Carzy Zarx’s PC Gaming Emporium - Catch Up on All the Latest PC Gaming Related News

[JEMC]

HoloDust said:

JEMC said:

While I understand your point, the truth is that a game score should reflect the quality of a game as a whole. It's the function of the actual review to let you know what is what a game does right and wrong. So, if a game does wrong things like battle mechanics or animations, the game score should note that it's not a very good game, even if it excels in one.

Of course, that brings us to the old debate of using the whole range of scores, not only from 5/6 to 10, and that we all should read the actual reviews, not just the scores, but I'm affraid that that's lots cause.

Also, I enjoyed BoTW .

I haven't read the review, but I know exactly what he means...all Piranha Bytes games are aquired taste, for one thing or the other, but they excel in most important things when it comes to open-world.

85 is right about in range where I should expect it, if it's quite good game - personally, even Gothic 1&2, which for me are still the best open-world action-RPGs ever made, are in that 80-90 range...simply put, that genre, beside being probably the most demanding too pull off, has not been improving since Gothic/Morrowind...quite the opposite in my opinion...and remains terribly underdeveloped compared to its linear cousins.

And I said, or at least tried to, it's perfectly ok to be excited for a game that doesn't excels in any aspect excep the one you are looking forward the most. But that doesn't mean that a review score should put the rest of the game aspects aside just because of that.

To make my point a little more clearer: if, back in school, I got a 10 in mathematics but failed in all the other subjects, I would still have to repeat the course and would be scolded by my parents, despite that 10.

It's the overall game that matters and should be reflected on the score, not just one part of it.