Remind me of Yelp Reviewers episode from South Park. They feel that they’re incredibly important.
1 Like
Maybe, but that is something an normal consumer can’t control and honestly is pretty silly for gamers to obsess over.
1 Like
I don’t believe at all it’s like that for anyone here though. If the game were to score many 70s, sure I’ll go in and thinking why didn’t they score this way higher. But it won’t affect my experience. If I like it, I like it.
I doubt anyone wants it to score badly. Clearly we all want it to be the best game possible. We can debate whether that’s tied to scores and aggregate scores and the issues with that separately. But it’s the ‘nervous’ thing I take issue with. What is there to be nervous about? Unless your validation comes from being able to crow about a score I’m not really sure why people who didn’t make the game would be nervous.
Nervous I guess because they want this game to be fantastic, and I guess they are just a bit scared it might have some disappointing things that could lower the score. None of us have played it. But that’s my guess for being nervous.
With the Prey reviews? Or you mean Redfall reviews?
Fallout 4 drawback based on history seems to be about more of the same and bugs. I know fans have more but that’s on them. Starfield is a whole new park. Can’t really connect from predecessor. Same thing if Hi-Fi Rush was announced and release much later, people would look Ghostwire reviews and think they are incapable to make high 80s titles.
It’s that ridiculous.
We aren’t normal consumers though. We are more than the average gamer. We care about the brand, and about the games that come out. If the brand produces massive games that don’t review well and succeed like they want it in turn can negatively affect the consumer.
For the average gamer, review scores may just dictate if the game is worth purchasing. If they didn’t matter then no one would care.
Negative reviews and reception hurt Redfall so much that there is a decent chance their entire plans for the game post launch have changed or been scrapped. Reviews matter, maybe not for your personal enjoyment but they matter in the grand scheme of things.
Prey reviews was harmed because of a bad bug that hurt the game. Redfall was likely the same but on Phil as well.
I’d also say that understanding how the score aggregators work and knowing this is a big game that attracts controversy because it’s Xbox and Bethesda means people are getting expectations way out of whack. I’ve seen people predicting like 96 scores…you basically need just one outlet to score low for clicks which is an absolute nailed on certainty to rule out mid to high 90’s and people are completely bent out of shape I think.
The way modern reviews go I think this will be sitting mid 80’s at best but will still possibly be one of the best games ever made and be discussed in those terms for years to come. Possibly. The score doesn’t dictate that because it’s completely arbitrary based on a bunch of subjectivity and likely skewed by some agendas.
We are talking very specifically about people being worried about review scores. I am not worried about Microsoft.
Bethesda proper doesn’t make bad games, the game is already a top seller on Steam, did you like Skyrim? Did you like Fallout 3 and 4? Well, then I really doubt that some journalist giving it a 7.5 instead of a 9 is going to be of much material value.
What a shame. I loved Prey.
Fallout 76 exists.
I don’t think it’ll review bad.
But how well a game is received can absolutely effect how much lost launch support a game gets too.
They fixed the game crashing bug but the damage was done. It’s why Prey is beloved without talking about the fault that damaged the review because of the fix.
I had the game at launch, so only reviewers were affected? They patched at launch?
Yeah i said earlier that i think the sheer ambition and what the game is trying to do could mean it ends uo with some lower scores due to it not clicking with some reviewers but if that is the case then id be real happy we’re getting a game thats attempting something new and is crazy ambitious. High 90’s would be great but even if its mid 80’s I’ll still be excited. Only way I’ll fall into any fanboy hysteria is if it has Redfall level scores.
I don’t remember but probably.
Fallout 76 wasn’t a product of the studio that made those other games. Its name was changed to Bethesda Austin sure, but the primary studio was a studio in Texas that was making a cancelled MOBA called Battlcry.
Ill accept that Bethesda proper should have looked at the state it was in prior to launch and made the call to delay it (the game is in a really good place now, and is actually really good), but we all know the circumstances of Zenimax at the time were what led to MS buying them to begin with.
Todd Howard led games, historically, straight up slap.
Yeah I think this has a potential score range from about 76-91 and likeliest is around 84-87 I’d say. People of course deliberately are suggesting it’s going to score 98 which is impossible just to set it up for failure.
This is just some basic stats. Unless you think no outlet will go with some crazy score for clicks and also assume that there will be blanket full scores across the board for such a large game which virtually never happens.
It’s extremely weird to me and just seems like they want ammo for their console list wars.
IGN gave it a 7, shock. Too much rock indeed.
1 Like