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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Watch Dogs currently has an 82 on Metacritic

spemanig said:
Burek said:
spemanig said:
That's not accurate. It has an 81 on the PC, and a 77 on the XBO. You should either specify that it's just the PS4 version, or add in all the console scores.

But such a small sample of reviews. It seems that PS4 is the leading platform for reviews as well, and that nobody is even touching last-gen versions with a ten foot pole...


That doesn't matter. They still count. Leading platform doesn't mean only platform.


Yes, the review score doesn't matter on which platform they review but the point is that most of the reviewers are using only PS4 version to review as their choice and posted the scores in that respective section in metacritic.



GAMING is not about spending hours to pass/waste our time just for fun,

its a Feeling/Experience about a VIRTUAL WORLD we can never be in real, and realizing some of our dreams (also creating new ones).

So, Feel Emotions, Experience Adventure/Action, Challenge Game, Solve puzzles and Have fun.

PlayStation is about all-round "New experiences" using new IP's to provide great diversity for everyone.

Xbox is always about Online and Shooting.

Nintendo is always about Fun games and milking IP's.

Around the Network

They should have released the game with a indy studio label on it or a Nintendo label. That way the critics and fans would call it a 10 or a classic off the bat.



Hm. Seems like a fair score to me, honestly.



This is a metacritic flop... 82... bleh... so lame!



"I've Underestimated the Horse Power from Mario Kart 8, I'll Never Doubt the WiiU's Engine Again"

I regard Watchdog as a game both fantastic and not so good because the graphics it has on ps4 is really good and it's content is fasinating ,while ubisoft has produced 6 versions on different consoles,which make it impossible for ubisoft
to make a better game



Around the Network
Ka-pi96 said:
HipHopGodd said:
They should have released the game with a indy studio label on it or a Nintendo label. That way the critics and fans would call it a 10 or a classic off the bat.


Sad but true.

 

Lower than I expected, this gens review scores are very different to last gen.


lol Like I said. Make it indy or Nintendo and it's a 9-10 game. Seems only those games get good ratings nowadays. Try to make something cinematic and they find fault with every little aspect. Make something simple and pointless and they call it a great game. 



Why do people expect every AAA game to be a 9-10 game? Then when the game gets an 8 on Metacritic they say they're not buying it anymore? That's some sheepish sh!t man!



82, for a new IP is outstanding, reviews are harsher, as they should be, last gen reviews gave out 9.5's and 10's like candy, game reviews are a joke anyway. Numbered scores should be abolished, just recommend it or not, the text will detail if it is your type of game or not.
WD will sell a tonne,.



QuintonMcLeod said:
celador said:
77 on X1 with 5 reviews. Maybe lower because of the amount of reviews. On the other hand, Game Informer gave the X1 version 80 and the PS4 85.


The real question is why?

The only differences between the two is resolution and minute graphical detail. That's enough to have a 5 point difference?

Both are 85, maybe there was a mistake at metacritic.



HipHopGodd said:
Ka-pi96 said:


Sad but true.

 

Lower than I expected, this gens review scores are very different to last gen.


lol Like I said. Make it indy or Nintendo and it's a 9-10 game. Seems only those games get good ratings nowadays. Try to make something cinematic and they find fault with every little aspect. Make something simple and pointless and they call it a great game. 


It will probably continue on until reviewers realize the double standards they are presenting.  The score is great to me and seems like it would be at least in the high 80s if they were doing it the same way as last gen. Great game so far.