Hmm I´m still not sure wether I should get the digital us version or the physical german one (releases on the 20th)....
OT: Well aside from the obvious click bait reviews (valid criticism but ridiculous scores) it pretty much falls in line with my expectations. Not a fully fledged home console mainline FF but still good (7.5-8).
 |
|
| Yup...RO friggin rocked |
Will get in when it is cheaper. Not sure what I expected from metacritic
GamechaserBE said:
Oh oh.... When you pop in Type-0, one of the first things you'll see is a cut-scene with the following chunk of narration:
Again, this is one of the first things you see. It goes on:
...you know what, you get the idea. Final Fantasy Type-0 isn't afraid to be incomprehensible, spitting out proper nouns like it's trying out for Worst Tolkien Impersonation at the bookstore. But unlike, say, the old spinoff Final Fantasy Tactics—which is similar to this game in a lot of ways—Type-0 doesn't have strong enough heroes and villains to convince you that this is a world worth investing in. It's gritty, sure, but it doesn't have a whole lot of heart |
Sounds good to me(story), people enjoy Wrpgs stories and those are the bland ones.
EDIT: Didn't seem to catch the quotation I was trying to speak on - see next post. Also, how do you delete you own junk posts (like this one)?
Retro Tech Select - My Youtube channel. Covers throwback consumer electronics with a focus on "vid'ya games."
Latest Video: Top 12: Best Games on the N64 - Special Features, Episode 7
| ktay95 said: Where are the Episode Duscae reviews?? |
It got a hype/10.
If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.
it has 7 positive reviews
2 mixed
1 bad
Not sure how you can say the game is bad based on that. If IGN. Gamespot, Gamestrailers, and Destructiod give it an 8+ and Kotuku gives it a yes that tells me its good. I can ignore a 40 from a no name site.
So Far
IGN-80
Destructiod- 85
Kotuku- Yes
Still waiting on GS and GT.
psn- tokila
add me, the more the merrier.
vivster said:
Did you expect a better score? |
I did. But I am mostly concerned by the content of the reviews, as others have said.
I've not played the PSP original.
starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS
| tokilamockingbrd said: Destuctiod (who is usually pretty harsh on games) just added their review and its an 85. Metacritic needs to think of a way to prevent click bait reviews from getting added to the total. I think any score 20 points outside of the mean should get dropped and the new score calculated without it. If more bad scores come in the total will get lowered and then the scores would be shown. So if a game has a 72 on meta All of the 10s and 95s would get tossed but so would the 20s and 40s.... |
It all works out in the end. Click bait on smaller reviewers dampens the effects of the advertising payouts on larger reviews. If they started filtering which reviews to include for each specific review (after having already narrowed the field by determining which publications they draw from) Metacritic would lose all creditibility. Truly good games have fewer "click bait" reviews, since there is a fine line between sensationalism (which brings in readers, but doesn't neccessarily destroy your audience via credibility) and absurdity.
What would be the measure (acid test) of what constitutes a "click bait" review, anyway? If it were simply an outlying score, you'd remove the whole point of having people weigh in with their opinions. As fara as this game is concerned, all the reviewers find the same basic flaws. The given scores differ depending on how important those particular aspects are in a game to the said reviewer. That's how criticism works.
Retro Tech Select - My Youtube channel. Covers throwback consumer electronics with a focus on "vid'ya games."
Latest Video: Top 12: Best Games on the N64 - Special Features, Episode 7
vivster said:
It got a hype/10. |
Awesome, day 1 buy for me =D
StuOhQ said:
It all works out in the end. Click bait on smaller reviewers dampens the effects of the advertising payouts on larger reviews. If they started filtering which reviews to include for each specific review (after having already narrowed the field by determining which publications they draw from) Metacritic would lose all creditibility. Truly good games have fewer "click bait" reviews, since there is a fine line between sensationalism (which brings in readers, but doesn't neccessarily destroy your audience via credibility) and absurdity. What would be the measure (acid test) of what constitutes a "click bait" review, anyway? If it were simply an outlying score, you'd remove the whole point of having people weigh in with their opinions. As fara as this game is concerned, all the reviewers find the same basic flaws. The given scores differ depending on how important those particular aspects are in a game to the said reviewer. That's how criticism works. |
to be fair I saw no advertisements on any of the sites for Type 0.
And it is hard to determine what is clickbait and what is not. However it is common for to remove outlilers from statistical data. The formula could be complex based on standard deviation and range or it could be simple like I said, more than 20 from mean its out, within 20 its in. What point would their be in intentionally writing a click bait article if you know from playing the game your score will be no where close to within 20% of the average.
I mean look at the order, there are reviews that were 90+, they need to be gone, but so do the 20s and 40s, nobody really believes the game was a 9 or 2.
psn- tokila
add me, the more the merrier.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
