Metal gear solid v reviews are in, I can't hold that many tens - Polidicks

[quote]Metal Gear is a member of video gaming’s old guard. It has been consistently popular since its inception in the ‘80s, which is a rare distinction it shares with revered names like Mario and Zelda. Unlike its peers, Metal Gear has been telling a continuous story the whole time – a major strength and a strange weakness all at once. Invested fans adore the series for its narrative just as much as its tactical espionage action, but the sprawling story makes it intimidating for newcomers. Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain is different; it puts the saga of Big Boss and his sons in [/quote] [url]https://www.gameinformer.com/games/metal_gear_solid_v_the_phantom_pain/b/playstation4/default.aspx[/url] 9.25/10 [url]http://www.ign.com/games/metal-gear-solid-5/ps4-149843[/url] 10/10 The Daily Dot – 5/5 Destructoid – 9/10 EGMNOW – 9.5/10 Examiner – 5/5 Game Informer – 9.25/10 GameSpot – 10/10 Game Trailers – 9.5/10 HobbyConsolas – 97/100 IGN – 10/10 Kinda Funny Games – “Amazing” Kotaku (Pre-Review) – “The best Metal Gear yet” Metal Gear Informer – 10/10 Polygon (Pre-Review) – ‘Hideo Kojima’s name featured dozens of times throughout’ Press-Start – 9/10 Respawn.ninja – 100/100 USgamer (Pre-Review) – “An incredibly memorable game” YongYea – “A very easy contendor for game of the year”

Aaaaaaaand exhale....

Honestly, seeing all these 10/10 reviews kind of makes me concerned. While MGSV is undoubtably a great game, 10/10 seems like a high threshold. I mean, look at IGN's review. They said that the story was sparse and not as deep as earlier MGS games. That should be enough to knock it down a point or so in such a story based series. I would rather have an objective review that sees the flaws instead of one that gives it a 10/10 because of the franchise name.

im masturbating for you, kojima

Well, time for one site to give it a 7/10 and everybody to freak out.

As if I trust any of these reviewers.

greatest sendoff a dev will ever give to the series i guess

I don't doubt MGSV being way better than 4, but 4 also got these kinda scores and wasn't even that good

[QUOTE=Svinnik;48526792]Honestly, seeing all these 10/10 reviews kind of makes me concerned. While MGSV is undoubtably a great game, 10/10 seems like a high threshold. I mean, look at IGN's review. They said that the story was sparse and not as deep as earlier MGS games. That should be enough to knock it down a point or so in such a story based series. I would rather have an objective review that sees the flaws instead of one that gives it a 10/10 because of the franchise name.[/QUOTE] I mean, that may be a veiled positive to be honest. The older games got bogged down in trying to explain what was happening or had happened previously. This seems like it's lighter on the story throughtout which is much easier to get into, especially if the gameplay is as good as some of the reviews are making it out to be.

[QUOTE=Yummy Pie;48526803]As if I trust any of these reviewers.[/QUOTE] When it's universally praised this much, I think it's a given.

[QUOTE=Random Access;48526797]Well, time for one site to give it a 7/10 and everybody to freak out.[/QUOTE] Polygons got you covered with a lower score and pretentious writers with fanboy commenters to boot.

[QUOTE=Svinnik;48526792]Honestly, seeing all these 10/10 reviews kind of makes me concerned. While MGSV is undoubtably a great game, 10/10 seems like a high threshold. I mean, look at IGN's review. They said that the story was sparse and not as deep as earlier MGS games. That should be enough to knock it down a point or so in such a story based series. I would rather have an objective review that sees the flaws instead of one that gives it a 10/10 because of the franchise name.[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure they mean the story is sparse compared to older games, there's a lot of variables, did they visit motherbase? Did they listen to the cassette tapes that mechanically replacing codec sequences? Did they do side missions?

this will be the last Konami game to get this kinda score. ..

I don't doubt the game is good, but I wouldn't trust a single one of these reviews. It's the finale (not counting what Konami does next) for one of the most venerated video games series ever. [I]It's going to get high reviews.[/I] That doesn't mean a thing. Not to mention, we're in a time where giving a game like this anything less than 9.5 will have people from all over the internet threatening the reviewer's families or some shit.

[QUOTE=Velocet;48526833]When it's universally praised this much, I think it's a given.[/QUOTE] Did you know that the words "bugs" or "graphics" don't appear once in PC Gamer's pre-release day review of Rome 2? This was also a game that scored 8's and 9's frequently (I distinctly remember Metacritic giving it a critic score of about 80-90 ish), despite being a poorly designed, bug ridden, ugly piece of shit on [I]launch[/I]* I wait for a select few trustworthy people on youtube to make a verdict because a lot of the time I get the impression reviewers are just branding things with scores corresponding to expectations because of brand identity *no longer the case

[QUOTE=Svinnik;48526792]Honestly, seeing all these 10/10 reviews kind of makes me concerned. While MGSV is undoubtably a great game, 10/10 seems like a high threshold. I mean, look at IGN's review. They said that the story was sparse and not as deep as earlier MGS games. That should be enough to knock it down a point or so in such a story based series. I would rather have an objective review that sees the flaws instead of one that gives it a 10/10 because of the franchise name.[/QUOTE] Good ol' video game score inflation, where 7 is average, 10 is good, and 6- is SHIT

I'm in agony waiting.

