Pemalite said:
Which is absolutely baffling... Because Gears 5 is superior to Gears 4 in every single way on PC and Xbox, reviewers need to take note of what older games scored and score successive titles in relation to that.
Was always unnecessary to me! There are games that ranked highly on metacritic that I absolutely dislike... And other games which ranked poorly which I absolutely adore. |
The detail is that usually reviewers will give a lower score if the sequel is at the same level or not much better.
Also the more and better games released besides the game under evaluation also pressure the score down.
Funny observation from Azz because on the Sony metacritic he was defending the lower scores as being valid plus on SoT and some other MS games that 70+ were great scores plus scores already not being important to determine if the game is good or bad on a generic term.
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
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."