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

Forums - Sony Discussion - The Last of Us Part II - Review Thread (MC: 93 / OC: 93)

Tagged games:

TruckOSaurus on 09 June 2020

I'll go with 92.

Also, I sincerely don't know why some people think Sony games get treated unfairly. Most of them have great scores.



Signature goes here!

Around the Network
Truthstation on 09 June 2020

88



AngryLittleAlchemist on 09 June 2020
BraLoD said:
TruckOSaurus said:
I'll go with 92.

Also, I sincerely don't know why some people think Sony games get treated unfairly. Most of them have great scores.

It's not that they are treated unfairly, is that Sony games will ALWAYS be prone to more criticism, independant of how good they are.

You can see games that win several GOTYs like Uncharted 4, TLoU and GoW just never reach the likes of Rockstar or Mario/Zelda peak scores (97+) even as they get as much recognition from everybody anyway.

(GoW wins lots more GOTYs from the same critics that scored it lesser than RDR2, for example).

You gets reviews dropping TLoU a 6 because when Joel dies his death is not permanent, or U4 a 4 because the game is too beautiful, or GT6 a low score (forget it, think it was 4) because it's not open world.

When it happens to Pokemon for example (too much water) it becomes a widespread meme, but that happens all the with Sony games.

Also you see things like this often in reviews: it's the best game I ever played, 9.4

Sony games are not treated unfairly by most of the critics (they are by some, but that happens) but they are definitely way more scrutinized by most of then.

So even as they can still score amazingly well, it ends up feeling that if it was made by someone else, it could score even better.

there should be a protest or something 



Oneeee-Chan!!! on 09 June 2020

I'm expecting a 95 Metacritic at this point.



fauzman on 10 June 2020

95 for me too.



<a href="https://psnprofiles.com/fauzman"><img src="https://card.psnprofiles.com/2/fauzman.png" border="0"></a>

Around the Network
Drakrami on 10 June 2020

Naughty Dog doesnt disappoint. And they have had so much time to polish the game.

97



Manlytears on 10 June 2020

i'm picking 95, got a good feling about this one dispete all the "negative stuff" on internet.



Oneeee-Chan!!! on 10 June 2020
Manlytears said:
i'm picking 95, got a good feling about this one dispete all the "negative stuff" on internet.

They will disappear when the game is released.



DonFerrari on 10 June 2020
EnricoPallazzo said:
96 Metacritic
85 User

Critics won't be allowed to give a lower than 9.0 for this game even if they wanted to.

Have no idea why no critics will be allowed to go lower than 9. I would bet we are going to see some troll reviews on the 60 or even lower.



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."

EnricoPallazzo on 10 June 2020
DonFerrari said:
EnricoPallazzo said:
96 Metacritic
85 User

Critics won't be allowed to give a lower than 9.0 for this game even if they wanted to.

Have no idea why no critics will be allowed to go lower than 9. I would bet we are going to see some troll reviews on the 60 or even lower.

Because of the themes included in the game. No reviewer will want to have his name spearing on twitter giving a low score for a game with such themes and being chased by cancel culture mob. The same thing happens with movies.