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

Forums - Sony - Uncharted 4: A Thief's End Review Thread - MC: 93 / GR: 92.70%

Tagged games:

Kerotan on 12 May 2016
Jranation said:
Kerotan said:
I know it's a satire troll review but it's still being counted and the score is 93. What did the great visionary Kerotan say? Meta 93.

People say I'm lucky. And thet I am. But guess fucking what, I make my own luck. thank God for me.

 

Thankyou for your great luck! 

My luck tends to rub off on others.  Follow me religiously and it might just get you a pot of gold at the end of my rainbow. 



Around the Network
Aerys on 12 May 2016

Thats à Shame they gave it to review to such à troll.

Looks like à user troll review " too many détails, it makes me blind" , Seriously.



Predictions for end of 2014 HW sales:

 PS4: 17m   XB1: 10m    WiiU: 10m   Vita: 10m

 

Kerotan on 12 May 2016
riecsou said:
lol this review in 3 hours have generated more comments than the last 2 days

And that's why the Washington post did it. 



melbye on 12 May 2016

9/10 seems appropiate to me



Slimebeast on 12 May 2016
BraLoD said:
"A Thief’s End” is overflowing with useless detail. It overwhelms the eye with so many different points of focus that one almost clings to the over-the-shoulder focal point at the center of the screen, where the gun reticle can at least hint at a potential ways of engaging with all of the simulated objects and effects that are otherwise impossible to identify, let alone differentiate."

The guy is seriously pointing on his review that the game has so much detail it has to be a problem.
That it looks so good that he'll take points away from it.
That's right from forum users jokes straight to a metacritic "professional" review.
Like when he played the "looks too good, 7/10", that actually happened.

Seriously, how did Washington Post allowed such a obvious troll article to be posted? The guy is not alone on the click bait issue, Washington Post is to blame just as well.

Ridiculous.

Actually it's written with the same criteria and standards as a typical movie review.

Movie reviews are more demanding, critical and may I say, sophisticated. Gaming journalism is still only in its infancy and it will take a long time before it reaches the same level.



Around the Network
GribbleGrunger on 12 May 2016
BraLoD said:

Metacritic also tweeted they take scores directly from Washington Post, that's the score they were sent to post.

Yes, and that's why I think there is a mix up. The original was 4/4 (still there) and then they are told 4 and assume 4/10. That's what I believe has happened. If not it's suspicious. A 95 gets ND bonuses and that's why it's important.



 

The PS5 Exists. 


Teeqoz on 12 May 2016
GribbleGrunger said:
BraLoD said:

Metacritic also tweeted they take scores directly from Washington Post, that's the score they were sent to post.

Yes, and that's why I think there is a mix up. The original was 4/4 (still there) and then they are told 4 and assume 4/10. That's what I believe has happened. If not it's suspicious. A 95 gets ND bonuses and that's why it's important.

A 95 won't happen regardless of the 4/10.



GribbleGrunger on 12 May 2016
Teeqoz said:

A 95 won't happen regardless of the 4/10.

I'm not interested in that one single jot. It's about principles and good practice.



 

The PS5 Exists. 


Teeqoz on 12 May 2016
GribbleGrunger said:
Teeqoz said:

A 95 won't happen regardless of the 4/10.

I'm not interested in that one single jot. It's about principles and good practice.

Yes, but then those principles are why it's important, not that ND gets a bonus for 95



Slimebeast on 12 May 2016

I'm glad that review was posted because it works a bit like a reality check to a lot of fans who have allowed themselves to get completely carried away.