I also think that Sony games are reviewed more harshly.
I hate Metascore pissing contests.
Thats all.
| Lawlight said: I also think that Sony games are reviewed more harshly. |
Sure, all those perfect scores for the Last of Us when it obviously deserved 11/10.
| Lawlight said: I also think that Sony games are reviewed more harshly. |
People always start saying this whenever hyped games turn out to get lower scores than expected from some sites.
It's been said for Nintendo, it's been said for Sony and I won't be surprised if, in the case that a X1 game or two gets lower scores from certain sites, it is said about MS.
| JayWood2010 said: With Sony's First Party being heavily bragged about this generation especially in the mid years (2009-2011) it appears that Sony has struggled in late years with quality games. On the other side they have a wide variaty with quantity. Just wanted to hear other's thoughts. |
I wouldn't use the current scores of Knack and Shadow Fall since the bulk of reviews haven't even come out yet. There are currently less than 20 for both. You can assume a lot more will happen after launch. However, I do understand that even currently those scores are not what you would expect given the hyperbole of some people.
Generally speaking, any game that averages an 80 or higher on Metacritic is worth even a little bit of bragging rights. Obviously the closer you get to 10 the better. Puppeteer, The Last of Us, Uncharted: Golden Abyss, God of War: Ascension, MLB 13: The Show, LittleBigPlanet Vita, Journey, Gravity Rush, and MLB 12: The Show are all worth feeling confident about though obviously some of them were not nearly as good as other titles in the franchise.
In my experience Polyphony Digital, Naughty Dog, Santa Monica Studio, and Media Molecule are the studios that most people think of when referring to Sony's first party strength. Guerrilla Games and Sucker Punch to a lesser extent. Another strength of Sony that people point to is Sony's ability to release many first party games with a great variety regardless of critical reception.
So, how you look at things will always determine if you think it was a strong last couple of years or not. If you liked a lot of the games that were released then you'll likely feel that Sony had a strong showing and you certainly can't knock the diversity of the titles offered. If your only gauge of 'strong' is critical reception, then Sony hasn't been as strong the last couple years but given that Naughty Dog and Santa Monica Studio only released one internally developed game each (Ascension's director wasn't Barlog or Asmussen) while both Polyphony Digital and Media Molecule have yet to release their latest titles this year, I'd say it's better to wait until the end of this year or even 2014 before we begin to fret over Sony's offerings in regards to critical reception. There are rumors that both Naughty Dog's and Santa Monica Studio's latest offerings may release within the next 12 months while both Infamous: Second Son and The Order: 1886 are receiving a lot of hype. More so than even Shadow Fall was getting. Let's just hope that doesn't turn out the same.
Raven722 said:
I wouldn't use the current scores of Knack and Shadow Fall since the bulk of reviews haven't even come out yet. There are currently less than 20 for both. You can assume a lot more will happen after launch. However, I do understand that even currently those scores are not what you would expect given the hyperbole of some people. Generally speaking, any game that averages an 80 or higher on Metacritic is worth even a little bit of bragging rights. Obviously the closer you get to 10 the better. Puppeteer, The Last of Us, Uncharted: Golden Abyss, God of War: Ascension, MLB 13: The Show, LittleBigPlanet Vita, Journey, Gravity Rush, and MLB 12: The Show are all worth feeling confident about though obviously some of them were not nearly as good as other titles in the franchise. In my experience Polyphony Digital, Naughty Dog, Santa Monica Studio, and Media Molecule are the studios that most people think of when referring to Sony's first party strength. Guerrilla Games and Sucker Punch to a lesser extent. Another strength of Sony that people point to is Sony's ability to release many first party games with a great variety regardless of critical reception. So, how you look at things will always determine if you think it was a strong last couple of years or not. If you liked a lot of the games that were released then you'll likely feel that Sony had a strong showing and you certainly can't knock the diversity of the titles offered. If your only gauge of 'strong' is critical reception, then Sony hasn't been as strong the last couple years but given that Naughty Dog and Santa Monica Studio only released one internally developed game each (Ascension's director wasn't Barlog or Asmussen) while both Polyphony Digital and Media Molecule have yet to release their latest titles this year, I'd say it's better to wait until the end of this year or even 2014 before we begin to fret over Sony's offerings in regards to critical reception. There are rumors that both Naughty Dog's and Santa Monica Studio's latest offerings may release within the next 12 months while both Infamous: Second Son and The Order: 1886 are receiving a lot of hype. More so than even Shadow Fall was getting. Let's just hope that doesn't turn out the same. |
Very goods post I literally agree with every single thing you said :)
Any ways im not too worried about their first party. I still believe (personal opinion) that sony had the best first party games this generation. I know they will come soon enough, no doubt about it.
orniletter said:
|
You're forgeting Tom Chick's 3/5 review or Polygon's 7.5 or the many websites which gave it less than a 9.
It should be sitting at 98 on MC.
Play4Fun said:
People always start saying this whenever hyped games turn out to get lower scores than expected from some sites. It's been said for Nintendo, it's been said for Sony and I won't be surprised if, in the case that a X1 game or two gets lower scores from certain sites, it is said about MS. |
Nintendo's games always review relatively highly - even the shovelware.
Lawlight said:
It should be sitting at 98 on MC. |
I wouldnt say every review negative automatically hinders a reviewer.
As for Quarter to Three, that guy is just a shit reviewer http://www.metacritic.com/publication/quarter-to-three?filter=games
JayWood2010 said:
I wouldnt say every review negative automatically hinders a reviewer. |
Oh god I agree. When I saw his review for Halo 4 I almost came unglued. A 1 out of 5 and he even said, in the comments I think, that he'd give the game a 0 out of 5 if he could. Seriously? A game only gets a score like that if it's truly a broken and unplayable mess. I understand everyone is entitled to their opinion but when a game is averaging an 87 from the media and you give it, basically, a 20 and claim you would have gone lower if you could... yeah you're just an ass. That's a clear example of someone's bias overriding his journalistic integrity. Assuming he ever had any.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
