The Gamespot review

[NathanH]

People - in the pro reviewing business a 7/10 is a game that barely works, an 8/10 is a disappointment, and the usual scale runs from 9/10 to 10/10.  Just because you use the whole scale doesn't mean that they do; it's a hostile review from someone who clearly prefers things like Dragon Age to things like this.  He's entitled to his opinion, of course, but that's what his score means.

This sort of claim gets made in pretty much every thread like this in every forum ever, but doesn't seem to have a lot of basis in reality. Very few games achieve a metacritic average of over 90. It seems there are only 108 PC games that satisfy this, and this includes some expansions and re-releases. If you look at RPGs, there are only about 15 with higher Metacritic scores than 90.

[evensong]

 

People - in the pro reviewing business a 7/10 is a game that barely works, an 8/10 is a disappointment, and the usual scale runs from 9/10 to 10/10.  Just because you use the whole scale doesn't mean that they do; it's a hostile review from someone who clearly prefers things like Dragon Age to things like this.  He's entitled to his opinion, of course, but that's what his score means.

 

This sort of claim gets made in pretty much every thread like this in every forum ever, but doesn't seem to have a lot of basis in reality. Very few games achieve a metacritic average of over 90. It seems there are only 108 PC games that satisfy this, and this includes some expansions and re-releases. If you look at RPGs, there are only about 15 with higher Metacritic scores than 90.

On the other hand, only 14% of the games currently on the first two pages of the Gamespot review section dip below 5/10, and those that do are relatively unknown, except for Sid Meier's Starships. I think the scale shift is real for games with relatively large budgets, though definitely not to such an extent that only 9 and 10 are used.

[NathanH]

It's certainly true that a metacritic score of 50 indicates a game is viewed as rather poor. The reviewing scale is not really using the full range in most cases. I believe it mirrors grading in many education systems. But, 80 still indicates a good game.

[kat7ra]

I can't see how giving a good game 8/10 is a bad thing...

PoE is NOT perfect, it HAS flaws, and ignoring them will not bring us better games in the future. This is the problem of "scores" when the mentality is "I like it: 10/10" becomes the norm.

a 10/10 should be near impossible to get to

9/10 is AMAZING

8/10 is a GREAT game!

If we don't use the whole spectrum, what's the point of having it there?

 

For the OPs point of getting angry when DA:I a 9 together with D.OS, I get it, I really do, but mostly because I feel those two games got over hyped a lot.

[Jasta11]

 

 

Oh come on. Any score from 7-10 would be fair for P:E. So much depends on your preferences, your tolerance for bugs, your willingness to learn systems, your experience with similar games and so on and so forth. 

 

Below 7 I would question the fairness though as it's more likely the reviewer just fails to get what the game is supposed to be.

 

Yeah but again I relate his 9/10 scores for other same-genre games (DA:I and D:OS) to PoE and find it odd that he considers PoE a full 'point' on whatever his scale is,  worse.

 

I can list a dozen things that DA:I does better than P:E off the top of my head. The fact that I feel that all of them are meaningless fluff simply means I have different preferences. 

 

 

But that would make you a reasonable person with a sense of perspective. And we can't have that in a gaming forum these days, can we?

 

Seriously, review scores are close to worthless. It's an approximation of one person's opinion on a game. The text of the review is far more valuable, if it's minimally well-written at least.

 

And if someone thinks Gamespot's 8 is going to harm PoE's sales, I very much doubt it. Not only does it still have a very high Metacritic aggregate score, but the people who only read Gamespot very probably aren't interested in kickstarted, isometric RPGs in the first place, if they know of any RPGs at all beyond Skyrim and Bioware games.

[Kriber22]

Someone actually feels that the user review on Metacritic are worthwhile? Are you serious? 40% of the user review are made by people who rate it 10/10 to "counter the negative reviews" or just because they looooove the game and deliberately ignore its flaws (and as much as I love PoE, it's not worth a 10 at this stage). Another 35% are nutjobs and trolls who rate games a 0/10 because they don't like the publisher, don't like the genre or have issues with how their mothers potty-trained them. And there in the middle, being completely drowned out by the noise from both camps, are a few people who give a reasoned, thorough review of a game's pros and cons. Not at all worth wading through the sludge, if you ask me.

[SeekDWay]

Gamewhat?

 

Also 8/10 is really good, if anyone gave a **** about that.

 

Check the user scores on metacritic, it's a game of 1s and 0s (10, 10, 0, 10, 0, 10). Reviews are so very credible. User reviews could tell you, if a game is worth considering. "Professional" reviews tell you nothing.

Edited April 7, 2015 by SeekDWay

[Anelor]

Someone actually feels that the user review on Metacritic are worthwhile? Are you serious? 40% of the user review are made by people who rate it 10/10 to "counter the negative reviews" or just because they looooove the game and deliberately ignore its flaws (and as much as I love PoE, it's not worth a 10 at this stage). Another 35% are nutjobs and trolls who rate games a 0/10 because they don't like the publisher, don't like the genre or have issues with how their mothers potty-trained them. And there in the middle, being completely drowned out by the noise from both camps, are a few people who give a reasoned, thorough review of a game's pros and cons. Not at all worth wading through the sludge, if you ask me.

