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

Forums - Sony Discussion - PS3's Last 8 core 1st party retail games Average 79 Metacritic - We need to talk

Panama on 07 March 2013

Nier is one of the best games I've experienced this gen and is only on 68 meta, as well as God Hand for last gen which is on 73. I think people shouldn't adhere so strictly to critic reviews. For starters, calling any game with a green Meta mediocre is a ridiculous oversight.



Around the Network
Aldro on 07 March 2013
CGI-Quality said:
J_Allard said:
Jay520 said:
J_Allard said:
This is why I prefer quality over quantity.


What are you implying, my good sir?


That a steady stream of exclusives doesn't mean much if they are all C/B grade games.

That's about as far reaching as you can get, though. This is a prequel, at the end of a gen, that isn't trying to re-invent the wheel. Besides, a lot of older games, some considered major classics, are B/C rated. 

It's a shame that these days, a 79 isn't considered quality, but maybe I'm just old fashioned.

Like you said, a prequel.

Seriously, does anyone think people will look back at this gen and go

"GoW Ascension and Gears Judgment totally screwed the franchise".

Somehow I think it'll be more like

"Gears 1 was fucking awesome and started the generation! "
"Hey remember GoW3? Damn dawg, shit was like next gen during the time"

Yeah I know I made it sound like its about graphics but I hope you get my point xD

 

Judgment and Ascension in a way, feels like : Since they both had engines done => They could get some more $$ going into next gen (while ofcourse trying some shizz, in Ascensions case: the MP).



theprof00 on 07 March 2013

Wow this is quite a feat. Sony has basically released 8 games in between its big franchises that cumulatively add up to only two points less than ms' last 8 major brand franchise titles of halo forza and fablr.
Pretty amazing wen you then think about the scores of the last 8 major sony brand ips. Its probably a good 6-7 points higher



J_Allard on 07 March 2013
CGI-Quality said:
J_Allard said:
Jay520 said:
J_Allard said:
This is why I prefer quality over quantity.


What are you implying, my good sir?


That a steady stream of exclusives doesn't mean much if they are all C/B grade games.

That's about as far reaching as you can get, though. This is a prequel, at the end of a gen, that isn't trying to re-invent the wheel. Besides, a lot of older games, some considered major classics, are B/C rated. 

It's a shame that these days, a 79 isn't considered quality, but maybe I'm just old fashioned.

Idk if anyone said 79 isn't quality. It's just not great.



Aldro on 07 March 2013
CGI-Quality said:
Aldro said:
CGI-Quality said:

That's about as far reaching as you can get, though. This is a prequel, at the end of a gen, that isn't trying to re-invent the wheel. Besides, a lot of older games, some considered major classics, are B/C rated. 

It's a shame that these days, a 79 isn't considered quality, but maybe I'm just old fashioned.

Like you said, a prequel.

Seriously, does anyone think people will look back at this gen and go

"GoW Ascension and Gears Judgment totally screwed the franchise".

Somehow I think it'll be more like

"Gears 1 was fucking awesome and started the generation! "
"Hey remember GoW3? Damn dawg, shit was like next gen during the time"

Yeah I know I made it sound like its about graphics but I hope you get my point xD

 

Judgment and Ascension in a way, feels like : Since they both had engines done => They could get some more $$ going into next gen (while ofcourse trying some shizz, in Ascensions case: the MP).

Agreed. But then, who knows what the gamers will say? They make like both Judgment and Ascension, which would render this conversation pointless. The bread-and-butter of  gaming is lost in this pettiness over debating a number, especially a score that's, actually, good (considering all of the variables).

Yeah ofcourse, I didn't mean to imply otherwise. Heck to me it seems the lower a score gets sometimes its for the better because the vocal people seem to be the people who disagree with the critics in a lot of websites hence why this could be a good thing for both games in terms of word of mouth.. on the internet.. if thats even relevant. (Well it is to me since I spend a lot of time on it haha).

Besides, its GoW and GeoW. We know what we're getting in to and I am sure we will enjoy it. Like you said, it's not exactly "bad" scores. Far from it.



Around the Network
S.T.A.G.E. on 07 March 2013
J_Allard said:
This is why I prefer quality over quantity.


Quality is subjective and really last gen no company was perfect when it came to games. Sony does however have the highest rated exclusives. 



Farsala on 07 March 2013
J_Allard said:
CGI-Quality said:
J_Allard said:
Jay520 said:
J_Allard said:
This is why I prefer quality over quantity.


What are you implying, my good sir?


That a steady stream of exclusives doesn't mean much if they are all C/B grade games.

That's about as far reaching as you can get, though. This is a prequel, at the end of a gen, that isn't trying to re-invent the wheel. Besides, a lot of older games, some considered major classics, are B/C rated. 

It's a shame that these days, a 79 isn't considered quality, but maybe I'm just old fashioned.

Idk if anyone said 79 isn't quality. It's just not great.

It is a mere 2 points difference to MS score though. I would say both are not great.



Aldro on 07 March 2013
theprof00 said:
Wow this is quite a feat. Sony has basically released 8 games in between its big franchises that cumulatively add up to only two points less than ms' last 8 major brand franchise titles of halo forza and fablr.
Pretty amazing wen you then think about the scores of the last 8 major sony brand ips. Its probably a good 6-7 points higher

And that the last 8 major brand franchises are actually spread over from year 2010 to today whereas Sony's doesnt even cross 2012 xD



Ssliasil on 07 March 2013

Sometimes i feel like the only one that doesn't give two shits about Meta scores. There are so many trolls that make fake reviews just to bash other systems that it doesn't even matter.



...uhh...ill just put my favorite quote of all time here.

"Welcome to Pain, the second of three...You have dealt the first...now deal with me!!"

J_Allard on 07 March 2013
CGI-Quality said:
J_Allard said:
CGI-Quality said:
J_Allard said:
Jay520 said:
J_Allard said:
This is why I prefer quality over quantity.


What are you implying, my good sir?


That a steady stream of exclusives doesn't mean much if they are all C/B grade games.

That's about as far reaching as you can get, though. This is a prequel, at the end of a gen, that isn't trying to re-invent the wheel. Besides, a lot of older games, some considered major classics, are B/C rated. 

It's a shame that these days, a 79 isn't considered quality, but maybe I'm just old fashioned.

Idk if anyone said 79 isn't quality. It's just not great.

We never argued over what was "great". Your original comment said: "This is why I prefer quality over quantity". In this topic, it appears that you're saying, including Ascension, "C/B grade" games aren't quality. I'm asking since when was a 79 average score not quality?


Yeah but I kind of explained that already when someone else asked for clarification. Nothing wrong with C/B grade titles. But give me 1 or 2 really great titles over a stream of C/B grade stuff any day of the week.

And if we want to harp on the average score, as it pertains to this thread, the 79 average is helped out mightily by two yearly MLB releases.

Quality over quantity is a pretty common expression and never implies there is 0 quality on the quantity side.