|
irstupid said: Reviewers tend to ignore Micro's, or it don't hinder their scores that much because of their whole time crunch. This is their job, they only have say 20 hours to review a game or something, so they just play the base ol' game and then review it. Thus the "GRIND" required to get the great loot they don't experience. |
Edit: After having read several reviews on the game, I've discovered that there's a "True Ending" that is locked behind the post-game mode. The post-game mode has you defending forts, and requires you to level grind. And guess what? Once you hit post-game you quickly run out of in-game money to spend in the shop. So your choice is to either grind like a madman, or spend real-life money in the shop. This explains the high review scores. Most reviewers only played until the end credits, and didn't both to dig into the postgame.
There are a few reviewers out there that aren't under any sort of time crunch. Jim Sterling, Destructoid, and Easy Allies all go at their own pace. The reviews are better for it in the end. Then we have excellent sites that just no longer issue review scores such as Rock Paper Shotgun, and Eurogamer. PC Gamer, and Gamespot both pretty much gave the game a thumbs down. Also, for all we know the game deserved a metascore of 93 without microtransactions, but got dragged down because of them.
I'll pick this up in a year or two when the GotY edition comes out with all the content on a single disc for $40. Edit: Or never because the post-game "true ending" grindfest sounds downright predatory.
