By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
JRPGfan on 01 November 2019
Edit Thread
LudicrousSpeed said:
JRPGfan said:

Harsh isnt even the right word..... to express how silly that score is, its worse than "harsh".

There has to be some sort of standard for what a review score means, or else the entire score metric is baseless and worthless.
3.5 is the sort of score you give some broken peice of crapy indie game, full of bugs.

All you need to do is watch a trailer or some gameplay and you can tell its not a 3,5 score.
That reivewer should be banned for click bait score giveing.

You can’t mandate a standard for something based entirely on opinion. There’s nothing that says an indie game or cheaper game should be reviewed differently. There’s nothing that says an exclusive should be reviewed differently than a multi platform. Some outlets do that, some dont. 

When you say a certain score should only be reserved for certain qualifications you’re speaking purely from personal opinion and bias. But those are what makes criticism interesting. People reviewing are also applying their own opinions and bias. You seem to want a vanilla, standardized form of reviewing and that sounds incredibly boring to me.

Also, I disagree that a big budget AAA title can’t be scored a 3.5 because it’s not an indie title or it isn’t buggy. The Order 1886 is a great looking, fully functional and bug free title. I wouldn’t bat an eye at a 3.5 score for it because the things it tries to do well, it fails miserably. I haven’t read the 3.5 DS score and probably never will, but if the reviewer found major flaws with key elements then why can’t it be a 3.5?

Also maybe if you feel this strongly about scores, don’t rely on a review aggregator? Or don’t even look at them. Find a stable of reviewers who share your opinions and bias and score standards and only read their reviews.

Your right, the problem is right now indie games get a pass.
They arnt judged nearly as harshly on graphics/sounds ect as AAA games.

It goes both ways, if you believe what you say.


1886 isnt a 3,5 score game though.
Also yes if someone reviewed that as a 3,5 that would be a troll or clickbait review as well imo.

Its short, and its repeative use of monsters..... but its not a bad game.

a 3,5 score should be for a bad game.

"Also maybe if you feel this strongly about scores, don’t rely on a review aggregator? Or don’t even look at them. Find a stable of reviewers who share your opinions and bias and score standards and only read their reviews."

I rather see this broken review system with metascore get fixed, than ignore it, and just look at stable reviewer ect.
Granted my only way to do anything is to express things on a forum like this.