Just a few things:I'm late to this, so this Jeff is getting attacked by Sony hardcore fans because he gave the game 6/10 and he apparently gave The Medium 10/10? Or is there any reason.
I think this Jeff guy is insufferable though, but i think meta scores are getting way way too much priority these days. People in forums always claim that review scores usually dont matter to them, yet everyday i see the complete opposite.
Well it is ERA what did you expect?....so how do they get away with other people rightfully critiquing a stupid take from a review?
Haha. Is Crackdown even worth a play on game pass. I have a Series X and always thought it looked like mindless fun.Just a few things:
1. He literally started his review with this sentence, "The art of building a quality roguelite is in the sleight of hand. In order to finish the game, the player needs to improve their skill. But that is a tedious and laborious process." It's so absurd I don't even want to comment any further.
2. He spent roughly 500 words on his review criticizing the roguelite genre (not the game itself, but the genre). And then he deducted Returnal's score and gave it a 6/10 because of his problems with the genre. So by his logic, even if a roguelite is a 10/10, it can't get a higher score because Jeff doesn't like the genre.
3. Then under the subheading You almost lost me there, he says, "My low point with Returnal came as I was struggling to get through the second biome."
For reference, you can get to the second biome after playing the game for 2-3 hours. So, Jeff had made up his mind about a 40-hour game in the first 2 hours. At around this time, most of the games do not even open up properly.
He also clearly said that he was struggling as soon as he started the game, in the first 2 hours, when he didn't even get skills and gear or get familiar with the mechanics and combat style. His review scores aren't on the game, but the genre and the difficulty that comes with it. That's why he is being criticized.
The sensible thing would have been to look at the game itself, see what it does good and what it does bad, base your score on that, and then mention that the game is a rogue-lite (explain the mechanics for casual gamers) and highlight that it is difficult and may not be for casuals.
But the reason he didn't do any of that is because he is clearly biased against Sony. He said that he won't even preview Returnal. Why the anger? Just because Sony doesn't tell you inside stuff so you could leak and stay relevant?
Also, as far as his review pedigree goes, he said that Crackdown 3 was a better game than Spider-Man (PS4). Any rational person could see the bullshit in that claim. He doesn't even hide his bias. That's it.
Crackdown 1 yes. Crackdown 3? No.Haha. Is Crackdown even worth a play on game pass. I have a Series X and always thought it looked like mindless fun.
In a world where the metacritic score can help green light sequels and influences dev bonuses a callous review like Grubb’s one is not just lazy at best but damaging to devs too… and it is not like the game seems to deserve it.Just a few things:
1. He literally started his review with this sentence, "The art of building a quality roguelite is in the sleight of hand. In order to finish the game, the player needs to improve their skill. But that is a tedious and laborious process." It's so absurd I don't even want to comment any further.
2. He spent roughly 500 words on his review criticizing the roguelite genre (not the game itself, but the genre). And then he deducted Returnal's score and gave it a 6/10 because of his problems with the genre. So by his logic, even if a roguelite is a 10/10, it can't get a higher score because Jeff doesn't like the genre.
3. Then under the subheading You almost lost me there, he says, "My low point with Returnal came as I was struggling to get through the second biome."
For reference, you can get to the second biome after playing the game for 2-3 hours. So, Jeff had made up his mind about a 40-hour game in the first 2 hours. At around this time, most of the games do not even open up properly.
He also clearly said that he was struggling as soon as he started the game, in the first 2 hours, when he didn't even get skills and gear or get familiar with the mechanics and combat style. His review scores aren't on the game, but the genre and the difficulty that comes with it. That's why he is being criticized.
The sensible thing would have been to look at the game itself, see what it does good and what it does bad, base your score on that, and then mention that the game is a rogue-lite (explain the mechanics for casual gamers) and highlight that it is difficult and may not be for casuals.
But the reason he didn't do any of that is because he is clearly biased against Sony. He said that he won't even preview Returnal. Why the anger? Just because Sony doesn't tell you inside stuff so you could leak and stay relevant?
Also, as far as his review pedigree goes, he said that Crackdown 3 was a better game than Spider-Man (PS4). Any rational person could see the bullshit in that claim. He doesn't even hide his bias. That's it.
Exactly. It is disingenuous. But I'd not expect anything else from a person who isn't even sincere with his work.In a world where the metacritic score can help green light sequels and influences dev bonuses a callous review like Grubb’s one is not just lazy at best but damaging to devs too… and it is not like the game seems to deserve it.
Then buy it at full fucking price!Bought it on Amazon for 10$ off.
I like to support housemarque because they tend to make games I like.
In a world where the metacritic score can help green light sequels and influences dev bonuses a callous review like Grubb’s one is not just lazy at best but damaging to devs too… and it is not like the game seems to deserve it.
