inaccurate ways to evaluate a product. Be it a game, a movie or a music.
AAA refers more to the budget and the size of the developer and not the quality of the game.
I've only read a couple of pages, but the salt is there. Someones opinion about a game you're interested in shouldn't waver your desire to play, unless the game is completely broken. Opinions are just that. Just because I've had more fun playing One Finger Death Punch than Uncharted 3 doesn't mean everyone will share that opinion.
Bitch Pudding
Member
Nah, you just didn't got that reference. Halo 5 is still great game. But I asume that the overall metacritics score is not as good as some people thought it could be, and not as bad as other people hoped it would be. With 85, Halo 5 is stucked in the middle between mission accomplished and "meh".
Just sit back my good man and enjoy the read. This thread has kept me occupied and laughing my arse off all day. They are embarassing but yet incredibly entertaining.
It's almost like some people in review threads get so upset they probably spend some of their time cry wanking into a tin because their favourite game didn't get above 90 on metacritic.
dying light with the 74...da faq. where was the outrage over that one?
Barely even deserves that.
It's been a really long time since Halo (or any AAA shooter sequel) was a contender.
Expect MGSV, The Witcher 3, Mario Maker, Bloodborne, and Fallout 4 to be the biggest names during GOTY talks. Undertale, Splatoon, and Ori should get some nice mentions as well.
People care more about how a game stands out instead of actually playing and enjoying the game.
Like the gaming equivalent of overcompensating.
Yea, I mean.. sure, you can draw some conclusions from score comparisons. I'd be pretty confident that most people in general enjoyed Final Fantasy VII more than Enchanted Arms (heh), but there's an awful lot of variables that can cause micro-adjustments to a metacritic score... else we wouldn't have to keep watching as scores continue to come in, because you never know when that on 5/10 by a highly weighed outlet may come through.
In regards to comparisons with past entries, MCC as an entire package scored lower than Halo 4 alone. Would Halo 4 get an 87 if released in exactly the same form today? Doubtful. Would CE get a 97? Fuck no (yes, I'm confident enough to treat this one as a fact). A lower score years later doesn't mean the game is definitely worse (though it may still be). There's no science to scoring 90+ amongst a bunch of complete individuals.
Ah ok. Yea any reference you were going for flew straight by me.
Diprosalic
Banned
nothing wrong with waiting for the better version.
Incendiary
Banned
I don't think anything in the U4 review thread will top the 8/10 meltdown of U3. At least I'm hoping nothing will because that is still the craziest review thread I've ever seen.
