before I watch this does this video spoil anything and if so which parts so I can skip it.
[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;48657306]before I watch this does this video spoil anything and if so which parts so I can skip it.[/QUOTE]
it doesn't spoil anything
okay just hand to be careful
[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;48657353]okay just hand to be careful[/QUOTE]
TB's usually pretty good at avoiding spoilers as far as I know.
yea read the whole thing by him and as usual bring's up alot of good point's
TL;DW: Reviewers are looking for different things than consumers. Consumers are obviously happy with FIFA, CoD and Ubisoft Game: The open world. Mad Max is full of proven things that work well and are well received, but aren't innovative in any way. Critics don't like repetitive Ubisoft open world tasks, critics don't like the game using Arkham combat [I]again[/I], the average customer does if user scores and sales figures are anything to go by.
He goes on to say that this isn't really a problem with critics and reviews, but with review scores. All the "negative" reviews were completely 100% right about everything they wrote, but the scores prioritized things some costumers might not care about like repetitiveness and the existence of female characters.
[QUOTE=Robber;48658492]TL;DW: Reviewers are looking for different things than consumers. Consumers are obviously happy with FIFA, CoD and Ubisoft Game: The open world. Mad Max is full of proven things that work well and are well received, but aren't innovative in any way. Critics don't like repetitive Ubisoft open world tasks, critics don't like the game using Arkham combat [I]again[/I], the average customer does if user scores and sales figures are anything to go by.
He goes on to say that this isn't really a problem with critics and reviews, but with review scores. All the "negative" reviews were completely 100% right about everything they wrote, but the scores prioritized things some costumers might not care about like repetitiveness and the existence of female characters.[/QUOTE]
So it's 8.8 all over again?
[QUOTE=Robber;48658492]TL;DW: Reviewers are looking for different things than consumers. Consumers are obviously happy with FIFA, CoD and Ubisoft Game: The open world. Mad Max is full of proven things that work well and are well received, but aren't innovative in any way. Critics don't like repetitive Ubisoft open world tasks, critics don't like the game using Arkham combat [I]again[/I], the average customer does if user scores and sales figures are anything to go by.
He goes on to say that this isn't really a problem with critics and reviews, but with review scores. All the "negative" reviews were completely 100% right about everything they wrote, but the scores prioritized things some costumers might not care about like repetitiveness and the existence of female characters.[/QUOTE]
Pretty much.
To be honest, I just think it's worth the experience of exploring and gazing at the world it has to offer. It's a fucking pretty game.
The game has absolutely fantastic visuals and very very fun gameplay. It's repetitive, very repetitive but it's a kind of repetitive you don't mind. You always feel like a badass, and you're always doing some crazy fun shit. I literally just beat the game about an hour ago and while in my opinion the ending [sp]sucks[/sp] , its a game i already spent about 50 hours in and have plans to return to 100% it because it's honestly that fucking fun.
Nowadays If im interested in a game I would look at steam reviews, or a twitch stream, I find you can't trust game review sites anymore.
Thing i like that TB pointed out is that the video game critics might get tired of the Arkham combat, the repetitive nature of open world games, and other things that are present in Mad Max. But also pointed out that regular gamers in general tend to not have a problem with these concepts.
[QUOTE=Valdread;48659520]Nowadays If im interested in a game I would look at steam reviews, or a twitch stream, I find you can't trust game review sites anymore.[/QUOTE]
Number scores never were good to begin with
tbh "7" being considered "MIXED" or "UNDER AVERAGE" is fucking pitiful.'
"5" being "middle, average, maybe even under average" is what is should be, end all, no debate. Not 7. 7 being "Average" is an grim reminder that the game media is an absolute sloppy joke.
[QUOTE=J!NX;48661259]tbh "7" being considered "MIXED" or "UNDER AVERAGE" is fucking pitiful.'
"5" being "middle, average, maybe even under average" is what is should be, end all, no debate. Not 7. 7 being "Average" is an grim reminder that the game media is an absolute sloppy joke.[/QUOTE]
7 is mediocre because getting a 70 in school is mediocre.
videogame journalism is based on kids who just got out of school
It's always funny looking at film reviews in newspapers. "the chicago tribune gave The Imitation Game 3 stars? That's only 60%, it must be fucking terrible," and then I remember how idiotic the game reviewing scale is.
-snip-
[QUOTE=J!NX;48661259]tbh "7" being considered "MIXED" or "UNDER AVERAGE" is fucking pitiful.'
"5" being "middle, average, maybe even under average" is what is should be, end all, no debate. Not 7. 7 being "Average" is an grim reminder that the game media is an absolute sloppy joke.[/QUOTE]
"Their arbitrary numbers rating system should be replaced with [I]my[/I] arbitrary numbers rating system!"