How would Jaffe know how much it cost? He's not part of HM or Sony. Game development cost is going up but that's true with everything else too. Returnal isn't a AAA budget game. Nor has it been advertised as such. Probably more in line with AA.I don’t have a feel for an actual number - I’m just going from Jaffe’s comment “a lot”. He didn’t say hundreds of millions for returnal and I didn’t interpret it that way either.
But what I can say is that just talking about HM as if they’re the only cost is incorrect.
The costs spiral out through other parts of Sony. HM might be a “small” and focused studio, but the support through the entire organisation can inflate that to hundreds of staff dedicating some or all of their time to it over the development and release periods.
From the reviews i readed it seemsl like the game is an excellent bullet hell tps, an overall great game but a pretty shitty roguelite.Reading the reviews on different sites is bizarre as the final verdict is often at odds with what they say (Eurogamers review comes to mind here). I feel that this is a game that reviewers desperately want to love hence the gushing praise, but ultimately don't regardless of their verdict, and this is why the reviews don't jive sometimes. I think this is would be an incredibly hard game to review.
I think ultimately this is going to be an extremely niche game which isn't a bad thing. It just is.
Our review thread is a Utopia compared to Ree.
It’s crazy that cm (aka playstation candy man/Voldemort)
did Jeff actually review the medium I’ve tried to find his review but I can’t find it. I saw a lot of people yesterday accusing cm (aka Voldermoriarty) of sending his fans to harass that lady but I feel like Jeff sent more people her way by actively pissing the fanboys off.Just a few things:
1. He literally started his review with this sentence, "The art of building a quality roguelite is in the sleight of hand. In order to finish the game, the player needs to improve their skill. But that is a tedious and laborious process." It's so absurd I don't even want to comment any further.
2. He spent roughly 500 words on his review criticizing the roguelite genre (not the game itself, but the genre). And then he deducted Returnal's score and gave it a 6/10 because of his problems with the genre. So by his logic, even if a roguelite is a 10/10, it can't get a higher score because Jeff doesn't like the genre.
3. Then under the subheading You almost lost me there, he says, "My low point with Returnal came as I was struggling to get through the second biome."
For reference, you can get to the second biome after playing the game for 2-3 hours. So, Jeff had made up his mind about a 40-hour game in the first 2 hours. At around this time, most of the games do not even open up properly.
He also clearly said that he was struggling as soon as he started the game, in the first 2 hours, when he didn't even get skills and gear or get familiar with the mechanics and combat style. His review scores aren't on the game, but the genre and the difficulty that comes with it. That's why he is being criticized.
The sensible thing would have been to look at the game itself, see what it does good and what it does bad, base your score on that, and then mention that the game is a rogue-lite (explain the mechanics for casual gamers) and highlight that it is difficult and may not be for casuals.
But the reason he didn't do any of that is because he is clearly biased against Sony. He said that he won't even preview Returnal. Why the anger? Just because Sony doesn't tell you inside stuff so you could leak and stay relevant?
Also, as far as his review pedigree goes, he said that Crackdown 3 was a better game than Spider-Man (PS4). Any rational person could see the bullshit in that claim. He doesn't even hide his bias. That's it.
I don't remember him doing that. The Medium 10/10 review was from another outlet I think, which gave Returnal a 7/10. Two different outlets I believe.It’s crazy that cm (aka playstation candy man/Voldemort)
did Jeff actually review the medium I’ve tried to find his review but I can’t find it. I saw a lot of people yesterday accusing cm (aka Voldermoriarty) of sending his fans to harass that lady but I feel like Jeff sent more people her way by actively pissing the fanboys off.
If you quote him, at least put the complete sentence instead of nitpicking what you want to make it look more bad than it is.Just a few things:
1. He literally started his review with this sentence, "The art of building a quality roguelite is in the sleight of hand. In order to finish the game, the player needs to improve their skill. But that is a tedious and laborious process." It's so absurd I don't even want to comment any further.
2. He spent roughly 500 words on his review criticizing the roguelite genre (not the game itself, but the genre). And then he deducted Returnal's score and gave it a 6/10 because of his problems with the genre. So by his logic, even if a roguelite is a 10/10, it can't get a higher score because Jeff doesn't like the genre.
3. Then under the subheading You almost lost me there, he says, "My low point with Returnal came as I was struggling to get through the second biome."
For reference, you can get to the second biome after playing the game for 2-3 hours. So, Jeff had made up his mind about a 40-hour game in the first 2 hours. At around this time, most of the games do not even open up properly.
He also clearly said that he was struggling as soon as he started the game, in the first 2 hours, when he didn't even get skills and gear or get familiar with the mechanics and combat style. His review scores aren't on the game, but the genre and the difficulty that comes with it. That's why he is being criticized.
The sensible thing would have been to look at the game itself, see what it does good and what it does bad, base your score on that, and then mention that the game is a rogue-lite (explain the mechanics for casual gamers) and highlight that it is difficult and may not be for casuals.
But the reason he didn't do any of that is because he is clearly biased against Sony. He said that he won't even preview Returnal. Why the anger? Just because Sony doesn't tell you inside stuff so you could leak and stay relevant?
