I specifically say that unless the rest of the game is way better than the demo, that it's a 60-65 game. I also say that my issues with the game are largely mechanical, which means they are unlikely to change throughout the game, and that one of the largest issues others seem to have with the game is that it gets worse later in the game.

Based on my experience with the game, the nature of my problems with the game, and what I've been seeing/reading about the game, 60-65 seems like an accurate score to me.

Better?

Yeah, still doesnt change the fact that the game should have been in development more. This is a classic investment/profit scenario. They didnt trust the IP enough so they didnt invest more in it. ANd the stealth jab at NMS is also part of the new approach MS has: bash it PC like. I am not impressed in all honesty.

The Order 1886 has much better story, atmosphere, graphics and music. Also shooting mechanics are better in The Order 1886 and so are the guns.

These two games just had different directions so comparing them and saying one is better than the other in a way is trying to downplay what the other does better.

Nope, most people would believe it is clickbaiting (but comparing a 89 or 95 game that get a 4/10 score is quite diferent than a 63 game getting the same 4/10) so in the case of this game it could be just sincere dislike for the game instead of clickbaiting.

And not only fanboys would say that, but when you are the head of a company you need to be better than the average joe and lashing out the media because you disagree with the scores. Even more because he didn't talk about the pressure they make for better scores on other outlets. So it sounds more like being butthurt than to trying to improve the industry.

MS fans still think he is a good guy, but time after time he already showed how much of a twister he is bending the truth to his and his company interest.

If the develope makes a demo that deserves a 63 then most people won't buy the game after playing it. So it would be the fault of the developer for putting an underwhelming demo to represent the game. The demo should represent most aspects of the game and what can you expect, not only be a generic portion of it. And considering our experience with movie/game trailers and demos usually those are the best parts. So since you weren't able to show to the guy that the game get so much better after what the demo shows you failed miserably to deny his point.

And the funniest part is these would be the people that would shit on The Order (that some liked very much, I enjoyed it, even more because a friend loaned to me) is know asking for more love for Recore. The Order didn't had a single flaw or bug I can remember, it only were too short and with little action parts for it to get a very good score in contrast with the good ambience, graphics, plot, mechanics, etc.

It's a $40 game right? So I fink MS new a long time ago that the game was not going to be top quality.

I don't know. I got Ratchet and Clank, Valkyria Chronicles, and Gravity Rush for $40 each. They aren't exactly brand new experiences but they're some of the best times I've had on my PS4.

I guess my opinion is a little biased. Review's narrative is almost non existent. No lengthy cutscenes and a lot of samey looking environments but, for the right type of gamer, it's a breath of fresh air. It's a great platformer, has some intense combat, has RPG elements, decent (not great) graphics, and a Metroid/Zelda feel. Can't recommend it to everyone (especially gamers who don't like to think, just want a good story, or hate exploring). It's still a 6-7/10 game so i can't hate on critics but it's a good game in a lot of ways. In some ways, it's a great game. 

No jabs were taken in this video and in this thread... 

I'd rate the thing over 66 and I don't like the game... 

But the game has a metascore of 63% based on 68 different reviewers, who is the clickbait review site in this instance? The 47 mixed reviewers who are responsible for it having the 60%ish meta score? Or the guys giving it 90% claiming it is mixing Megaman (which ones) and Metroid (the 2d games? The prime series?.... pinball? federation force?) perfectly, even admitting that the platforming game has camera issues and loading problems yet still gives it a solid A 90% rating.



But sure.... some of those 53 sites who didn't score this game a positive score were looking for clicks >.>

Ganoncrotch said: But the game has a metascore of 63% based on 68 different reviewers, who is the clickbait review site in this instance? The 47 mixed reviewers who are responsible for it having the 60%ish meta score? Or the guys giving it 90% claiming it is mixing Megaman (which ones) and Metroid (the 2d games? The prime series?.... pinball? federation force?) perfectly, even admitting that the platforming game has camera issues and loading problems yet still gives it a solid A 90% rating. But sure.... some of those 53 sites who didn't score this game a positive score were looking for clicks >.>

Half the negative reviews and 1/3 of positive ones... 

AsGryffynn said: Ganoncrotch said: But the game has a metascore of 63% based on 68 different reviewers, who is the clickbait review site in this instance? The 47 mixed reviewers who are responsible for it having the 60%ish meta score? Or the guys giving it 90% claiming it is mixing Megaman (which ones) and Metroid (the 2d games? The prime series?.... pinball? federation force?) perfectly, even admitting that the platforming game has camera issues and loading problems yet still gives it a solid A 90% rating. But sure.... some of those 53 sites who didn't score this game a positive score were looking for clicks >.> Half the negative reviews and 1/3 of positive ones...

Given some of what I seen of the game (just watched, haven't played) but what the top review says about it being "one of the Xbox ones best action games" I think would really make you question the quality of the consoles other offerings if you happened to pick up a Re:Core bundle with the X1 and thought... that was one of the best offerings.

But yeah to say some reviewers were harsh to it... but in such masse is a really strange path to go down, I mean if it was that 1 negative review that Uncharted 4 got or something completely away from the norm I would understand... but the majority of reviews are in the "meh" category, not bad... but not great either.

PC Meta is down at 59% with fewer reviews just 16 but the same sort of mix, 2 pos , 11 mixed and 3 negative. This isn't just a clickbait thing... it's just a mediocre game being rated as such.