pezus said:
man-bear-pig said:
Andrespetmonkey said: 7.2 form IGN |
Damn...that is pretty dismal.
|
No, 7.2 is a "Good" score. Above average.
|
http://www.metacritic.com/publication/ign?filter=games&num_items=100&sort_options=critic_score
Their average score is 69 but most people would agree they are far more leniant these days; and you also must remember that 7 no longer really means 'Good', and that the scores are skewed. You merely need to read the review to get that vibe. A score of 72 puts it on the 59th or 60th of 115 pages, which is veeery slightly below average for the site, and places it in such good company as Pac-Match Party, Jump O' Clock, Karoke Revolution and many others (which you can read for yourself if you'd like).
I'm not hating on the game, because I'm sure it's quite an enjoyable experience and one I will pick up eventually I'm sure. But you can't use the argument that 7.2 is a "good score" or "above average", because, sure, it is technically, but it clearly isn't anymore if you merely look at review scores. A good example is the sister site of IGN UK, which only became a seperate site not long ago. That has an average review score of 83, despite the fact a lot of scores from the two publications are either the same or within a point of each other. IGN have become far more lax, and 7.2 on the site, or any really, is just a sign for many gamers of a poor quality title; regardless of how right or wrong it is.
Regardless, let's wait for more reviews to trickle in so we can build up a good picture. I have a feeling it will be a love-hate game so nailing down your opinion from reviews would be difficult...