[QUOTE]Polygon (Pre-Review) – ‘Hideo Kojima’s name featured dozens of times throughout’ [/QUOTE] So they took his name off the box art but forgot to check the actual game?

[QUOTE=Liem;48526941]So they took his name off the box art but forgot to check the actual game?[/QUOTE] You expect Konami to put that much effort in?

[QUOTE=Dr.Critic;48526886]Did you know that the words "bugs" or "graphics" don't appear once in PC Gamer's pre-release day review of Rome 2? This was also a game that scored 8's and 9's frequently (I distinctly remember Metacritic giving it a critic score of about 80-90 ish), despite being a poorly designed, bug ridden, ugly piece of shit on [I]launch[/I]* I wait for a select few trustworthy people on youtube to make a verdict because a lot of the time I get the impression reviewers are just branding things with scores corresponding to expectations because of brand identity *no longer the case[/QUOTE] But game journalists love to be contrarian assholes so why would they do what's expected when they can get massive amounts of publicity from being the outlet that said The Phantom Pain sucks, even if it were true?

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;48526887]Good ol' video game score inflation, where 7 is average, 10 is good, and 6- is SHIT[/QUOTE] It kinda feels like they're treating the scoring system like a usual school grading system where a grade of 70 is the lowest you can get before it's considered failing.

[QUOTE=Skerion;48526973]It kinda feels like they're treating the scoring system like a usual school grading system where a grade of 70 is the lowest you can get before it's considered failing.[/QUOTE] what? where is a 70 considered faiiling?

[QUOTE=Skerion;48526973]It kinda feels like they're treating the scoring system like a usual school grading system where a grade of 70 is the lowest you can get before it's considered failing.[/QUOTE] I think that makes sense because the average game is at least competent and fun. 50-69 shows an attempt but it didn't succeed, 1-49 is either they didn't try or they did try and failed miserably.

[QUOTE=eirexe;48526988]what? where is a 70 considered faiiling?[/QUOTE] It's not, but he's saying lower than that is. 70's consider average nowadays. And lets be honest, as wrong as it is, most people will look at 60 and say, "yeah no, not worth the time"

[QUOTE=eirexe;48526988]what? where is a 70 considered faiiling?[/QUOTE] school system 90-100 - Excellent 80 - 90 - Above Average 70 - 79 - Average 60 - 69 - Below average 1-59 - Failure

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;48526887]Good ol' video game score inflation, where 7 is average, 10 is good, and 6- is SHIT[/QUOTE] Makes me wonder what it takes to get a 0 out of these sites. Ride to Hell: Retribution didn't even get a 0... [editline]23rd August 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=eirexe;48526988]what? where is a 70 considered faiiling?[/QUOTE] Standard grading system in US schools. 0-69: 'Fuckin' biffed it, mate' 70-79: Skin-of-the-teeth pass 80-89: Meh. Typical. 90-100: Either you cheated, you memorized the entire textbook, or you're in too easy of a class. Holy shit.

[QUOTE=Velocet;48526958]But game journalists love to be contrarian assholes so why would they do what's expected when they can get massive amounts of publicity from being the outlet that said The Phantom Pain sucks, even if it were true?[/QUOTE] Ever read IncGamers, Sweden's Eurogamer, Video Game Talk, DarkZero, WorthPlaying, RPGamer or Gaming Nexus's reviews of Dragon Age 2? I haven't heard of any of them except Eurogamer and they're the only critic reviewers on metacritic to give Dragon Age 2 a score of <75, putting it out of the green category This is also a game that has a user score of 4.4 and an overall critic score of 82 for the record - I haven't seen this effect you describe at all in memory

[QUOTE=Velocet;48526996]school system 90-100 - Excellent 80 - 90 - Above Average 70 - 79 - Average 60 - 69 - Below average 1-59 - Failure[/QUOTE] So per your numbers, below 70 is not actually failing.

[QUOTE=Velocet;48526958]But game journalists love to be contrarian assholes so why would they do what's expected when they can get massive amounts of publicity from being the outlet that said The Phantom Pain sucks, even if it were true?[/QUOTE] Every time this happens its by a small handful of review outlets, most are borderline irrelevant. [I]Major[/I] review outlets always give high scores to games of this caliber or close- whether they deserve it or not.

[QUOTE=Velocet;48526991]I think that makes sense because the average game is at least competent and fun. 50-69 shows an attempt but it didn't succeed, 1-49 is either they didn't try or they did try and failed miserably.[/QUOTE] I don't know, seems like it would make more sense if a 5/10 was considered average or mediocre considering that it's kinda in the middle between good and bad, like how 5 is between 0 and 10.