The point is that critics and reviews can never dictate how much I will enjoy a game. I couldn't care less about scores. I finished Devil's Third MULTIPLE times ffs.
Yes, there are similar games with higher scores, who denied that? But still a score of 60 will never be able to make me enjoy a game for just 60%.
In my opinion gamers shouldn't rely their purchase decisions based on scores alone anyway. In these times there are plenty of opportunities to make up your own mind about liking a game or not, and if someone looks for a game like this then just go on and give it a go.
What do you mean with that last paragraph? Is this a jab?
And I APPRECIATE that point, I make it all the time and I 100% agree with it. People take critics scores way too seriously as some kind of objective judgement of what they should think. But the way you wrote your comment just seems kind of disingenuous, to be honest.
"I think this game delivers what it wants to deliver: it's just mindless unserious fun where you shoot stuff and things go boom. Not more, not less. If someone wants a deeper game that's fine, there are a lot of alternatives. Not every game must be cookie cut to please everyone."
This whole quote reads to me like a way of laying responsibility off the game. Tons of games have come out that were just mindless unserious fun and a lot of them were received much better than Crackdown. The game may "deliver" mindless unserious fun, but tons of games have delivered that better (in the opinion of critics). And that's why it's getting the scores it's getting, because even if the basic concept was achieved the baggage that surrounds the game isn't good. And I think if you asked the developers, their goal for the title wasn't to make a very basic realization of a concept which has been done before. It was to make a great product out of that, and to the critics and a lot of people that doesn't seem to be the final result. Then there's the last part where you imply that "someone" is looking for a deeper game. Critics aren't giving this game low scores because they don't fundamentally understand Crackdown, or because they expected it to be a super complex title for some reason. They just don't think it's that great of a game. A lot of fans don't even seem to like this game anyways, so again, the whole "it's not for everyone" thing doesn't really apply. If it isn't for fans or connoisseurs of the genre, who is it for? Granted, a lot of people like it as well, but that's the point. It's just a mixed result of a game, it's not a misunderstood one.
Also nah, not a jab at you, lol. That's why I didn't reply to you specifically and was replying to the thread in general. I've never seen you make a comment about troll reviews. It It IS a problem I see on this site a lot, though.
|Mr Puggsly said:
Try watching the Digital Foundry video about this game.
That way you can see what a person that enjoys it thinks, then compare that to the critics that seem to hate every aspect of this game.
I don't think the game is bad myself, I haven't played it. I sure will check out Digital Foundry's video though, I was going to watch their video anyways since one of the Digital Foundry guys said the graphics were impressive. Thanks for letting me know! Didn't know it was out yet.