Well optmized isn't lack of bugs (that would be more like polished) is a different story then on being "heavy on assets, low on the impact". So if a game doesn't look to be pushing the technical aspects and still need a good HW I wouldn't say the code is well optimized. KH3 is made with UE4 as well as many great looking games, so I find it hard to say CD3 is the best in optmization.

There is a very big difference between not being part of the game (and we have seem critics take points from some great games from the lack of MP or SP campaign). And a game usually is considered as bad as its worse portion. So there have also been great games that lost points from having glaring mistakes on the extra content pumped in.

People disagreeing are people that really like the game and are upset with the score. 

Already said that some games have lost good points from not having a feature the reviewer wanted, and usually games lose points from extra content that wasn't good.

So if you think the MP is shitty, then it really should impact the total score and the 60 doesn't seem like unfair score.

A game should never be evaluated by how much its fanbase like it, if that was the case most games would get much bigger scores)

This ^

There are tons of mediocre games on Metacritic, where the fanbase has come out and given the game an average user score of 8.5 or higher. There are also a lot of great games, where the fanbase came and metabombed the game's user score over minor things. 

It is expected that fanbase like the game and also bitch and moan when unsatisfied.

Okay having played some of Crackdown 3, it honestly deserves all of the 5's and 6's. It is a very bland and uninteresting game, even with Gamepass it just feels like I am wasting my time playing it when there are games that do every that Crackdown 3 does, but better.

In fact having replayed Crackdown 1 just a few months ago, I am shock how many of the flaws from that game weren't address in 3 like lock-on removes so much challenge from the game and bad the platforming can get.

Again you demonstrate you don't really know much but you talk anyway. Crackdown 3 performs well, has a relatively high resolution for UE4, the presentation is sharp and clean looking, great use of effects, its not considered buggy, therefore its a polished product.

KH3 IS NOT considered polished. I assume it still has an erratic frame rate, runs on at a significantly lower resolution on base X1 and its a linear game in comparison.

Again, a game as polished as Crackdown 3 and with no glaring flaws generally don't score a 60. Less than upset, I think people find it a odd.

So you agree with me, critics arbitrarily decide when to ding a game for its MP or lack of? Stop bloviating and just admit I'm right.

I did not say a game should be reviewed based on fan opinions, that's dumb. Here's a thought, people praised Sonic Mania for just being more 16-bit era Sonic. People like NSMB because its like classic Mario games.  Mario Kart hasn't changed much since the Gamecube release. So why can't Crackdown just be more Crackdown?

Essentially you have fans that just wanted more of the same and are enjoying it. Its a polished game called Crackdown doing what its supposed to do. The critics on the other hand seem to feel Crackdown needed to change open world genre or something. I think that's where the disconnect is. Other IPs can stay the same and get praise, but Crackdown could not be that I guess.

Yakuza avatar?

Very much how I feel when reading endless Yakuza dialogue, watching long cutscenes and getting in countless fights. "I am wasting my time playing it."

Again, to each his own.

Moderated - think-man

I don't really know what Yakuza has anything to do with this thread aside from my icon, since Yakuza and Crackdown are very different series. Its like you can't understand the fact, that a game you enjoyed is something that most people consider to be shallow, boring, forgettable, outdated, and just plain old mediocre. 

You said, "I am wasting my time playing it." It just felt ironic from the guy with a Yakuza avatar, a huge time sink that's "shallow, boring, forgettable, outdated, and just plain old mediocre." Has it changed much since the original PS2 release? I mean really?

Essentially, I'm just seeing some irony from a guy with your avatar.

The formula has been the same, but they actually have went changed up the mechanics big time like the jump from Kiawmi 1 to Yakuza 6 was pretty big, they made a brand new engine and made some major changes to the combat and it does feel like a current gen game. (admittedly though some changes were for the worse) 

Hell even something like Yakuza 5 from Yakuza 0 is pretty different combat wise with each of 0's playable characters having 4 different fighting styles, for each them. 

Also I certainly wouldn't call Yakuza forgettable, even some of the weaker games have great moments and do some interesting things.

But honestly, it seems you are trying to derail this thread by trying to call out a franchise I like, just cause I agree with the critics on a game when it comes to its reviews saying its mediocre and not worth playing, but is one you like which is completely fine.

Come on...   really?   The guy is giving his OPINION about CD3 and your come back is Yakuza is "plain"  and "forgettable"???    First of all, how is that relevant to the topic on hand, and second of all,  I don't think anyone has ever referred to the Yakuza games as that, but okay, that's your opinion...  Idjust dont think majority of people who played it, would agree with u. 🤷‍♂️