Support NeoGAF

[SEGAvangelist]

People have always focused on Metacritic on review threads. Opencritic barely gets mentioned.

Nearly every review thread includes OpenCritic results. It's pretty popular around here. This is from this very review thread:

 

[VideoGameEnjoyer]

Does every video game journalist have a massive main character complex?

 

[DeepEnigma]

Yes, but several have noted that the console metacritic has several Xbox branded sites giving inflated scores. The PC version only has one such site. Seems like folks would trust the PC reviews more then.

Or... Steam reviews.

 

[DForce]

Nearly every review thread includes OpenCritic results. It's pretty popular around here. This is from this very review thread:

Opencritic and Metacritic results always get posted on the front page.

Opencritic doesn't get mentioned nearly as often as Metacritic after the first page.

 

[GymWolf]

MS owns Havoc though. Havoc can do better player/environmental physics than that. Tap into the resources, then again, F this engine and it's dated design.

Nobody does that for falling animations, do you expected state of the art third person animations from fucking bethesda?

It is already a win that i can run in the game without my torso glitching out of existence...

 

[CosmicComet]

If it's at 87 now this early then there is a great chance it will drop to 84-86 when all is said and done.

After seeing the limitations of this game it really does seem like No Man's Sky (in it's current form) is the better space game, if you can forgive the lack of strong narrative.

84 is here lol.

At this point, I dont think 83 is out of the realm of possibility.

 

[DForce]

Yes, but several have noted that the console metacritic has several Xbox branded sites giving inflated scores. The PC version only has one such site. Seems like folks would trust the PC reviews more then.

Yes, exclusive titles often get a bit inflated due to Xbox/PS fan sites.

He wanted to know why PC version is getting ignored and I said people just focus on the MC page with the most reviews.

 

[Topher]

Or... Steam reviews.

Outside the massive number of PlayStation covert operatives like Ass of Can Whooping , of course.

 

[DeepEnigma]

It is already a win that i can run in the game without my torso glitching out of existence...

 

[SEGAvangelist]

Yes, exclusive titles often get a bit inflated due to Xbox/PS fan sites.

He wanted to know why PC version is getting ignored and I said people just focus on the MC page with the most reviews.

I'm pointing out that you are purposely omitting the PC scores to say the game didn't meet NeoGAF review poll expectations.

 

[GymWolf]

I can't say the same for other npcs's torso tho.

 

[Madflavor]

Not saying Starfield will follow the same trajectory but this is not the death nail many here are hoping it to be.

Death Stranding winning more GOTY Awards than RE2R and specifically Sekiro was such a sham.

 

[DForce]

I'm pointing out that you are purposely omitting the PC scores to say the game didn't meet NeoGAF review poll expectations.

I'm pointing out that people have always focused on console scores on MC because they will have the most review scores posted.

Console - 62 reviews | 84 score
PC - 58 reviews | 87 score

Check the Metacritic score for Halo Infinite.

PC - 31 reviews | 80 score
Console - 97 reviews | 87 score

If you think people were trying to push the lower score, then they would have done it with Halo Infinite in the review thread, but no, they focused on the console version because it has the most review scores.

People will continue to focus on Starfield console version of MC because it's likely going to have way more review scores when its all said and done.

 

[SEGAvangelist]

I'm pointing out that people have always focused on console scores on MC because they will have the most review scores posted.

Console - 62 reviews | 84 score
PC - 58 reviews | 87 score

Check the Metacritic score for Halo Infinite.

PC - 31 reviews | 80 score
Console - 97 reviews | 87 score

If you think people were trying to push the lower score, then they would have done it with Halo Infinite in the review thread, but no, they focused on the console version because it has the most review scores.

People will continue to focus on Starfield console version of MC because it's likely going to have way more review scores when its all said and done.

So then you agree the game did meet expectations?

 

[Topher]

So then you agree the game did meet expectations?

In general, it is pretty safe to say that is not the case.

 

[BbMajor7th]

Really? Ok, then. I guess we just won't see eye to eye on game reviews in this case. That's fine. Agree to disagree.

