When has that ever not been the case? People always enjoy being validated in their like or dislike of something.

I can already tell from the early reviews that this one's gonna be divisive. Some folks hate it, others love it...like Dark Souls in a way I worry that there won't be much in terms of middle ground - you either love it or hate it. you either get it or you don't. you either forgive its shortcomings to praise what it does well or you don't.

I still have no idea how this game actually plays, so I'll wait till it comes out to decide if it's for me. Good to see that it's getting a lot of love, though.

Also, yeah, you folks debating what's the RIGHT way to review a thing...just generally seem to not understand what you're talking about. Seriously, it's kinda funny how steadfast you all are to push your own single agenda on ART, instead of taking each instance on its own like you should. Sometimes, you need to review a piece of art based on what it was trying to convey, sometimes it's better to compare it to others. sometimes it's okay to let bias affect you, sometimes it is not. Occasionally it's okay to go into something with preconcieved notions of what it's going to be, other times it's not. The important thing is transparency, becuase the purpose of a review is not to do the thinking for you, it's to give you context and information based on that context so you can go into the game with a basic understanding of what you can expect.

All the stellar reviews for the MLB: The Show series on Ps4 don't mean squat to me because I don't play sports games. The outstanding reviews for Call of Duty don't outweigh my personal hatred for microtransactions and thus have no effect on my willingness to buy those games. The point is that everyone's perspective is slightly different and a review should serve as another point of reference, not a premade opinion.

I'm reading these reviews and it sounds to me like Death Stranding isn't for me. It sounds like it's an outstandingly well-written and well-made game with a tonne of value...but like FNAF or even The Last of Us/Uncharted, it sounds more like a STORY than a GAME. So even though some people are praising the game, that means little to me because the thing I like most in games appears to suffer. Doesn't make it a bad game, but does mean it doesn't sound like it's for me. No idea why this seems so hard to understand for so many people.

Holy crap, there is some serious mixed reviews going on with this game. An 84 average is a good game, and one that I imagine I'll pick up still, although I'll admit after reading the MC main page and seeing something like this:

"Death Stranding is an irredeemable piece of garbage that should serve as a warning to publishers who give developers carte blanche to create ‘art’."

... Makes me wonder just how other reviews say things like this:

I was hooked from the first time I saw the title screen until the credits rolled 72 hours later. Death Stranding is immensely satisfying, and everything I could have hoped for and more from Kojima Productions.

So, it's the most satisfying game ever, while also complete garbage in the eyes of someone else? To be honest, it's possible that both of those reviews (100/100 and 35/100) are complete bias, and the score was in the mind of the reviewer before even playing, but looking at the average, an 84 is a damn good game, just not game of the year material. Still what I'm going to be playing next weekend, and I'm sure it's going to be great, but it fucking sucks that it's not 90+. Imagine waking up this morning to seeing MC at 97/100 or something like that, and we'd be all pumped to play the greatest game released in years.

Im sorry, but have you played any of those games?
It just boggles the mind a bit, when people say "story/cinematic driven game" I think something more in the lines of Heavy Rain, Detroit or Until Dawn - Which are precisely that. TLOU or Uncharted are nothing of the sort, they are 97% gameplay, 3% story. They are as focused on their story as Final Fantasy, Mass Effect or any Rockstar game. Its just a plot device to kick things off or give them direction. 
Obviously I havent played Death Stranding (duh) but from the looks of it, its the same. It has a story -used as a simple device for the concept of the game (which is as ambiguos as they come) - that drives the gameplay - which seems to be the focus. 

That is because you are giving a score for how much you liked the game, not how good the game is.

I don`t like Halo and would score it 3 on my like, but I know the game is 8 or 9 so I would avoid reviewing.

If CD3 was a great game at doing what it intended to do sure it would deserve a better score.

And also reviews should be as objective as possible and evaluate the product, not only "I like or had fun with it" but for the technical parts as well.

We are discussing how these bias and lack of standard affect the average not if someone should give relevance to one specific reviewer that do bad.

Think about it as being cautious and helding expectations so you get pleased when you play.

Huh. I didn't even know I had quoted you before doing it early in this thread. Sorry if it feels that way.

But really if you feel like I'm following you, that just tells me that I've been confused about your behaviour a lot.

Not really though, which is the point.  I thought Sekiro was completely unbalanced and was **** as a result.  I thought overall design was awful as well.  Enemy placement was an issue for me.  Others thought it was perfection.  Which is exactly why some people love Death and others hate it.  There shouldn't be a shock when people rate games different.

Games are art, it can't be reviewed by a technical assessment.  Personal feelings drive how people think about art.  

Ultimately I don't see the point in the argument "only people who love the game should review it."  That makes no sense, other than inflating scores.  

Jeff Gerstman

I think some conversations I’ve had about Death Stranding’s lategame story and dialogue have moved me from “maybe I’ll eventually see this through” to “maybe I’ll just uninstall this and never look back.”

I can try and pretend to hold back any expectations but I don't know if I have the capability to trick myself in such a way. With so many games coming out, I use MC as a measure to help me figure out if a game is worth buying, with some exceptions.

Without having played the game myself yet, I can safely assume it will be enjoyable to me, worthy of purchase, and fun, but not perfect.

In other words, if the game got a 55% MC, I wouldn't be buying it, as it would most likely be a bad game.

This is why I didn't buy Days Gone. I was really hyped for the game, but after reviews came out, I was disappointed and decided not to bother with it. There are exceptions to this rule, however. For example, MediEvil got a 67%, but I bought it anyways (and already beat it).

So, does Pokemon SnS have a chance to outscore Death Stranding?