Quantcast
God of War review thread - Meta: 94 OC: 95

Forums - Sony Discussion - God of War review thread - Meta: 94 OC: 95

Bristow9091 said:
How many more reviews can it actually get at this point, any chance of it going back up to a 95?

High chance of it. A few more 100s would do the trick.



                                                                                                                                            

Around the Network
CGI-Quality said:
Metallox said:
The horror, the game dropped 1 point.

While I agree with your overall point, in the case of GameCritics, I get why people are bothered by it.

It's a troll review, but it's just a minor scratch on what it is an excellently received game. I agree with that notion, actually. Everything about this game is lovely, heck, even the dialogues are cool. 



Metallox said:
CGI-Quality said:

While I agree with your overall point, in the case of GameCritics, I get why people are bothered by it.

It's a troll review, but it's just a minor scratch on what it is an excellently received game. I agree with that notion, actually. Everything about this game is lovely, heck, even the dialogues are cool. 

It's not a troll review. These guys honestly don't like anything from Playstation, it's clear from their scoring of games that have gotten universal praise and from what I have read they seem to be very open about this. As to why they are reviewing Playstation games knowing they don't like the general style and darker tones over nintendo and are so very invested in Nintendo to the point of trashing Playstation IP, I do not know, it's mind boggling that they wouldn't not see it as an asset to their site to bring on some more staff for the playstation side and have a more diverse pool of opinion among them, it's pretty obvious that no matter how much they like a playstation title that group think within their bubble effects there final review and scoring. 



 

Also, a 95 hit, it might not be much but every little helps :)



 

Kratos can bounce back, those official PlayStation Magazines are awfully lazy with their reviews so it could be a while before GOW hits a 95 again.



Around the Network
GhetooBillGates said:
Kratos can bounce back, those official PlayStation Magazines are awfully lazy with their reviews so it could be a while before GOW hits a 95 again.

When are they due ? 



I think the more attention we giving dubious reviews like this, the more they like it and will continue to do these types of reviews. I hadn't heard of either Qt3 or Gamecritic until i saw posts on this site. And the Gamecritic review is currently the hottest article on N4G so clearly their low scores are working. We should really just ig orw these guys and accept some rogue reviews.



Uncharted 4, a 5/10 :) they must of rated a lot of objectively worse games higher, whats the best example?



GProgrammer said:
Uncharted 4, a 5/10 :) they must of rated a lot of objectively worse games higher, whats the best example?

How can a game be objectively worse?



Azuren said:
Errorist76 said:

 

Gamecritics : PS exclusives: 
Bloodborne 92 meta -> 70 Gc 
Uncharted 4 93 meta -> 50 Gc 
Horizon ZD 89 meta -> 65 Gc 
Uncharted TLL 84 meta -> 65 Gc 
NieR Automata 92 meta -> 65 Gc 
Persona 5 93 meta -> 65 Gc 

 

So much for that “trust” issue.

Couldn't be that he just doesn't care for more mature themed games?

 

Trends don't always indicate correlation. For example, high ice cream sales trend with higher shark attacks. Not because sharks hate ice cream, but because ice cream is eaten more in the summer and people also swim more in the summer.

@bold
Then he shouldn't be reviewing the game in the first place.
Lets use the ice cream for example. A food critic that doesn't like ice cream review how the ice cream tasted in a ice cream parlor. Do you think he/she will be able to critic it objectively? Do you think the critic will have the experience and knowledge to even know on why it's good or bad? 

It's the same with game reviews if he hates those kind of games then he doesn't have the right criteria to review the game.

Errorist76 said:
Azuren said:

Couldn't be that he just doesn't care for more mature themed games?

 

Trends don't always indicate correlation. For example, high ice cream sales trend with higher shark attacks. Not because sharks hate ice cream, but because ice cream is eaten more in the summer and people also swim more in the summer.

Don’t tell me you think that a 5/10 for Uncharted 4 is in any way justifiable.

Same goes for the others.

Even though reviews always are to an extent subjective, professionalism dictates that reviewers should at least TRY to stay objective.

This is in no way the case with all those games. If they work like that they clearly shouldn’t review games.

And they especially shouldn’t be listed on MC.

They clearly have an agenda, don’t try to justify it.

Agree with the bold. Professionalism should always be the priority and be objective as much as possible. 

VGPolyglot said:
Errorist76 said:

Sure man...strange goal posts you’re moving there for them.

Different reviewers use different meanings for their scores, you call their 5/10 unjustifiable yet game reviews are subjective, so of course it's justifiable, it's based on personal experiences with the game.

What's justifiable for you? Does reviewer should be subjective?

Reviewing a game has a scale to be followed. It shouldn't be subjective. As much as possible you should be objective because you are being paid to review a game and liking and reviewing are two different things.
Reviewing a game should have a scale. 
I will use GT reviews (shame they are gone)
They use a scale

  • Presentation
  • Design
  • gameplay
  • story

Gamecritics : PS exclusives: 

Bloodborne 92 meta -> 70 Gc 
Uncharted 4 93 meta -> 50 Gc 
Horizon ZD 89 meta -> 65 Gc 
Uncharted TLL 84 meta -> 65 Gc 
NieR Automata 92 meta -> 65 Gc 
Persona 5 93 meta -> 65 Gc 

But still it's really hard to justify the list above and the timing of releasing the review. It's really hard not to think they are doing it for clicks and this kind of reviewer should not be tolerated. 
Purposely lowering a score for the sake of personal interest.
Last edited by NoCtiS_NoX - on 28 April 2018