Also, as far as his review pedigree goes, he said that Crackdown 3 was a better game than Spider-Man (PS4). Any rational person could see the bullshit in that claim. He doesn't even hide his bias. That's it.
Apologies if i have misinterpreted your statement , but are you suggesting that critics should consider a developers opportunity to receive " bonuses" and potential sequels into their reviews/critique? Do they hold back on critisicms to facilitate that? Always give a score that does not fall below the "bonuses"/sequel threshold?In a world where the metacritic score can help green light sequels and influences dev bonuses a callous review like Grubb’s one is not just lazy at best but damaging to devs too… and it is not like the game seems to deserve it.
There you goLol all these talk about roguelites makes me nostalgic for the classic ascii roguelikes like moria.
If you were given the chance to save people based on how you think they are worthy, maybe do so honestly.Apologies if i have misinterpreted your statement , but are you suggesting that critics should consider a developers opportunity to receive " bonuses" and potential sequels into their reviews/critique? Do they hold back on critisicms to facilitate that? Always give a score that does not fall below the "bonuses"/sequel threshold?
Just a few things:
For reference, you can get to the second biome after playing the game for 2-3 hours. So, Jeff had made up his mind about a 40-hour game in the first 2 hours. At around this time, most of the games do not even open up properly.
This is why you don’t bother appealing to wokelords. Progressive, desexualised main female character. But they just shift the goal posts and find some other outrageFor the record Resetera is completely misrepresenting what Moriarty did (what a shock). He didn't "organize a harassment campaign" or any of that nonsense. He literally just quoted the article and said "What?" That's it.
It's sad that you guys are trying so hard to be like them.Our review thread is a Utopia compared to Ree.
Im sure that compared to their previous games, the budget for Returnal is alot more.I don’t have a feel for an actual number - I’m just going from Jaffe’s comment “a lot”. He didn’t say hundreds of millions for returnal and I didn’t interpret it that way either.
But what I can say is that just talking about HM as if they’re the only cost is incorrect.
The costs spiral out through other parts of Sony. HM might be a “small” and focused studio, but the support through the entire organisation can inflate that to hundreds of staff dedicating some or all of their time to it over the development and release periods.
True. It especially reminded me of that hot chick's Days Gone review from Gamespot. She complained about the lack of things that would have literally appeared in the game had she played for a few more hours.Funny enough, this is the exact same issue I've seen with a lot of Death Stranding and Days Gone reviews.
This has been an issue with games journalists for a long time. It's pretty obvious once you read the reviews that they didn't do much in the game at all...being clueless about the story/game mechanics outside the first 2-3 hours(Death Stranding got nailed HARD for things that aren't available at the start of the game like the mechanical legs, floating carriers etc...hell some of them didn't even mention there were guns in the game). I would think that's doing a disservice to any potential reader.Funny enough, this is the exact same issue I've seen with a lot of Death Stranding and Days Gone reviews.
They still get paid the same. His discount is at the retail level so it makes no difference to Sony or HMThen buy it at full fucking price!
This has been an issue with games journalists for a long time. It's pretty obvious once you read the reviews that they didn't do much in the game at all...being clueless about the story/game mechanics outside the first 2-3 hours(Death Stranding got nailed HARD for things that aren't available at the start of the game like the mechanical legs, floating carriers etc...hell some of them didn't even mention there were guns in the game). I would think that's doing a disservice to any potential reader.
I would suggest that the motivation is just to get clicks.Yeah. And again, while I love the game, and would rate it nearly perfect if I was a reviewer, I can see how someone could fairly rate it a 6/10. Any less than that implies that the game is broken somehow, which is not the case, but this is a fairly arbitrary line.
The problem is not playing and reviewing while pretending to do so. Grubb's returnal review is just another in a very long list. The problem is that this leaves people to wonder if there's some political / monetary motivation to do this. Not saying there is, but the thought is there, especially considering the content this particular person puts out.
Apologies if i have misinterpreted your statement , but are you suggesting that critics should consider a developers opportunity to receive " bonuses" and potential sequels into their reviews/critique? Do they hold back on critisicms to facilitate that? Always give a score that does not fall below the "bonuses"/sequel threshold?
How would Jaffe know how much it cost? He's not part of HM or Sony. Game development cost is going up but that's true with everything else too. Returnal isn't a AAA budget game. Nor has it been advertised as such. Probably more in line with AA.
If games like this cost AAA budgets believe me there'd be far more studios disappearing.
Grubb did more harassment to her than Moriarty but ERA mods have no ideia how to deal with communities lol every single time they are completely lost in the actions.It’s crazy that cm (aka playstation candy man/Voldemort)
did Jeff actually review the medium I’ve tried to find his review but I can’t find it. I saw a lot of people yesterday accusing cm (aka Voldermoriarty) of sending his fans to harass that lady but I feel like Jeff sent more people her way by actively pissing the fanboys off.