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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Astral Chain reviews: Meta: 87, OC: 87

My GotY is between Fire Emblem and this game, hands down! I cannot wait to play this over the weekend!



Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

Animal Crossing NH Dream Address: DA-1078-9916-3261

Around the Network
mZuzek said:
Yeah, this is around where I thought the scores would be. Hopefully I'm not as right about the sales.

Will be getting it in early September.

Yeah, I hope it does well commercially, as well.

Judging from the Treehouse and previews, this game is something that I really want to play. I cannot wait to have it in my hands.

Nintendo's Summer has been pretty awesome up to this point. First Super Mario Maker 2, then Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3: The Black Order, then Fire Emblem: Three Houses, and now Astral Chain. Outside of SMM2, and maybe FE: TH, none of these titles are gonna be compared to Breath of the Wild, Mario Odyssey, or Smash Bros. Ultimate in terms of sales and acclaim, but these titles are great highlights for the Switch's overall library and provide something different for a Switch owner when its all said and done.

Next month will be interesting once Link's Awakening Remake, Dragon Quest XI S, Daemon x Machina, and the Nintendo Switch Lite hit.



Hiku said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
Open Critic is actually matching Metacritic now at an 88.

Admittedly it would have been nice to get a round 90 because I see a lot of people on social media who are deniers or kind of on the fence about the game, but oh well. Going to be awesome at any rate ! (unless it's not then i'd be sad).

The answer to people doubtful of games under 90 on Metacritic is probably to have them play less games with a score of 90+, and more games with a "horrifying" score of 88. Or god forbid, even lower.

Yeah, lol. 

Don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but I feel like a lot of 87-89 titles are probably games that are as quality as 90+ titles, but simply are much more niche. It certainly feels like review scores are generally tailored towards popular titles, with a lot of 90+ games perfectly capturing both acclaim and popularity. Or maybe they're just titles with slightly less polish in some areas, that overall are fun enough to be as good as games of higher review averages.

Either way, I don't really care about review scores. I'm just glad people are generally happy with the game, hopefully that nets more sales. 



Kai_Mao said:
mZuzek said:
Yeah, this is around where I thought the scores would be. Hopefully I'm not as right about the sales.

Will be getting it in early September.

Yeah, I hope it does well commercially, as well.

Judging from the Treehouse and previews, this game is something that I really want to play. I cannot wait to have it in my hands.

Nintendo's Summer has been pretty awesome up to this point. First Super Mario Maker 2, then Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3: The Black Order, then Fire Emblem: Three Houses, and now Astral Chain. Outside of SMM2, and maybe FE: TH, none of these titles are gonna be compared to Breath of the Wild, Mario Odyssey, or Smash Bros. Ultimate in terms of sales and acclaim, but these titles are great highlights for the Switch's overall library and provide something different for a Switch owner when its all said and done.

Next month will be interesting once Link's Awakening Remake, Dragon Quest XI S, Daemon x Machina, and the Nintendo Switch Lite hit.

All good games for the Switch to have. It'll be interesting to see how far sales get driven by the release of the Lite. 



Glad I predownloaded the game. Now I can just play it as soon as it releases. Not a big collector and don't really go back to play games so digital doesn't bother me at all.



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also

Around the Network

Debating between getting this at launch, or instead buying the two Nier games. On the one hand, this is shiny and new and portable. On the other hand, I could get both Nier games for the price of this.

Oh and remake Wonderful 101. That game deserves a bigger audience.



mZuzek said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

Don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but I feel like a lot of 87-89 titles are probably games that are as quality as 90+ titles, but simply are much more niche. It certainly feels like review scores are generally tailored towards popular titles, with a lot of 90+ games perfectly capturing both acclaim and popularity. Or maybe they're just titles with slightly less polish in some areas, that overall are fun enough to be as good as games of higher review averages.

That's true without being a conspiracy theory. It's not that reviewers rate games lower because they're not as popular, it's that they think of games lower because of it. It's not exactly down to popularity as much as it is about reputation, though - and new IPs don't have any reputation, hence why they usually never get a 90+. Take a look at Horizon: Zero Dawn for example, considered by many one of the games of the generation, but it has the same metascore as Fire Emblem: Three Houses. Nothing against Fire Emblem, that game looks pretty good, but I mean, yeah, you get what I'm saying.

Yeah and I basically agree, which is why I hope this game does well sales-wise even though it likely will do OK at best. 



AngryLittleAlchemist said:
mZuzek said:

That's true without being a conspiracy theory. It's not that reviewers rate games lower because they're not as popular, it's that they think of games lower because of it. It's not exactly down to popularity as much as it is about reputation, though - and new IPs don't have any reputation, hence why they usually never get a 90+. Take a look at Horizon: Zero Dawn for example, considered by many one of the games of the generation, but it has the same metascore as Fire Emblem: Three Houses. Nothing against Fire Emblem, that game looks pretty good, but I mean, yeah, you get what I'm saying.

Yeah and I basically agree, which is why I hope this game does well sales-wise even though it likely will do OK at best. 

I think it will do Xenoblade 2 numbers personally, which is great for the type of game it is.  I hope it does better, but this seems like a safe, realistic bet.

Even on facebook, the ads are all over the place and the comments section is bleeding hype.  That alone does not tell what the sales will be, but it is certainly a good sign.



Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

Animal Crossing NH Dream Address: DA-1078-9916-3261

mZuzek said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

Don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but I feel like a lot of 87-89 titles are probably games that are as quality as 90+ titles, but simply are much more niche. It certainly feels like review scores are generally tailored towards popular titles, with a lot of 90+ games perfectly capturing both acclaim and popularity. Or maybe they're just titles with slightly less polish in some areas, that overall are fun enough to be as good as games of higher review averages.

That's true without being a conspiracy theory. It's not that reviewers rate games lower because they're not as popular, it's that they think of games lower because of it. It's not exactly down to popularity as much as it is about reputation, though - and new IPs don't have any reputation, hence why they usually never get a 90+. Take a look at Horizon: Zero Dawn for example, considered by many one of the games of the generation, but it has the same metascore as Fire Emblem: Three Houses. Nothing against Fire Emblem, that game looks pretty good, but I mean, yeah, you get what I'm saying.

I would say it is more a matter of mathematics.  Basically, a niche title is one that appeals to a more narrow demographic.  As such, the likelihood of pulling a few reviewers who don't like it goes up significantly vs a game with a very broad appeal.  This is why niche games have a higher probability of having what sound like borderline nonsensical reviews that seem to utterly miss every point.

As for Horizon Zero Dawn, I haven't seen a ton of "Game of the Generation" accolades thrown its way since the hype cycle surrounding its launch died down.  I would say it decidedly doesn't fit anywhere near the definition of niche or whatever that , say, most of Platinum's games.  It was a very mainstream game with a very mainstream aesthetic and very mainstream game design.  I would say its score is pretty fair. 



I'm afraid to look too much into this game. Already so many on my wishlist but not enough money for all of em. Dx