By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Pemalite said:
DonFerrari said:

Well it isn't just in the same timeframe but they also compare to the best games that released within the same gen.

We have seem many great games score within 85-90 even though we personally though it deserved 95, and usually it have to do with reviewers not evaluating what the game is and have, but what they wanted to be, what it doesn't have (even if the dev didn't want to put it and fans don't care) and details or mechanics other games have used.

If you force your memory to the start of the generation you'll see cases of games that were much better than last gen counterparts but received lower scores.

Anyway at least 85 is a pretty good score, but I'll trust you on that it should have been higher based on your impressions of the game.

Well, Gears of War 4 released in the same generation as Gears of War 5, so Gears of War 5's score should be reflected against that... It doesn't need to be a 95, it just needs a score higher than Gears of War 4.
If we were comparing it against a 7th gen Gears of War title, then that is another issue entirely.

Either way, it doesn't really matter, anyone who enjoys Gears will pick this game up, those who don't, probably won't grab a copy, irrespective of a couple of irrelevant metacritic points.

My issue is just the consistency of review scores, irrespective of platform or game.


High scores may bring some additional sales, but being on gamerpass it is likely that anyone not sure if they will like or want to buy may at least try a short sub to test the game, so I agree there isn't much issue on the 85 itself (and also agree that a better game should have a higher score, but to many times that isn't true on the reviews).

And about the consistency, professionalism, objectivity, etc of reviewers that is a discussion almost all metacritic threads have and usually most agree reviewers do a poor job.



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."