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

Forums - Sony Discussion - God of War review thread - Meta: 94 OC: 95

AngryLittleAlchemist said:
KLAMarine said:

He doesn't? Why not?

Because a certain fanbase ruined it for everyone. 

What happened?



Around the Network

I made a prediction of 95 over on vizioneck.com and I wasn't far off.



KLAMarine said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

Because a certain fanbase ruined it for everyone. 

What happened?

I think Jim just doesn't like review scores. He got a lot of backlash for giving BOTW a 7, but more than that I think a lot of the tradition behind game scores does not line up with his philosophies. More than anything though, I think he realized people go to him for his impressions and not for some conventional review style (Dynasty Warriors 9 is a good example).



It's hit the top 50 all time on gamerankings (94.57%)
http://www.gamerankings.com/browse.html



AngryLittleAlchemist said:
KLAMarine said:

What happened?

I think Jim just doesn't like review scores. He got a lot of backlash for giving BOTW a 7, but more than that I think a lot of the tradition behind game scores does not line up with his philosophies. More than anything though, I think he realized people go to him for his impressions and not for some conventional review style (Dynasty Warriors 9 is a good example).

Any word from him on the matter?



Around the Network
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
I did say it would land in the 94-96 range

Even though I wasn't sold on the game till recently. I will pick this up!

I told you it's going to be a good game. 



KLAMarine said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

I think Jim just doesn't like review scores. He got a lot of backlash for giving BOTW a 7, but more than that I think a lot of the tradition behind game scores does not line up with his philosophies. More than anything though, I think he realized people go to him for his impressions and not for some conventional review style (Dynasty Warriors 9 is a good example).

Any word from him on the matter?

http://www.thejimquisition.com/changing-criticism-or-fuck-game-reviews/



PEEPer0nni said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
I did say it would land in the 94-96 range

Even though I wasn't sold on the game till recently. I will pick this up!

I told you it's going to be a good game. 

If you're reffering to the first part of my comment, then I always thought the game was going to be in the 94-96 range, and I have old comments saying as such. I even had to convince a Playstation fan that this kind of reception was absolutely possible (and probable). The thing is, Metacritic does not define to me what a good game is. 

If you're referring to the last part of my comment, then the developer behind the scenes videos and that tweet about how it compares to other video games is really what did it for me...



AngryLittleAlchemist said:
Intrinsic said:

No it isn't. Lets not confuse unique quirky gameply (eg tank controls) with 'broken gameplay' eg missed hit points, being able to stab/shoot enemies through the same walls that prevent them from comomg through to you, enemies being able to climb some stairs and not others giving you a loop hole advantage.....etc.

Well that's actually the problem. What is or isn't a broken gameplay mechanic is up for debate. There are the obvious ones like what you mentioned. But there is a lot of nuance between the obvious and the obscure. 

Oh I am aware of those. Eg, like the tank controls I mentioned, or using a bow and arrow in KCD. Or being able to use Pauls deathfist in Tekken......

Some could look at stuff like that and call it broken (wrongly if I may add) simply because it doesnt work for them or they cant wrap their heads around it but thats just wrong because they aren't broken.

But the examples I gave are clear examples of broken gameplay...... and those arent subjective. Because they are broken. Something about the gameplay either prevents progression or makes progression too easy or at least easier than designed. Things like that usually gets patched out of the game if the devs have a choice.



This is a game a score below 80 can only be a troll (just like would be the case with Halo, Zelda, Mario, GT, and some others).



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."