Doom for Switch Reviews - 78 Metacritic (45 critics)

[DonFerrari]

Mnementh said:

Pemalite said:

False.
The PC can be portable on top of having superior visuals, controls and performance.

Indeed they can. However, artificially inflating scores because the hardware is portable is biased in my eyes.
Review the game for the games merits, not the hardware it operates on.

The difference with your examples is that... The Home Consoles don't have compromised controls in their comparison which directly influences gameplay, mobile devices do.

VR is also an entirely different kettle of fish and requires a much different approach to game development in general.

The Xbox One version also outscores the Playstation 4 version, despite the Playstation 4 version being technically superior in many aspects and that is also silly in my eyes.

Home console have often inferior inputs compared to PC. It is usually not a problem with todays games as they are tailored with console in mind, but try the original Starcraft or games like this that heavily rely on mouse on console.

VR is different, as handheld is different as mobile touchscreen-devices are different.

I agree that XB1 and PS4 versions are similar enough that the scores shouldn't show much differences. But that doesn't mean a platform with inherent differences like the Switch can't improve or deteriorate the experience. It fully depends on the game though, which effect the platform has.

Yep consoles have inferior ports, and no issue with they getting some discounts on the score (unless PC while having better specs end up showing worse due to bugs);

And which improvement have Switch brought to the game to warranty better score?

Mnementh said:

DonFerrari said:

Some games will be better played on VR, others will be the same (or the fact that PSVR makes the game show as in a 300" TV demands an increase on the score?). The simple fact that a PC game is mostly played on a monitor, a console on a big TV and a handheld on a small screen doesn't change the game alone. The only instance where that should be relevant is when the game depends on the portability to work or improve, like geolocation, social factors, etc. In this case the game just downgrade from being portable.

Several PS3 games that came 1 year after X360 sold better, so what is your point on it?

Well 500k for Doom and 1M for Skyrim would probably mean good profits so that would push more support.

You outright say we ignore factors like control-scheme? As I said as example: I really like Jagged alliance, but I despise the 3DS-port, as the controls work horrible. You say it should be ignored, as the game stays the same. The fact that 3DS doesn't use a mouse shouldn't impact the score of the game. Well, I disagree heavily.

That some PS3 late ports sold better than on X360 shows the selling power of the PS3. Some late ports on Switch also sold better than on any other platforms. But the general rule of thumb is: late ports sell worse. That the trend was in some cases reversed shows, that other factors played a big role.

Does that mean you expect sales better than on other platforms for Doom and Skyrim on Switch? But then you say my expectations already would mean financial success, so I'm confused what your point is here.

Were did I outright said it?

The fact you play on KB+M, control or HH in itself shall not give extra or minus point to the game unless that really impact the game in a meaningfull manner.

Errr on the case of PS3 as far as I remember it was more common for late ports to sell better than worse, but that is irrelevant anyway.

Nope I don't expect better sales than any other consoles. I said that if the game do bad, there shouldn't be excuses. And also that the numbers you posted should mean a good success. But if the game instead do 200k (instead of 500k) and 500k (instead of 1M) that would mean it didn't do well, do you agree?

monocle_layton said:

DonFerrari said:

Welcome to the group that considers reviewers to be completely unnecessary and unprofessional.

Some games will be better played on VR, others will be the same (or the fact that PSVR makes the game show as in a 300" TV demands an increase on the score?). The simple fact that a PC game is mostly played on a monitor, a console on a big TV and a handheld on a small screen doesn't change the game alone. The only instance where that should be relevant is when the game depends on the portability to work or improve, like geolocation, social factors, etc. In this case the game just downgrade from being portable.

Several PS3 games that came 1 year after X360 sold better, so what is your point on it?

Well 500k for Doom and 1M for Skyrim would probably mean good profits so that would push more support.

Technically it have everything worse than ALL other platforms, but can be taken with you... Notebook and PSVR connection can also do it without being that lowered.

X1 deserves 2 points more than PS4 because the controller of X1 makes the game better in case you don't know... and is better than the PC version even if you can choose between X1 control or KB+M because the higher framerate, textures and resolution are distractful (sarcasm).

So the score of the game should be based on the price of the machine?

What? I never said that.

The Switch is portable, and plays a very good game with obvious compromises. What exactly is the issue? Resident Evil will obviously get a higher score on a ps4 or xbox one compared to a fucking ds. It's also why Skyrim VR might score higher than Skyrim

So if price have nothing to do with score and portability why bring it?

For me no issue. If the game runs fine and players like it, that is all fine. The discussion was why should portability be a factor to increase or lower the score if that portability doesn't impact the game itself?