Conina said:
Cherry-picking at its best! The PS4 launch is 16 months ago... only ONE of these listed games was released in the same time frame since PS3 launch, two of them were released in year 5.
And if Heavy Rain counts as "Sony's First-Party-Exclusive"... what has happened to quality games the Sony published in 2006 and 2007? Genji: Days of Blade (Metascore 55), Untold Legends: Dark Kingdom (Metascore 58) and Lair (Metascore 53)?
|
THIS.
@ OP
Beside the article being cherrypicked, the real problem is twofold.
First, it seems that reviewers have started to go back to a normal rating scale as they had before. One where 5/5.5 is average, 6/6.5 is above average, 7/7.5 is good, 8/8.5 is great, 9/9.5 is excellent, and 10 is perfection (or as close as you can get to it.) This is in contrast to the ridiculous one they, for some reason, adopted last gen where 7-7.5 was average, 8-8.5 was good, 9-9.5 was excellent, and 10 was supposed to be near perfect, but your game could still have a bunch of bugs and still get this rating.
Bascially, they adopted a school grade system, where anything score below 8 was looked down on and anything below 7 was regarded as a piss poor game. This meant an average game, that some could still enjoy, were seen in the same light as bad as games that got a 1 or 2, which were broken pieces of crap that barely work. Unfortunately, I feel they have been a little overly harsh on games this gen to compensate for it, while also not informing their readers (who have are still on the old review scale) of the change.
And two, some reviewers are using low scores to either try to make a point or, worse, for clicks to their site. It's obvious that more clicks means more ad revenue, so I don't really need to explain that one. For making a point, some will give it a lower rating if they don't like that type of game, maybe they prefer another game in the same genre, or maybe they didn't get their goodie bag with the game. We see this with people giving games that, objectively speaking, should be getting at least (above) average reviews, getting 1s and 2s, scores that should be reserved for games that are riddled with bugs and with (below) average graphics/gameplay.
Really, if a game has very few bugs and meh-average graphics/gameplay/sound, that should be enough to get into, or very close to, to the 5-5.5 range. From there, you add 1/2 points or whole points for things the game does above average (graphics, sound, story, gameplay/mechanics, control.)
