Negotiator101
Member
Said it before and I'll say it again, it's the best 83MC rated game I've played. To claim it deserves lower is an insult to the developer's. With that said it wasn't as good as I expected either.
-
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.
Jason Scheier: "Starfield 83 Metacritic Score was only possible because of Xbox outlets"
digoutyoursoul
Member
The build up to its release had unnecessary pressure put on itself because of the inconsistency of first party and yet again it was another “we are sorry” “ we are learning” routine from Phil Spencer after what happened with RedFall.
Even those influencers like Parris were saying the game needed to deliver and when certain outlets are not receiving review copies then it raises questions given what has happened before with the negative reactions to their content or the lack of content in some years.
For all the talk about Xbox not one of these media outlets will call out the management directly, they will deliberately talk around it.
It’s a fucking shame what has been going on, I know some will disagree and even mock, I firmly believe Xbox could be much better and be a brilliant platform especially with console if they had the right people and strategy to execute it and this sort ot thing wouldn’t even be written.
Even those influencers like Parris were saying the game needed to deliver and when certain outlets are not receiving review copies then it raises questions given what has happened before with the negative reactions to their content or the lack of content in some years.
For all the talk about Xbox not one of these media outlets will call out the management directly, they will deliberately talk around it.
It’s a fucking shame what has been going on, I know some will disagree and even mock, I firmly believe Xbox could be much better and be a brilliant platform especially with console if they had the right people and strategy to execute it and this sort ot thing wouldn’t even be written.
Last edited:
Negotiator101
Member
Well how many PS sites are there? Alot more I'd wager which makes your question look rather silly.
MarkMe2525
Banned
In a vacuum (without hype or expectation) this game would easily score an 83 on its own merit. Jason is ignoring the fact that bias scoring cuts both ways.
a multicultural team of v
Member
I counted the Spider Man 2 review sites with Playstation in the name and it was only one more total.
PlayStation Universe
DualShockers
MeuPlayStation
PSX Brasil
PSX Extreme
LaPS4
TheSixthAxis
PlayStation LifeStyle
PlaySense
Push Square
Granted I could have missed one or two that had obscure non-Playstation obvious names. And I guess less Playstation focused sites could have reviewed Spider-Man 2 vs Xbox focused sites reviewing Starfield.
Killjoy-NL
Banned
No shit.
Crayon
Member
Damn he just slipped it in there but it's the truth. Of the most notable fans sites and influencers the Xbox ones are the most zealous. Is there a pony Euivalent of colt, , klobrille, ms-employed Greenberg and nelson, stevivor, windows central, etc, etc that we get a steady stream of bs to be mocked?
Miss me with the both sides shit. You don't have that on ps, Nintendo, or steam. Defender fanboys sure, but they are not elevated in the same way.
Miss me with the both sides shit. You don't have that on ps, Nintendo, or steam. Defender fanboys sure, but they are not elevated in the same way.
Last edited:
Ar¢tos
Member
Is it crazy that the game rentable for peanuts has more user reviews than games sold at full price with no rental option at launch?
Majormaxxx
Member
Schreier is quite petty and salty huh.
bender
What time is it?
Negotiator101
Member
Well there it is, although I thought there would be more than that but its not as if its a ridiculous amount on either side.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
These are the "Evangelists."
Freelance Yakuza
Member
How many of those had "mods will save this game"?
XXL
Member
The irony of all of this is that IGNs review was the most accurate score for the game.
Its a 7/10.
I would probably say more a 6-6.5 personally, but 7 is completely reasonable and it's far more reasonable than a fucking 9 or 10....that's for damn sure.
People should stop talking about this game, it's completely irrelevant and has nothing notable about it.
Its a 7/10.
I would probably say more a 6-6.5 personally, but 7 is completely reasonable and it's far more reasonable than a fucking 9 or 10....that's for damn sure.
People should stop talking about this game, it's completely irrelevant and has nothing notable about it.
