RubberLuffy
Banned
I'm gonna become a reviewer, but I'm gonna only watch streams/youtubes and review games based on those.
It'll be the next hot thing
It'll be the next hot thing
I really don't know why it flies to review Nier without actually finishing the game.
It's seeing the credits roll. It's challenging to start again after that. At least somewhat.
It's at 88 again.
GameCritics - 65/100
Well, at least surely that reviewer played the game to the en-
Shit happens, game it still GOTY for me.
now let's bomb his twitter
(let's not)
I'm STILL getting retweets and likes and comments and conversations inclusions and whatnot from talking to the previous guy. XD
At least the the reviewer saw the game's story through in one shape or form, even if it's via watching LP.
Thing is, having finished NieR, I can get the spectrum of "GOAT 10/10 masterpiece" all the way to "meh, it's a decent game, but so much idiosyncrasies and the story does nothing for me."
It's a story and pace where you find meaning in what it dares to ask the players to consider in your experience of it, but not everyone will be touched or react to the implicit questions that the story poses.
It's seeing the credits roll. It's challenging to start again after that. At least somewhat.
Also Route B really, really doesn't help encourage people to keep playing either. I'm about 5 hours into it and struggling to grind through.
So...you're telling me I get to go through the same story from a different perspective (that isn't exactly mind blowing) but with neutered combat (one weapon) and an annoying mini-game?
I've absolutely loved the game so far, and I'll get all the endings, but I felt a sense of dread when I realized what it was going to take to get to route C and the new content
I'm debating continuing it now, or just coming back to it after I've spent some time with Persona 5 and need a palette cleanser. Maybe at that point I'll have more enthusiasm for it.
It's best to ignore any site that publish such reviews.He also reviewed Horizon without finishing it. It's best to ignore all of his reviews from now on.
You can plow through B fast if you want, you already know most of everything you have to do. It's worth it for C. Alsothere's more to B than you give it credit for
No.Am I the only one that thoroughly enjoyed route B.
Am I the only one that thoroughly enjoyed route B.
Asking a game reviewer to play through the same game 3 times to get the whole story is absurd, especially when the game is as long as it is. They do not have that kind of time.I think everyone in this thread jokes about the MC score affecting their enjoyment of the game.
Still think it's crazy to review a game without seeing the whole story though.
Though in this case the reviewer can't even be bothered to finish some games once.Asking a game reviewer to play through the same game 3 times to get the whole story is absurd, especially when the game is as long as it is. They do not have that kind of time.
It's like the shortest game out and you're not playing the same content 3 times.Asking a game reviewer to play through the same game 3 times to get the whole story is absurd, especially when the game is as long as it is. They do not have that kind of time.
Asking a game reviewer to play through the same game 3 times to get the whole story is absurd, especially when the game is as long as it is. They do not have that kind of time.
Asking a game reviewer to play through the same game 3 times to get the whole story is absurd, especially when the game is as long as it is. They do not have that kind of time.
Asking a game reviewer to play through the same game 3 times to get the whole story is absurd, especially when the game is as long as it is. They do not have that kind of time.
Asking a game reviewer to play through the same game 3 times to get the whole story is absurd, especially when the game is as long as it is. They do not have that kind of time.
Asking a game reviewer to play through the same game 3 times to get the whole story is absurd, especially when the game is as long as it is. They do not have that kind of time.
Asking a game reviewer to play through the same game 3 times to get the whole story is absurd, especially when the game is as long as it is. They do not have that kind of time.
Valid criticism IMO. Don't have time nowadays to beat a game once and you are telling me to do it thrice just to get your story?
Nah. Back to Overwatch.
It's not on outlets to re-review a game because it wasn't so great at launch. That's just a waste of their time. Shouldn't have released a bad port in the first place.Since PCGamer are mostly reviewing port quality rather than game quality, I hope they go back and change the score when the problems are fixed. They clearly consider it a 9 or a 10.
Metacritic only take the first score a reviewer gives, right?
I hope he got paid well for that arduous dedication to his craft. Truly an inspiration to us all.Yeah. I could totally see someone who doesn't like this game at all and gives it a super low score, and also totally get the 10/10s too.
I just can't understand like what point we're at where a dude played a bit of a game, then watched a fucking Let's Play of the rest of it, and then reviewed it with a Metacritic score. Like, how is that any different from 90% of Metacritic user reviews
Asking a game reviewer to play through the same game 3 times to get the whole story is absurd, especially when the game is as long as it is. They do not have that kind of time.
Valid criticism IMO. Don't have time nowadays to beat a game once and you are telling me to do it thrice just to get your story?
Nah. Back to Overwatch.
i knew those sneak press fucks were lying about reviewing persona
Valid criticism IMO. Don't have time nowadays to beat a game once and you are telling me to do it thrice just to get your story?
Nah. Back to Overwatch.
Nier isn't one game 3 times.
It's three parts of one game.
I got credits after eating something as a joke ending. That didn't mean the game was finished.
Am I the only one that thoroughly enjoyed route B.
Nier isn't one game 3 times.
It's three parts of one game.
I got credits after eating something as a joke ending. That didn't mean the game was finished.
Some people just shouldn't be allowed to review games period or especially in cases like this should not be counted on metacritic.
Perhaps someone should just let him/her know that the game wasn't over and that they should actually finish the game.
Maybe they'll adjust their scoring.
Perhaps someone should just let him/her know that the game wasn't over and that they should actually finish the game.
Maybe they'll adjust their scoring.
I'm conflicted about whether or not a reviewer should have to finish a game in order to render a verdict. Some games are insanely long.
That being said, this doesn't really seem like one of those games (have yet to play it myself). We're not talking about some 80+ hour adventure.
I'm conflicted about whether or not a reviewer should have to finish a game in order to render a verdict. Some games are insanely long.
That being said, this doesn't really seem like one of those games (have yet to play it myself). We're not talking about some 80+ hour adventure.
The reviewer was very well aware, he watched the rest on youtube afterall
If you brute-force your way through just the story (which i don't recommend), you can beat Automata in roughly 25-ish hours.
This game can be completed in probably 20-35 hours if you skip most of the plot-relevant side quests. "I'm in a rush" can't be the excuse. If they don't have a couple of days to dedicate to playing and finishing a game, they probably shouldn't be reviewing games.