If your argument is that only intrinsic commentary in review is permissible - to review the game in a vacuum in and of itself - then I would disagree. A game may be excellently made and well-executed, but if it also happens to be a clear rip-off of another highly lauded game, borrowing most of its ideas wholesale, then it's fair to critique it on that basis, even if it does it better in some cases. What counts as reasonable context will vary from person to person, but I don't think you can honestly say 'nothing in this review but the game itself'. Even something as simple as praising the graphics of a game is entirely contextual.

Game reviewers typically do not mention how the review code was obtained. If that is noted then it is done outside the review itself.

Easy Allies do it in every single review - never heard anyone so much as mention it.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Outside the massive number of PlayStation covert operatives like Ass of Can Whooping , of course.

 

[GymWolf]

Death Stranding winning more GOTY Awards than RE2R and specifically Sekiro was such a sham.

An absolute joke to even have that pretentious turd close to sekiro.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Not saying Starfield will follow the same trajectory but this is not the death nail many here are hoping it to be.

That's because (1) Death Stranding got shafted in reviews by some reviewers quite unfairly (e.g., Stevivor gave it a 3.5/10!) and (2) the game was divisive AF. It was not the 'safe' game that would score 8s and 9s by every outlet.

But people who played it loved it. That's where Starfield and Death Stranding differ from each other.

 

[SEGAvangelist]

That's because (1) Death Stranding got shafted in reviews by some reviewers quite unfairly (e.g., Stevivor gave it a 3.5/10!) and (2) the game was divisive AF. It was not the 'safe' game that would score 8s and 9s by every outlet.

But people who played it loved it. That's where Starfield and Death Stranding differ from each other.

That's a bit of an unfair comparison. Wasn't Death Stranding Epic exclusive at launch?

 

[Topher]

Easy Allies do it in every single review - never heard anyone so much as mention it.

We are discussing written website reviews (such as Metro). Not YouTube.

 

[Heisenberg007]

That's a bit of an unfair comparison. Wasn't Death Stranding Epic exclusive at launch?

Why does that matter? If anything, it'd piss off Steam users even more and encourage them to unfairly give it a negative review. It's still 90% positive though.

 

[SEGAvangelist]

Why does that matter? If anything, it'd piss off Steam users even more and encourage them to unfairly give it a negative review. It's still 90% positive though.

This was a late release with lots of fixes on the Steam version. The fair comparison would be a future GotY edition or something like that. Have Steam users given negative reviews because of a late release? If anything, your expectations are already set for a late release, and negative reviews are even less likely.

 

[DForce]

I was specifically referring to thread poll expectations.

It didn't reach what most people predicted on the pole. That is clear.

 

[DeepEnigma]

This was a late release with lots of fixes on the Steam version. The fair comparison would be a future GotY edition or something like that. Have Steam users given negative reviews because of a late release? If anything, your expectations are already set for a late release, and negative reviews are even less likely.

Steam reviews show that the gaming landscape has changed, and they are less forgiving of Bethesda's shit like they were 10+ years ago.

 

[SEGAvangelist]

It didn't reach what most people predicted on the pole. That is clear.

The 85-90% were right, yeah.

 

[BbMajor7th]

We are discussing written website reviews (such as Metro). Not YouTube.

What difference does that make?

 

[SEGAvangelist]

Steam reviews show that the gaming landscape has changed, and they are less forgiving of Bethesda's shit like they were 10+ years ago.

I'm not arguing against their relevancy. Steam reviews are a great way to speak directly to the developer. Actual money with proof of time played helps a lot.

 

[damidu]

oh no 84, what happens to all the bonuses now?

That's a bold call out. They should probably not expect another code from Bethesda at this point.

its telling what’s pretty much obvious.
they have to be called out for those shitty practices at every opportunity.
as for not sending codes, yeah seems to do wonders for bethesda

 

[SlimySnake]

That's because (1) Death Stranding got shafted in reviews by some reviewers quite unfairly (e.g., Stevivor gave it a 3.5/10!) and (2) the game was divisive AF. It was not the 'safe' game that would score 8s and 9s by every outlet.

But people who played it loved it. That's where Starfield and Death Stranding differ from each other.

Death Stranding reviews were absolutely retarded. I remember several reviewers docking points despite liking the game because 'it's not a game for everyone'.

I think if the steam reviews are any indication, this game isnt as beloved by users as death stranding but the point I was trying to make was that low 80s scores dont mean much. The Last Guardian is at 82 and its one of the greatest games of all time that finished 3rd in voting here on old gaf after overwatch and uncharted 4.

