At this point, I don't know if this kind of comment is serious or not.
Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice - Review Thread
- Thread starter Savantcore
- Start date
Salty Rice
Member
There are already videos out since at least yesterday or even longer and also like i said he can still review like the 95% of the game he played even if he did not see the ending and go points down.
I would. In fact, if I was enjoying it and wanting a conclusion, I would hate what I enjoyed even more.
SMG
Member
They should have.
Calling out devs stupid and their decisions moronic is not something that I would call critique. Especially coming from person who is considering himself important content creator.
Doesn't change the fact that he wasn't able to finish the game due to the bug, and thus does not affect how it's broken for him.
But that's exactly what he did. You should actually read the review.
OrbitalBeard
Member
No, your book analogy just straight up doesn't work. It's not a valid comparison. Even the alternative comparison I gave wasn't that great, but at least it dealt with the same type of issue, a manufacturing one.
A digital file with a game-breaking bug embedded within is different from a book that has a manufacturing defect.
People reeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaalllly need to stop caring about Meta Critic averages.
That's what he did.
https://twitter.com/JimSterling/status/894846138368614401
Edit: seems he's taken the review down.
Jim Sterling said:
Edit: seems he's taken the review down.
Jim seems to have taken the review offline? The embedded video doesn't work and it's not on his YouTube channel.
Edit: Wow, dude. That's really, really big fuck up. To go ahead with thjs and then retracting it only minutes later...woof. Not a good look. Wondering what's going to happen to the MC entry now. Pretty sure they have a policy not to change scores once posted? Not sure.
Edit: Wow, dude. That's really, really big fuck up. To go ahead with thjs and then retracting it only minutes later...woof. Not a good look. Wondering what's going to happen to the MC entry now. Pretty sure they have a policy not to change scores once posted? Not sure.
The plot thickens.
So what will people say when even Jim realizes a 1/10 isn't reasonable?
SolicitorPirate
Member
This is why I hate reviews that focus on a numerical score - it eliminates all nuance. Jim's 1/10 is rubbish, but what else can you expect from a system that asks you to summarise an entire experience ranging from the artistic to mechanical in a fucking number?
Danjin44
The nicest person on this forum
I personally not planning to buy this game because already spend my money on getting DQ8 and I need to save my money for Evil Within 2 and .hack//G.U. Last Recoded.
But I would say this. I never did consider people like Jim and Angry Joe as real reviewers because they more interested selling the whole "angry internet guy" to u than give u an actual review. I don't give a shit about this whole MC, but when someone gives 1/10 score, its clear click bait.
Jim knows most people theses days really pay attention to scores. so when suddenly gives absurd score like this, people get curious to see why give such score or even people who don't agree with him will click to his video just to post about how crappy reviewer he is in the comment section.
But I would say this. I never did consider people like Jim and Angry Joe as real reviewers because they more interested selling the whole "angry internet guy" to u than give u an actual review. I don't give a shit about this whole MC, but when someone gives 1/10 score, its clear click bait.
Jim knows most people theses days really pay attention to scores. so when suddenly gives absurd score like this, people get curious to see why give such score or even people who don't agree with him will click to his video just to post about how crappy reviewer he is in the comment section.
Jim's score is really unfair, it might be a 1 in a million bug, he can't be so brutal because of such unfortunate case, he thinks the game is good, he do realize his opinion can lose a lot of money to the devs, be a little humane, how can you give all of their hard effort and the 8 hours you did enjoy up until that point a fucking 1/10?
This is insane imo, it's a a score that is given to games like Ride to Hell or Big Rigs, not an 8 hour of very good gameplay and a rare game breaking bug than no other reviewer got to experience.
It smells like attention seeking and provocation for me. Like WTF Jim??
This is insane imo, it's a a score that is given to games like Ride to Hell or Big Rigs, not an 8 hour of very good gameplay and a rare game breaking bug than no other reviewer got to experience.
It smells like attention seeking and provocation for me. Like WTF Jim??
xrnzaaas
Member
This is more of a matter of why you're playing the game. If it's only to enjoy the combat or the graphics then you're good. If you want to know the entire story and you're stripped of that (and apparently at the last moment) then you have the right to treat your entire playthrough up to that point as wasted time.
edit: to be clear, I'm not saying that this scenario should result in an instant 1/10 if you're reviewing the game, every professional reviewer should know about the existence of day1 patches and should try to contact the devs if something like this happens
Jawbreaker
Member
Interesting. Curious to see what conclusion he's come to.
Laughing Banana
Weeping Pickle
Most probably you are right.
A game designed with such a harsh penalty should be airtight--it seems like this is an oversight from Ninja Theory.
Serious Sam
Member
You are right, his book analogy wasn't that great. You can't patch books. But you can patch games and turn unplayable game into playable one without customer every having to leave their house or do anything at all, except wait for (usually) small patch file to download.
Salty Rice
Member
Such a shame about the bug sullying Jim's review. I watched the video and he seems to be enjoying the hell out of the game up until that point. Easily sounds like a 8/10 review.
Turns out it was an autosave bug after he accidentally missed a trigger earlier on in a section. Easily done I suppose so I can 100% understand his frustration and it is definitely a QA issue. I also don't think he'd have attacked the game with as much vitriol if he wasn't engrossed in it beforehand.