Negotiator101
Member
Yes it does seem there is some bias but I'd suggest other sites low balled the score as well. Just out of curiosity did you play the game? if yes what score do you think it deserves? It's hard for me to give it less than an 8 so I'd say its pretty much right where it should be.
bender
What time is it?
Without looking, I can thinking of DualShockers, PushSquare, and TheSixthAxis. I know some of those sites have branched out their coverage beyond PlayStation but I'd guess there are more sites that started off PlayStation specific and far more that are Nintendo specific.
MarkMe2525
Banned
I don't find my claim unreasonable. It may not be the game we wanted or thought it was, but it is a solid fun game in its own right.
Negotiator101
Member
Dr_Ifto
Member
I have about 7 hours on PC. Just wasnt my cup of tea. It actually made me go play Outer Worlds again, which felt like a more coherent and narrow story to keep me entertained.
GooseMan69
Member
delete
Last edited:
bender
What time is it?
It's a baseless claim.
phant0m
Member
I don’t think that many people really “hate it”…. More like consider it disappointing/mid.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Spider-Man 2 is a 9/10 game on MC. Now the question is, how many of these websites gave SM2 a 10/10? The websites that gave SM2 a 9/10 or lower shouldn't be counted in this scenario because they are clearly not shilling.
On the other hand, we know that all of these Xbox websites gave an 8/10 Starfield a 9/10 or a 10/10.
Edit: I checked. And only 2 websites (PlayStation Universe and DualShockers) gave Spider-Man 2 a 10/10. In comparison, following are the Starfield's MC scores from Xbox websites.
Last edited:
analog_future
Resident Crybaby
FalsettoVibe
Member
This is about Xbox outlets overrating a particular game.
Listing a bunch of PS centric reviewers who could possibly do the same, is not the same.
Last edited:
a multicultural team of v
Member
Given the market share differences between the two even an equal number of outlets makes no sense.
I don't even care about the score. I am merely asking how the two brands can support an equal number of dedicated websites despite the large and continually growing difference in market share, particularly given that the economics of running gaming (and all media) sites is a disaster and they are closing/consolidating left and right.
I might be missing a ton of Playstation sites, like I said I just checked the Spider Man 2 reviews. But I dunno what Playstation website would exist and not review Spider Man lol
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
If we removed every reviewer who went against consumer sentiment at least once we wouldn't have any reviewers.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
That's an excellent point, and one that I've talked about multiple times.
Not just the amount of websites, but also the sheer number of podcasts and Twitter "influencers" that the Xbox brand has in comparison with Nintendo and PlayStation -- considering it has the smallest reach and usebase.
As you said, it makes no sense. There is no sense of proportionality and a clear sign of artificial inflation. I chalk it up to the infamous Xbox Ambassador Program, about which I have written in detail before.
Last edited:
Banjo64
cumsessed
Can you rank the other 83MC games you’ve played? I’m actually interested.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
So, starfield was successful and had more players than those games?
Evil Calvin
Afraid of Boobs
You don't think Sony and Nintendo do that? Of course they do. Probably moreso.
Punished Miku
Human Rights Subscription Service
Journalists were too scared to even discuss Insomniac's leak lol. That tells you something. Not all leaks got that treatment.
MarkMe2525
Banned
I mean, this whole premise is "baseless". To make a claim of positive bias while not acknowledging there is a flip side to that isn't a sound argument. He can't make a legitimate claim to know which arguments truly gave an inflated score nor which scores were negatively impacted by the reviewers bias. It's speculation for the sake of speculation.
I also acknowledge I am no authority on the quality or subjective ranking of a game. I can make observations of my experience with the game and compare with other experiences. So it is my subjective opinion that Starfield is perfectly in line with other games that have scored similiar scores of 83.
Again, I did not claim my assertion that Starfield would score an 83 on its own merits was ground truth, but it is also not an unreasonable thing to say.
Last edited:
NonPhixion
Member
oh, more so? I suppose you have a few examples of review codes being given to select reviewers before release dates?
Ar¢tos
Member
eyeroll.gif
Starfield was accessible to every gamepass user from day one, no need to dish out 70$ to try the game, therefore a lot more people tried it and were able to give their opinion about it.
