Does he have a history of bad reviews?
Curious for the Playstation Magazine review, can't access it atm.
8/10
So great story, bad open world
Meanwhile IGN says the opposite.
I'm going to use this moment to interject here and suggest that we not do crap like this. Whether complaining about scores being too high or too low, let's not fall down the trap of acting like there's an objective metric by which we can or should rate games. Because there isn't. There just is not. This may not be very inviting for discourse, but I'm not even remotely interested in a rebuttal to this statement.
Does he have a history of bad reviews?
From the Gamespot review...
"Kevin VanOrd has played all three Witcher games and read several of the novels. He spent about 100 hours with The Witcher 3 on a PlayStation 4 debug system, a version that included the games' day-one patch. He uses the word "ploughing" in everyday speech. "
100 hours is enough to pass judgement on anything that isn't an MMO.
Don't wanna read any reviews in case of spoiling myself, but the IGN quote about fetch quests and an uninteresting story have me a tiny bit worried.
I tend to get easily bored of most recent RPGs, but loved the previous Witcher games.
From the Gamespot review...
"Kevin VanOrd has played all three Witcher games and read several of the novels. He spent about 100 hours with The Witcher 3 on a PlayStation 4 debug system, a version that included the games' day-one patch. He uses the word "ploughing" in everyday speech. "
100 hours is enough to pass judgement on anything that isn't an MMO.
tbh i expected more 10's but this shows again another overhyped game.
Don't get me wrong, i'm sure it will be an amazing game but i personally kept my hype in check since the other two previous Witcher games were far from being masterpieces.
Yeah don't know how can Bloodborne get a 9 with such crappy combat
Bloodborne is very good but not a 9.
So PC review code isn't available yet according to RPS. Why do I see a review by a PC gaming outlet in the OP then?
tbh i expected more 10's but this shows again another overhyped game.
Don't get me wrong, i'm sure it will be an amazing game but i personally kept my hype in check since the other two previous Witcher games were far from being masterpieces.
That feeling that everyone else is wrong, and you're the only one that's right.
Maybe they reviewed the PS4 version. We know that all review copies out now are PS4 only.So PC review code isn't available yet according to RPS. Why do I see a review by a PC gaming outlet in the OP then?
I understand you're not smart enough to understand my previous post but you should stop twisting my words.
tbh i expected more 10's but this shows again another overhyped game.
Don't get me wrong, i'm sure it will be an amazing game but i personally kept my hype in check since the other two previous Witcher games were far from being masterpieces.
They reviewed the PS4 version.
What?
This post makes no sense.
Sarcasm right?
Curious for the Playstation Magazine review, can't access it atm.
8/10
So great story, bad open world
Meanwhile IGN says the opposite.
Does he have a history of bad reviews?
Compare the hype of this game to the scores so far.
GT says that there are often framedrops in more dense areas, swamps or whatnot. You could actually see drops in video.So I just read that these review copies are essentially with the day one patch. I don't have time to read the reviews, so can anyone please tell me if any reviewer mentioned anything about frame rate drops?
So PC review code isn't available yet according to RPS. Why do I see a review by a PC gaming outlet in the OP then?
They reviewed the PS4 version.
lol @ these reviews, it's like everybody reviewed a different game. There's proabably every combination of these out there: great strory/shit story, great open world/awful open world, meaningful sub-quests/boring fetch-quests and colectathons, amazing combat/crap combat.