In fact when asked if he'd recommend the game he said:
"Players missing things are part of the game experience. I didn't create those autosaves and bizarre checkpoints. But as soon as they're sorted out, then yeah, I'd say pick this up."
Given the subject matter I think this is one I'll be picking up myself.
Probably a fair move. I don't blame him at all for the 1/10 score though. If the game stopped him completing it then in his eyes it's broken. Hopefully he's in touch with the developers and they can sort the issue so he can post an appropriate score based on his impressions up until, and beyond that point.
Like I said he seemed to be enjoying it until it f*cked up.
Turns out it was an autosave bug after he accidentally missed a trigger earlier on in a section. Easily done I suppose so I can 100% understand his frustration and it is definitely a QA issue. I also don't think he'd have attacked the game with as much vitriol if he wasn't engrossed in it beforehand.
In fact when asked if he'd recommend the game he said:
"Players missing things are part of the game experience. I didn't create those autosaves and bizarre checkpoints. But as soon as they're sorted out, then yeah, I'd say pick this up."
Given the subject matter I think this is one I'll be picking up myself.
Probably a fair move. I don't blame him at all for the 1/10 score though. If the game stopped him completing it then in his eyes it's broken. Hopefully he's in touch with the developers and they can sort the issue so he can post an appropriate score based on his impressions up until, and beyond that point.
Like I said he seemed to be enjoying it until it f*cked up.
0/10
Well at least Jim himself thinks his review wasnt maybe the best way handled.
But people here will still defend it anyway lol.
OrbitalBeard
Member
My guess is he's probably going to withhold a score for now. Which is fine. Very few have said the way he handled this is the only correct way to do so.
paperspace
Member
Last edited:
SomedayTheFire
Member
I would die laughing.
I will defend a reviewer giving a game any score they think it deserves. What's wrong with that?
Necro900
Member
We'll debate with the defense force of the defense force of the 1/10 obviously.
So he will either fix things up or, knowing his character, double down. We'll see I guess
Kenzodielocke
Banned
I always thought of review scores as how good or bad the time was with the game you played, and 1 would tell me it was really bad all around. And yeah, not a good look for Jim, unless he gives it a 0 now.
Jawbreaker
Member
That would be humorous, but I'm guessing he's going to remove the score from his review entirely. That's just as valid as his initial score, though it's obviously more measured in its approach.
Which is probably exactly what he should have done in the first place, but I digress.
It's his opinion and he can score it how he wants. That's been the case throughout the entire thread.
That would be amusing but he's most likely just going to change the review so that it has no score attached.
As they should. Reviewers should give the score they feel the game deserves or what's the point of reviewing the media in the first place.
KZXcellent
Member
I want this to happen so bad.
This kind of stuff is why I prefer reviews that go through a standard editorial process. Beyond Jim, I find too many solo media outlets/reviewers just do what they want without the normal journalistic process I appreciate.
OrbitalBeard
Member
So, with this knowledge, what do you think would be a fair review score TODAY?
In my view, he has three valid choices:
- Score it based on how the experience was for him when he played it
- Same as above, but update the score later if the issue is addressed by the developer
- Assign no score to the review, advise his audience to wait and see how the bug is handled, then assign a final score shortly. I personally wouldn't give the dev more than a few days to one week, but that would be a call for each reviewer to make.
I guess a fourth option would be to not publish a review at all, but if you're going to go this route, you've better be pretty transparent with your audience as to why that is. Make it very clear that you encountered a game-breaking bug.
I think all of the above options are perfectly reasonable and fair.
Necro900
Member
Same.
Still don't know the story behind him being on metacritic, though, where the majority does follow that process.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
I'm assuming the bug can be patched out? It's a shame really that even when it were to be patched, that score will remain like an anchor on an apparently decent game.
Maybe he should've held off on giving it a score, to see if it gets fixed?
Maybe he should've held off on giving it a score, to see if it gets fixed?
SolicitorPirate
Member
As much as I think Jim's score is reflective of why I don't think highly of him as a critic, I agree that he has every damn right to score the game whatever he believes it worth.
My chief beef is with our collective obsession over demanding scores in the first place. We get up in arms whenever someone says video games aren't art, but refuse to actually treat them like art ourselves
SomedayTheFire
Member
Honestly this thread is another reason I think the 1-10 review scale does not work. People can't use the full scale without fans and non fans going into a frenzy. What's the point using a ten point scale if using half of it is considered "unprofessional"?
GravityInsanity
Member
I would laugh my ass off if he did that.
Hentailover
Member
Yeah, I will. I am quite frankly disgusted by people claiming that reviewers should worry about developer MC bonuses. That's utterly absurd and is a literal downward slope that encourages publishers to implement even scummier contracts, with bigger ties to these things, to encourage reviewers being even "nicer" because "they don't want to make developers lose out on their paychecks".
They way we put each other down to empower and encourage exploitative practises is depressing.
SMG
Member
at the very least a log of save files. One save slot systems make no sense, it means you either make a perfect game or you risk this sort of shit.
Of what I played that seems fair.
SomedayTheFire
Member
Yep. Those posts are terrifying.
Nightwing123
Member
Sorry but I believe a full review is better/more-professional than a half done review bug or no bug. Jim can give the game a 0/10 afterwards for all I care but at least the review would cover the whole game including the bug. You can disagree with me that's perfectly fine but no need to be passive aggressive.