I do have a feeling that it will fare well at awards season this year. its new and fresh, and people will be playing it for far longer than other games releasing this year. My GOTY is still ToTK but im sure FF16, RE4, and Star Wars are likely going to end up behind Starfield in overall goty awards.

 

[Topher]

What difference does that make?

If we were talking about some YouTube channel then I wouldn't have even brought it up. It is a false equivalency in any case. Not going down this rabbit hole.

 

[killatopak]

oh no 84, what happens to all the bonuses now?

I dunno if Obsidian should be laughing or sad about this since they’re now under one umbrella but it’s definitely an ironic situation.

NV is one of my favorite game of all time and most of the critics’ criticism about it was how bugged it was. I’m extending the same benefit of doubt to Starfield and waiting to experience it without bugs mostly with mods or updates. I just don’t know if removing bugs by itself would elevate it to NV levels to me considering Starfield is called the least buggy Beth game.

One of the reasons I enjoyed NV was the character system and the effect it had on the quests. I’m just not so sure I’ll like Starfield‘s. It has been a long criticism of mine the Bethesda keeps dumbing down the RPG systems of their games in each subsequent games. It’s like every game they keep removing things one thing at a time.

 

[BbMajor7th]

If we were talking about some YouTube channel then I wouldn't have even brought it up. It is a false equivalency in any case. Not going down this rabbit hole.

Rabbit hole of your own making. In your bizarre desperation to win this argument you've reached the point of implying that video reviews should be held to different editorial standards than print reviews (God only knows what we do about outlets that publish both).

Of course, the real story here isn't that. The real story is that a major publisher is being accused of trying to manipulate review aggregation sites and your biggest bugbear is how and where journalists should surface these concerns. What's that all about?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Steam reviews show that the gaming landscape has changed, and they are less forgiving of Bethesda's shit like they were 10+ years ago.

It's more like the same exact thing 10 years later will simply have a different result now as opposed to then. Bethesda games have always appealed to a certain group of gamers and in the last 10 years while gaming has grown by leaps and bounds, Bethesda games have not.

Hyping up relatively niche titles like Titanfall and Starfield as universal games of the forever is not a winning strategy for Xbox, that's why they are trying to spend $70 billion to buy Call of Duty and the rest of the Activision Blizzard portfolio. Once they can force people to buy Xbox just to play CoD, then they can win through force instead of making good products people actually want.

 

[JTCx]

I dunno if Obsidian should be laughing or sad about this since they’re now under one umbrella but it’s definitely an ironic situation.

NV is one of my favorite game of all time and most of the critics’ criticism about it was how bugged it was. I’m extending the same benefit of doubt to Starfield and waiting to experience it without bugs mostly with mods or updates. I just don’t know if removing bugs by itself would elevate it to NV levels to me considering Starfield is called the least buggy Beth game.

One of the reasons I enjoyed NV was the character system and the effect it had on the quests. I’m just not so sure I’ll like Starfield‘s. It has been a long criticism of mine the Bethesda keeps dumbing down the RPG systems of their games in each subsequent games. It’s like every game they keep removing things one thing at a time.

NV shits all over starfield. Heck, NV shits on all their other games. Leave it to Obsidian to make a BGS rpg better than BGS themselves. Starfield rpg elements are even more dumbed down.

 

[SlimySnake]

It's more like the same exact thing 10 years later will simply have a different result now as opposed to then. Bethesda games have always appealed to a certain group of gamers and in the last 10 years while gaming has grown by leaps and bounds, Bethesda games have not.

Hyping up relatively niche titles like Titanfall and Starfield as universal games of the forever is not a winning strategy for Xbox, that's why they are trying to spend $70 billion to buy Call of Duty and the rest of the Activision Blizzard portfolio. Once they can force people to buy Xbox just to play CoD, then they can win through force instead of making good products people actually want.

I was hyping up Starfield, if anything xbox was relatively lukewarm on it aside from a couple of starfield directs they did at E3. Even Philbo was like me releasing starfield wont change the course of this gen.

I think what has happened here is that Bethesda marketed the game in a way that set unrealistic expectations. I wouldnt be surprised if MS bought into the marketing. It honestly felt like a genre defining game from the two previews but it turns out Bethesda just promised too much.