Deputy Moonman
Member
15 xbox fan sites gave it a high score, so naturally he concludes that the overall score is too high? Every game that has ever come out has fan sites that give what appear to be biased high scores. This is typically balanced out by the hundreds if not thousands of sites/reviewers that review bomb the same games. Did he happen to look at the reviews where people gave it a 0 or something that you wouldn't give a game unless it was unplayable? Starfield may not be genre defining; it may not meet expectations; but it's still a good game. We are to the point where haters can't handle the fact it got an 83... I'm dead.
diffusionx
Gold Member
Just for perspective, God of War Ragnarok has... FOUR PlayStation-specific sites that gave it a 95%+:
God of War: Ragnarok critic reviews
Metacritic aggregates music, game, tv, and movie reviews from the leading critics. Only Metacritic.com uses METASCORES, which let you know at a glance how each item was reviewed.
www.metacritic.com
That's less than Starfield, even though the game has a much higher overall MC, and has many more scores in that range, so those scores are not as much of a deviation. Even if I missed one or two sites I think it is clear why Starfield's reviews are a little odd.
Fatmanp
Member
I think the Starfield user scores being lower than the games mentioned in this thread may have something to do with the game being on PC and the PC audience generally has a higher standard required for satisfaction than a console only game. PlayStation have perfected the art of putting out a very similar style of game (Third person cinematic action adventure) so incremental improvements are enough to satisfy. The people that made Skyrim, Morrowind and Fallout 3 may get held to a different standard which is fair. Imo I did not rate Spiderman 2 anywhere near as highly as the first which I thought was at most an 8.5/10. I much preferred God of War (9,5) to Ragnarok (8.5) and I loved both Horizon games (9 and 9). Imo HFW is the best game out of the four even though I have only played about 3 hours of Starfield.
diffusionx
Gold Member
Another example: Ghost of Tsushima, same MC as Starfield:
www.metacritic.com
Has ZERO PlayStation specific sites that gave it a 95%+. Highest score is 90 from PS Universe and Push Square.
Ghost of Tsushima critic reviews
Metacritic aggregates music, game, tv, and movie reviews from the leading critics. Only Metacritic.com uses METASCORES, which let you know at a glance how each item was reviewed.
www.metacritic.com
Has ZERO PlayStation specific sites that gave it a 95%+. Highest score is 90 from PS Universe and Push Square.
TheRedRiders
Member
This is the last place on Earth on I expected to see the word wasteman lmao
#BritishGaf
bender
What time is it?
It's easy enough to show your "flip side" argument if it exists. We aren't talking about user reviews here, the amount of professional reviews (those factored into a Metacritic score) is finite. Go read the bottom end of the spectrum and point out the obvious "flip side". If you want to get nerdy about it, do the same for the reviews that Jason questioned, throw out all the obvious examples of pro-bias and anti-bias and refactor the score.
For what it is worth (see absolutely nothing), my gut tells me it would be much to maintain professional status (again, factored into Metacritic with a pro-bias than it would an anti-bias). Access and important and publishers are quick to pull that access over the smallest of slights (see: Sony and The Esccapist/Zero Punctuation).
Last edited:
Deputy Moonman
Member
My perspective is that even 15 biased high scores is unlikely to change the final review score by a huge margin. And again - it's an 83. Can I just say that one more time? It's an 83Just for perspective, God of War Ragnarok has... FOUR PlayStation-specific sites that gave it a 95%+:
God of War: Ragnarok critic reviews
Metacritic aggregates music, game, tv, and movie reviews from the leading critics. Only Metacritic.com uses METASCORES, which let you know at a glance how each item was reviewed.
That's less than Starfield, even though the game has a much higher overall MC, and has many more scores in that range, so those scores are not as much of a deviation. Even if I missed one or two sites I think it is clear why Starfield's reviews are a little odd.
Last edited:
diffusionx
Gold Member
I mean, would you say it could tilt the overall score by 5 points? I'd say there is a big difference in terms of perception between 83 and 78
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked