Quantcast
Death Stranding Review Thread - MC: 83 / OC: 85 / GR: 84.89%

Forums - Sony Discussion - Death Stranding Review Thread - MC: 83 / OC: 85 / GR: 84.89%

Tagged games:

Nate4Drake said:

From Gaming Age :

""I was hooked from the first time I saw the title screen until the credits rolled 72 hours later. Death Stranding is immensely satisfying, and everything I could have hoped for and more from Kojima Productions. In a year that brought us a new From Software title (Sekiro), a new Obsidian RPG (Outer Worlds), a new Borderlands and a new Kingdom Hearts game, the Game of the Year competition was already a bit crowded. Death Stranding definitively plants itself at the forefront of modern gaming and is a true contender for Game of the Year. One minute you can be in the middle of delivering a pizza to a doomsday prepper in his shelter, the next minute you can find yourself fighting a giant biomechanical sludge lion, hitting him with grenades full of your own blood, all while the fetus in the pod on your chest uses a form of echolocation to help keep tabs on it. All of this while the entire world melts around you into a sludgy mess. Death Stranding is the definitive Hideo Kojima experience, and a genuine, one of a kind gaming experience.""

10/10

72 hours ! Did he said on what difficulty ?



Playing this month : Death Stranding, Gears 5 and Star Wars Jedi Fallen Order.

Around the Network

People really need to keep in mind that just because an aggregate, like Metacritic, may be a nice place to get an overview of a great assortment of reviews, as well as bringing them all in line with a singular, easy to understand score system, the sites they're pulling from can use vastly different rating systems. One man's 2/5 (or 4/10) doesn't necessarily equal someone else's opinion, even if they put the same number score at the end. While popular gaming media outlets may have conditioned you to view 7/10 as an average game, there are in fact others who would give a 5/10 to what they think is an average game. That's not even taking subjective criteria, like how heavily one weighs various aspects of the experience, into account.

If you dismiss certain reviews simply because you don't like the number attached to it, you're doing yourself a disservice in regards to how you gather your information. Maybe actually read what someone has to say about the thing they're evaluating. Maybe that person's view still won't align with your own, or provide you with a worthwhile perspective, but maybe it will....either way, at least your response to their work will mean something.

Simply having a rant about a score being too low or too high, without any context of how someone arrived there, coming solely from your own prism of perspective, is completely ignorant.



RaptorChrist said:
@DonFerrari, @Nate4Drake


Also, when did it drop to an 83? Still a good score... Hopefully I'll fall into the camp that thinks it's better than it performed by reviewers. I just hope that the 83 isn't a buffed score based on it being a Kojima game. It's possible that many reviewers went easy on this one.

To be perfectly honest, it probably is a "buffed score" to a certain degree.  Most reviewers are pretty much just gamers who can write.  Actually, since many of them are passionate about gaming, they're probably even more susceptible to nostalgia and expectations than the general population of gamers.  

However, if you're going to label a Kojima game as "buffed" then you need to step all the way into the abyss.

Imagine if Pokemon were an EA game.  Think it would get the same kind of scores?  Think reviewers would be half as afraid to piss off fanatical fanboys?  What about Rockstar games?  Think they'd score quite as well?  Pretty much any established and beloved franchise from Nintendo, Sony, or ... well, I'm not so sure Microsoft has earned that kind of credibility with gamers, but you get the idea.  Hell, even being unabashedly "indie" can be worth extra points with some outlets.

Point is, there are PLENTY of "buffed" scores out there, so many that "buffed" is actually more like "normal". 



6 hours left until the extreme edging is relieved. We are almost there folks.



 

Everything in the above reply is my opinion, from my own perspective and not representative of reality outside of my own head!

-Android user, please be gentle with critique on my spelling.

RaptorChrist said:
@DonFerrari

Sorry, I don't mean to drag this conversation on too long with you, but I noticed something that makes me think I may have misunderstood you initially, so maybe our disagreement isn't all that big.

I do agree that a reviewer should be objective, and not give a game a bad score just because it wasn't for them. A good reviewer can, for example, give a game like Sekiro or Dark Souls a good score even if they struggled to find enjoyment due to frustration or lack of hand-eye coordination.

On a side note (mostly unimportant), I would imagine that publications will try to avoid giving a reviewer a game that conflicts with their preferences, or that reviewers will request certain games that they are hyped to play.

But I think that all reviewers know this. No publication would outright state something like "Persona V is a 4/10 because I don't like RPGs". Rather, reviewers that are stating that Death Stranding is not fun are stating it objectively (in most cases I would assume). I haven't read these reviews myself, so I suppose it's possible that some are trolling or have something against Kojima, but besides those outliers, I would like to think most are being professional.

It's not that Death Stranding wasn't to their preference, but rather that Death Stranding is not a satisfying game to play (objectively) according to them. If they believe that consumers will not like the game, I think their score should reflect that.

In a perfect situation, I could see all reviewers arriving at the same score for a given game. Death Stranding has a large standard deviation so it seems that this one is difficult to objectively score.

Historically, I've found MC to be very accurate when it comes to these scores (in my mind). That would be great if this game ends up being a 90 ~ 92, but I am curious about something...

You predicted an 85 for the game, but believe that you will personally feel it's a 90 ~ 92? Is that how you always generally feel (that games tend to deserve better scores than they get), or did reading the DS reviews make you more hyped for the game than you originally were?

Hey you wouldn't believe but there were a reviewer that gave Gran Turismo a very low score because she didn't see the point in running in circles. She totally hated the genre. And yes I do agree that you also should avoid someone that is totally in love for a game beforehand (or you could have someone read his review and play some areas to validate the score). And sure I have no problem with any user saying the game isn't for him and on his book it is a 4 or whatever (although I don't do that myself, if I don't think I can give it a fair score I won't score I will just say that although technically it is good and well acclaimed I didn't like it).

Every big game we have a couple or half dozen troll reviews or clickbaiters that is quite common when you go in a lot of the metascore threads.

About my prediction versus taste. I thought it would be at most 85 (I prefer to use 5 increment or round numbers =p) because I was sure the game would have mixed reviews and divisive opinions by looking at the trailers and threads since reveal. But also I think I'll consider it a 90 from the video reviews I saw. Sure it can end up being a 6 =p

Angelus said:
People really need to keep in mind that just because an aggregate, like Metacritic, may be a nice place to get an overview of a great assortment of reviews, as well as bringing them all in line with a singular, easy to understand score system, the sites they're pulling from can use vastly different rating systems. One man's 2/5 (or 4/10) doesn't necessarily equal someone else's opinion, even if they put the same number score at the end. While popular gaming media outlets may have conditioned you to view 7/10 as an average game, there are in fact others who would give a 5/10 to what they think is an average game. That's not even taking subjective criteria, like how heavily one weighs various aspects of the experience, into account.

If you dismiss certain reviews simply because you don't like the number attached to it, you're doing yourself a disservice in regards to how you gather your information. Maybe actually read what someone has to say about the thing they're evaluating. Maybe that person's view still won't align with your own, or provide you with a worthwhile perspective, but maybe it will....either way, at least your response to their work will mean something.

Simply having a rant about a score being too low or too high, without any context of how someone arrived there, coming solely from your own prism of perspective, is completely ignorant.

Sorry but I won't subscribe to that because I have done some verification on the scores on some threads.

And you'll see a publication that gave let's say 35/100 to Death Stranding is only 0.6 points below average on metacritic for the collective of their reviews so they aren't particularly harsher. They gave a total of 7 games worse scores than Death Stranding and no one would dispute they are worse games, they also gave much lower than average on some exclusives probably to attract clicks as well. Their average score is 73 (with 41% of their reviews above average and 55% below average of metacritic). For them Otter World is a 95 game, AfterParty is a 90, Control is 100, Super Mario Maker 2 is 95, BoxBoy-BoxGirl 95, ME Andromeda is 95, For Honor 90, Busch Hockey League is 80, and the list goes on.

Giant Bomb have its offenses as well but is on average only 3/100 lower than the aggregate. But go look at the games with over 80 meta that they gave a 40.

pokoko said:
RaptorChrist said:
@DonFerrari, @Nate4Drake


Also, when did it drop to an 83? Still a good score... Hopefully I'll fall into the camp that thinks it's better than it performed by reviewers. I just hope that the 83 isn't a buffed score based on it being a Kojima game. It's possible that many reviewers went easy on this one.

To be perfectly honest, it probably is a "buffed score" to a certain degree.  Most reviewers are pretty much just gamers who can write.  Actually, since many of them are passionate about gaming, they're probably even more susceptible to nostalgia and expectations than the general population of gamers.  

However, if you're going to label a Kojima game as "buffed" then you need to step all the way into the abyss.

Imagine if Pokemon were an EA game.  Think it would get the same kind of scores?  Think reviewers would be half as afraid to piss off fanatical fanboys?  What about Rockstar games?  Think they'd score quite as well?  Pretty much any established and beloved franchise from Nintendo, Sony, or ... well, I'm not so sure Microsoft has earned that kind of credibility with gamers, but you get the idea.  Hell, even being unabashedly "indie" can be worth extra points with some outlets.

Point is, there are PLENTY of "buffed" scores out there, so many that "buffed" is actually more like "normal". 



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Around the Network
pokoko said:
RaptorChrist said:
@DonFerrari, @Nate4Drake


Also, when did it drop to an 83? Still a good score... Hopefully I'll fall into the camp that thinks it's better than it performed by reviewers. I just hope that the 83 isn't a buffed score based on it being a Kojima game. It's possible that many reviewers went easy on this one.

To be perfectly honest, it probably is a "buffed score" to a certain degree.  Most reviewers are pretty much just gamers who can write.  Actually, since many of them are passionate about gaming, they're probably even more susceptible to nostalgia and expectations than the general population of gamers.  

However, if you're going to label a Kojima game as "buffed" then you need to step all the way into the abyss.

Imagine if Pokemon were an EA game.  Think it would get the same kind of scores?  Think reviewers would be half as afraid to piss off fanatical fanboys?  What about Rockstar games?  Think they'd score quite as well?  Pretty much any established and beloved franchise from Nintendo, Sony, or ... well, I'm not so sure Microsoft has earned that kind of credibility with gamers, but you get the idea.  Hell, even being unabashedly "indie" can be worth extra points with some outlets.

Point is, there are PLENTY of "buffed" scores out there, so many that "buffed" is actually more like "normal". 

And sure if reviewers really used the full scale 0-100 to score a game it would be perfectly natural to accept 4/10 to Death Stranding not being trolling. But when the average game is about 70 and only the absolute crap gets 50 or lower then nope I don't accept under 6 for a perfectly working game or under 8 for a good game.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

At this point the only thing I care is if my pre-order delivery will get here by tomorrow or at least Saturday.
Metacritic is not really my concern now.



My Total Sales prediction for PS4 by the end of 2021: 110m+

When PS4 will hit 100m consoles sold: Before Christmas 2019

There were three ravens sat on a tree / They were as blacke as they might be / The one of them said to his mate, Where shall we our breakfast take?


@Don

Well said; I get where you're coming from. Games do seem to get higher scores than movies. But I think a lot of it has to do with things like RottenTomatoes giving a thumbs up versus thumbs down, rather than a concrete score. But yeah, it's hard to imagine a AAA game getting a 5 or 6.

@john

Six hours? I haven't looked into release times, but is this midnight around your area? Usually games come out at 11:00 p.m where I live; should I expect it sooner?


Edit: I live in CST, which puts me at 1:17 p.m. at the moment.

Last edited by RaptorChrist - on 07 November 2019

72 game for a reviewer? Means it will probably take me 150 hours.



I want this fekkin game right now!

I'm very sensitive to spoilers but I think this game will make for a fun discussion thread. I'll try not too hard to fall behind everyone else. Is this game open world then? It doesn't sound like an exploration based game, but more like point a to b, right?