[QUOTE=RichyZ;48663409]5 out of 10 being average isn't arbitrary at all[/QUOTE]
5 out of 10 is 50%
If a game hits 50% of the mark, its usually probably not a good game at all.
I think around 6-7 is where you start getting into average/good territory.
I honestly believe that 1-5 is a good way to rate something,
terrible; 1 | pass
bad; 2 | pass
average; 3 | rent
good; 4 | rent/buy
great; 5 | buy
The problem with the score system isn't wether people use it accurately or not it's that it's so incredibly subjective that looking at a score shouldn't tell you anything at all about the game and wether you would like it or not.
I don't have an issue with scores in itself, because personally I can just ignore it and read the review. But I think that's the big flaw of it.
[QUOTE=RichyZ;48664035]50% being average is how a lot of movie sites work as well though
2.5 stars is never a [i]bad[/i] movie, why should the equivalent for games by a bad game[/QUOTE]
using a 1-5 scoring system with .5s is pointless. you're just making it a ~interesting~ 1-10 scale (where things start to get muddy)
[QUOTE=StrawberryClock;48659110]Pretty much.
To be honest, I just think it's worth the experience of exploring and gazing at the world it has to offer. It's a fucking pretty game.[/QUOTE]
Didn't expect it to be good because of being a game from a movie (as we know, a game from a movie and vice versa usualy sucks) but from what I saw, it looks pretty good!
:snip:
[QUOTE=paul simon;48663279]"Their arbitrary numbers rating system should be replaced with [I]my[/I] arbitrary numbers rating system!"[/QUOTE]
it's because it's fucking lame when a [B]under a rating of 8[/B] is considered "A bad thing" when there are 10 numbers in a 1-10 rating system
if 7 is "Average" then what the fuck is a 2 or a 3? So absolutely awful that the reviewer killed themselves afterwards?
It makes it very hyper sensitive. A good game can range from average to perfect with a change of just 2 numbers, but a bad game has like, 6 or 7 numbers to describe how "genuinely terrible" it is. It doesn't make any sense. There are more bad games out there than people think, and there's no point in giving "More numbers" to categorize games as bad.
it's also dumb that reviews add decimals to a 1-10 system. If you add decimals to a 1-10 system with ratings like "7.5" and "8.6" you aren't using a 1-10 system at all, you're using a 10-100 system and then cutting out anything below 6.0 "Because 6 is below average" except for games you just want to shit on becaus you hate your shitty journalism job.
what is it with companies and these inane decimal systems (aka 1-100 systems) and hyper sensitive ratings. When 7 and 8 are "Average", it becomes too vague to be useful as a ratings system, and you may as well dump it, because it's completely useless.
[editline]11th September 2015[/editline]
to be honest, I think it's way better to do a system based on what "previously recorded" does
"Not recommended, Recommended" and have a 5-30 minute discussion on the game, letting people have their own opinion form about it.
with exceptions of course. "Recommended, but only if X thing"
To be honest, I think ratings should die.
[QUOTE=StrawberryClock;48664972]To be honest, I think ratings should die.[/QUOTE]
Imo, the ratings themselves aren't bad. The problems are believing too much in them, rating things wrong, and having them accompanied by nothing sometimes.
In other words, a review can have ratings, as long as they actually explain why they are rated that way. It wont help if they are inflated or deflated, but thats a whole other issue I guess...
Ratings are useless because you can't compare them between themselves since they're subjective and arbitrary.
a proper review is one that doesn't define the game as "bad", or "Good", but instead allows the user to interoperate what the reviewer states for themselves, and make a decision on whether it's worth it or not based on what they have heard rather than some arbitrary numbers
I hate some games that everyone else loves, I love some games that everyone else hates. Let the user decide if its a good game or not.
Games are extremely objective, more so than people think. But they're also very subjective, as well. A vague numbering system assumes 100% objectivity, and misses the point. There's too much in a game to worry about to define with a single number.
[QUOTE=J!NX;48665322]a proper review is one that doesn't define the game as "bad", or "Good", but instead allows the user to interoperate what the reviewer states for themselves, and make a decision on whether it's worth it or not based on what they have heard rather than some arbitrary numbers
I hate some games that everyone else loves, I love some games that everyone else hates. Let the user decide if its a good game or not.
Games are extremely objective, more so than people think. But they're also very subjective, as well. A vague numbering system assumes 100% objectivity, and misses the point. There's too much in a game to worry about to define with a single number.[/QUOTE]
Okay the only reason people read reviews is they want the opinion of a game from someone they may trust or seems trusted. So of course a review is going to have the reviewer critique parts and praise parts. He has to say he either likes aspects or he doesnt like them.
What you're describing that you want isnt a review. It's a summary.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