 

[Raven117]

I was hyping up Starfield, if anything xbox was relatively lukewarm on it aside from a couple of starfield directs they did at E3. Even Philbo was like me releasing starfield wont change the course of this gen.

I think what has happened here is that Bethesda marketed the game in a way that set unrealistic expectations. I wouldnt be surprised if MS bought into the marketing. It honestly felt like a genre defining game from the two previews but it turns out Bethesda just promised too much.

I mean....This is literally the MO of Bethesda. (But they make great games anyway).

 

[damidu]

It's more like the same exact thing 10 years later will simply have a different result now as opposed to then. Bethesda games have always appealed to a certain group of gamers and in the last 10 years while gaming has grown by leaps and bounds, Bethesda games have not.

yeah pretty much.
they’ll be in for even ruder awakening once they release next elder scrolls with this fossil of an engine, 8 years in the future.

 

[amigastar]

NV shits all over starfield. Heck, NV shits on all their other games. Leave it to Obsidian to make a BGS rpg better than BGS themselves. Starfield rpg elements are even more dumbed down.

I'm curious about Avowed. How that will turn out.
Anyways i still have to play Starfield properly. Haven't had much time because i've heard Starfield gets good from 20 hours+ and up.

 

[digoutyoursoul]

1. You don't know what their prediction is based on.
2. I said if it's based on MC then it failed.
3. Most predictions are 90%, which means it failed to meet their expectations.

I'm pointing out the obvious, you're just unwilling to accept mere facts.

I said before that mid 80s is not a bad score but it's clear that people had higher expectations. I only laughed at the people who cry media bias.

You don't see me laughing at the actual score from MC or even OC

It’s interesting they don’t call out alleged media bias to those who inflate scores to nines and tens for games that clearly don’t deserve it. They stay silent on that because those sort of people who clearly have zero integrity or objectivity soothe their obnoxious sensitivities with the blatant capping for corporation material they put out.

 

[Topher]

Rabbit hole of your own making. In your bizarre desperation to win this argument you've reached the point of implying that video reviews should be held to different editorial standards than print reviews (God only knows what we do about outlets that publish both).

Of course, the real story here isn't that. The real story is that a major publisher is being accused of trying to manipulate review aggregation sites and your biggest bugbear is how and where journalists should surface these concerns. What's that all about?

Nah....I'm not trying to win anything. We just disagree. I have no problem with any outlet writing an article lambasting Microsoft or Bethesda for how they handled review codes. Just not in the actual game review. That should be about the game and game only. We won't see eye to eye on that. I'm fine with it.

 

[Raven117]

Man...Todd is looking a little older nowadays.

 

[Humdinger]

90%-100% were wrong.

If they were predicting 85%-90% on MC then they were wrong.

Yeah, nearly half the people voting thought it would score 90 or above. Woops.

 

[Madflavor]

Man...Todd is looking a little older nowadays.

There are some exceptions to the rule, but typically even the greatest minds in any medium eventually lose their creative spark as they get older. Todd is doing only what he knows, and what he knows worked best 15 years ago.

 

[Hugare]

What reviews are missing now?

Edge and who else?

 

[Topher]

What reviews are missing now?

Edge and who else?

Eurogamer

 

[XXL]

After my time with the game, I feel like a 7 or 8 is more accurate than a 9 or a 10.

I would say it's an 8/10.

The best word to describe the game is bipolar.

 

[Topher]

After my time with the game, I feel like a 7 or 8 is more accurate than a 9 or a 10.

I would say it's an 8/10.

The best word to describe the game is bipolar.

I've got over a 100 hours in the game and I think 7-9 are fair scores, imo. 10 seems too high, 6 seems too low. I'm at a 9 assuming Bethesda gets off their ass and fixes some of the performance issues and bugs. Otherwise, definitely an 8.

 

[Madflavor]

 

[Darkness_Arises]

It is quite telling that there have been no articles about MS/Bethesda's sneaky attempts at manipulating the early review aggregate scores by giving sites like Xboxera codes, while depriving reputed sites, that might not have been so charitable. Maybe Sony will wise up to this and stop supplying codes to sites like Polygon, Edge, Eurogamer, etc. that have been not too hot on their games.