Mr Puggsly said:
|
DonFerrari said:
You don't need to play something to not like it, you can see gameplay and read the reviews glaring points to base the opinion that the game isn't good. Even more you can't even be sure if people that are criticizing haven't played just because you don't like what they say.
|
Agreed, but you made a lot assumptions in this thread that were inaccurate.
That's why I told you to watch the Digital Foundry video, to clear up some of that.
|
Assumptions? I have gone from what was written on the reviews here. The one assumption you may claim I made was a counter on yours this game being the most polished UE4 implementation and the like.
And since you agreed the MP is garbage, a 7 game filled with garbage MP doesn't seem inapropriate to have a 6 Meta. If they got rid of MP they could have risen to 7 Meta. MS fault for imposing it and not making sure quality match. No reason to cry wolf on the critics for considering a big portion of the game on the score.
uh-huh said:
smroadkill15 said:
I've played 12 hours so far and I can say that it's not a bad game. I don't see a reason for it to have any scores below a 6. The game I would compare Crackdown 3 to No Mans Sky. The developers over promised on certain aspects and the end result wasn't what people were hoping. In this case, the multiplayer for Crackdown 3. I already said this, but the multiplayer for Crackdown is lackluster. No Mans Sky scored roughly 7/10, which is about where I would land my score for Crackdown. On the other hand, Crackdown 3's single player is exactly what I wanted and expected. Most people who enjoy Crackdown feel this way. It's easily a better game than Crackdown 2 which scored low 70's. If someone doesn't like Crackdown, then no problem. Everyone has their own taste in games. This doesn't mean Crackdown is a bad game or trash. I keep hearing these words from people who haven't even played it, and are simply parroting what others are saying. I wouldn't put 12 hours into a game if it was bad. |
No way this game deserves to be scored as well as NMS. NMS fell short of its promises at launch and rightfully got lambasted for it. But it still achieved quite a bit that had never before been attempted.
crackdown 3 didn’t promise much to begin with it looked and played like a cookie cutter last gen game and still managed to fall short. This level of laziness and incompetence doesn’t even deserve a score, critics should’ve refused to even review it. And I suspect if this weren’t a MS first party game it would’ve came and went without anyone even noticing.
|
Exclusives will generally generate more attention for the good and for the bad. So yes there would be less discussion but possibly the score could be higher.
smroadkill15 said:
DonFerrari said:
I thought you were talking about here. Because I haven't gone to all these places to see how much the game is being trashed... and since it is on so many places, it leads to believe it isn't just critics conspiring to say the game is bad.
You don't need to play something to not like it, you can see gameplay and read the reviews glaring points to base the opinion that the game isn't good. Even more you can't even be sure if people that are criticizing haven't played just because you don't like what they say.
|
Considering Vgchartz is good at eliminating trolling and fanboy stuff, we don't really see it. Other places that are terrible at policing like N4g and Youtube, it's everywhere. Look at the Userscores for metacritic with a 4.4. Of course this isn't just a Crackdown issue. It's all over the place with certain games.
Well it certainly helps their credibility if they has played the game before praising it or hating it. I'm not going to take someone's opinion of a game that they haven't even played. It's easy to tell from the people who actually played the game and those who don't by what they say.
|
I don't really care about outside of VGC for this type of discussion. GoW, BotW and several other great games were called trash on these type of places.
