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

Forums - Sony - IGN: Where Is the Call of Duty: Black Ops Declassified Review?

Barozi on 14 November 2012
Soleron said:
Barozi said:
Soleron said:
I have no experience of shooter games. I watched 10mins of that livestream.

The game looked much better than 1/5. I don't really understand. The game looked great for a handheld game, you could switch between weapons and kill bad guys, and the levels looked interesting enough. It certainly looked like it was done by a professional studio with millions of dollars. That says more of a 3/5 to me?


when I watched it they were doing one of the singleplayer missions.

I heard the AI shooting him long before he was walking around the corner. Apparently the singleplayer is 1 hour long, has no connecting storyline (so basically it's like the Spec Ops missions in MW2 and MW3 but even shorter) and it's incredibly hard to get into any multiplayer match.

How is that going to make the game above average (if we take the 2.5/5 = average standard) ?

I bet I could hack together a 3D shooter that would get at least 2/5 from Giant Bomb in less than a week. The art assets would be in MS Paint, I'd be using a Doom-clone tutorial as my engine, but given those limitations it would be polished and thoughtful.

What I'm trying to say is, they got the majority of what it takes to be a playable game. It looks good, it plays OK (you can shoot things and run around) and its flaws are mostly in comparison to the CoD you're used to, rather than objectively.

So you could make a game with broken multiplayer and 1 hour of singleplayer content, put in on Vita (or any other platform if it doesn't matter), sell it for $50 and still get a 2/5 ?
Personally I think they wouldn't even review it.



Around the Network
CChaos on 14 November 2012

Well, might be worthwhile to say that Nihilistic made a legitimately bad game if the reviews continue as is. Metacritic user reviews can't be trusted, what with the ratings trolls and what not. The company likely doesn't need people making excuses when doing so won't help make it better. Functional doesn't mean it's worth $60...or even $20.

It's not like it's the first time they made a lousy game though. I'm not entirely sure why people have this tie to it because it's a Vita game in some other forums and such. It's like a bad review is somehow insulting the fanatics. The Vita is a good console. So is the 360 and the PS3. There's some amazingly bad games for all of them. The freaking out already going on over this is kind of bizarre and pretty amusing.



zuvuyeay on 14 November 2012
CChaos said:
Well, might be worthwhile to say that Nihilistic made a legitimately bad game if the reviews continue as is. Metacritic user reviews can't be trusted, what with the ratings trolls and what not. The company likely doesn't need people making excuses when doing so won't help make it better. Functional doesn't mean it's worth $60...or even $20.

It's not like it's the first time they made a lousy game though. I'm not entirely sure why people have this tie to it because it's a Vita game in some other forums and such. It's like a bad review is somehow insulting the fanatics. The Vita is a good console. So is the 360 and the PS3. There's some amazingly bad games for all of them. The freaking out already going on over this is kind of bizarre and pretty amusing.


people thought it might help but it's making it worse = freak out



                                                                                                                                        Above & Beyond

   

Viper1 on 14 November 2012

Nihilistic has never had a console or portable game score over 69 on Metacritic. Ever.

Did anybody really think that was about to change now?



The rEVOLution is not being televised

Soleron on 14 November 2012
Barozi said:
...

So you could make a game with broken multiplayer and 1 hour of singleplayer content, put in on Vita (or any other platform if it doesn't matter), sell it for $50 and still get a 2/5 ?
Personally I think they wouldn't even review it.

Does the price really bring it down a whole 20% or 40% though? The verdict could easily have been, wait until this one is under $20 sticker price.

And of course they wouldn't review it, it wouldn't give them enough exposure and ad views. It's just a hypothetical. I agree that the difference between 6/10 and 8/10 is subjective. But 1/5 should be reserved for games that cannot provide their core gameplay.

I'm not defending Vita or its games. To me it looks pretty dead and this is a huge screwup. But I believe the 1/5 is more for shock value than a genuine reflection of the review content.



Around the Network
CChaos on 14 November 2012
Viper1 said:
Nihilistic has never had a console or portable game score over 69 on Metacritic. Ever.

Did anybody really think that was about to change now?

Apparently a shocking number of people...



osed125 on 14 November 2012

Ouch only 3 reviews on meta and we have 20, 30 and 40. So much for being Vita's savior...



Nintendo and PC gamer

Cub on 14 November 2012

I find this hilarious , I spent more time playing project 83113, what a joke lol



CChaos on 14 November 2012

This one isn't on Metacritic yet either, but found it all the same, from Metro.

http://www.metro.co.uk/tech/games/917970-call-of-duty-black-ops-declassified-review-d-o-a

Looks like the average is keeping up...



Soleron on 14 November 2012

What percentage of games get 30 or less on Metacritic, or on game review in general? Are there any cumulative frequency graphs for game reviews?