How do you explain the sharp difference between the users score and the official critics'one of DA:I? Personally i learned to don't trust official critics since when RTW 2 was relesead in a very obscene condition (more than one year of patching to fix it), despite the high scoring received by the most popular game critics.

Anyway for me 8/10 reflects the current bugged/beta-like status of the game that partly ruins the combat experience, so i think is roughly right.

Edited April 7, 2015 by Anelor

[GreyFox]

8/10 is exactly how I'd rate Pillars. The real problem is that nowadays any score below 9 is considered a disappointment.

 

Yea I'd have it at an 8 or so as well and I agree that it's so stupid these days that it has to be a 9 or greater or people think it stinks.

 

That said D:OS is slightly better because its slightly more fun to play. The story and writing is much better in PE than D:OS but in D:OS the combat and gameplay is actually good/fun.

Edited April 7, 2015 by GreyFox

[Lightzy]

there's no comparing divinity original sin and this game...

 

Divinity is stupid, but extremely fun! The only thing I have to say negative about that game is that the story and setting are too stupid.

But the game design, combat and so on is absolutely fantastic and the storyline is well written in terms of how it advances and how stuff is found out gradually etc.

Combat especially is extremely fun, especially in the first areas where everything is HARD and every fight feels special and requires some kind of thought.

 

 

In this game all the story is told in the first couple of hours and from then on it's just... kind of .. nothing in terms of story, and combat is not quite as fun.. it's speedy gonzales on caffeine high fast, you generally win or lose within 15 seconds.

The story is still quite captivating at first but it sort of peters out around the time you get the fort and it seems there's no real drive to it from then on. the stat system is awful too.

 

I'd definitely rate divinity a 9.5 at least, and this I guess, 7.5

 

 

 

I like wasteland2 though. shame it doesn't come into comparison in this thread. Well written, interesting setting, combat is fun too, until the point where armor and energy weapons become really stupid, making you into combat shirtless because of some truly spectacularly bad design

Edited April 7, 2015 by Lightzy

[Kriber22]

 

Someone actually feels that the user review on Metacritic are worthwhile? Are you serious? 40% of the user review are made by people who rate it 10/10 to "counter the negative reviews" or just because they looooove the game and deliberately ignore its flaws (and as much as I love PoE, it's not worth a 10 at this stage). Another 35% are nutjobs and trolls who rate games a 0/10 because they don't like the publisher, don't like the genre or have issues with how their mothers potty-trained them. And there in the middle, being completely drowned out by the noise from both camps, are a few people who give a reasoned, thorough review of a game's pros and cons. Not at all worth wading through the sludge, if you ask me.

How do you explain the sharp difference between the users score and the official critics'one of DA:I? Personally i learned to don't trust official critics since when RTW 2 was relesead in a very obscene condition (more than one year of patching to fix it), despite the high scoring received by the most popular game critics.

Anyway for me 8/10 reflects the current bugged/beta-like status of the game that partly ruins the combat experience, so i think is roughly right.

 

I explain that by realizing that:

1) There's an enormous number of people out there who will rate any EA-published game a 0/10 just because they hate EA. Don't get me wrong, EA is a poster-child for bad corporate behavious, but that has nothing to do with the quality of games published under their logo.

 

2) Very many people have very strong feelings about BioWare in general and the Dragon Age franchise in particular. If these people see anything that deviates the slightest little bit from the game they imagined in their heads prior to release compared to the game they actually got, they'll spew their bile on Metacritic and post a 0/10.

[archangel979]

 

 

Someone actually feels that the user review on Metacritic are worthwhile? Are you serious? 40% of the user review are made by people who rate it 10/10 to "counter the negative reviews" or just because they looooove the game and deliberately ignore its flaws (and as much as I love PoE, it's not worth a 10 at this stage). Another 35% are nutjobs and trolls who rate games a 0/10 because they don't like the publisher, don't like the genre or have issues with how their mothers potty-trained them. And there in the middle, being completely drowned out by the noise from both camps, are a few people who give a reasoned, thorough review of a game's pros and cons. Not at all worth wading through the sludge, if you ask me.

How do you explain the sharp difference between the users score and the official critics'one of DA:I? Personally i learned to don't trust official critics since when RTW 2 was relesead in a very obscene condition (more than one year of patching to fix it), despite the high scoring received by the most popular game critics.

Anyway for me 8/10 reflects the current bugged/beta-like status of the game that partly ruins the combat experience, so i think is roughly right.

 

I explain that by realizing that:

1) There's an enormous number of people out there who will rate any EA-published game a 0/10 just because they hate EA. Don't get me wrong, EA is a poster-child for bad corporate behavious, but that has nothing to do with the quality of games published under their logo.

 

2) Very many people have very strong feelings about BioWare in general and the Dragon Age franchise in particular. If these people see anything that deviates the slightest little bit from the game they imagined in their heads prior to release compared to the game they actually got, they'll spew their bile on Metacritic and post a 0/10.

 

That is just not true. http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect this has a good score. Why? because it is a good game.

People rate bad EA/Bioware game the score they deserve.

[Archaven]

Just - wow. I can't believe the score Kevin van Ord gives PoE. 8/10, when he gave Dragon Age : Inquisition 9/10. AND Divinity Original Sin?!! Is he for real?

 

PoE is not perfect, but 8/10?

 

Something is definitely up here. Did the devs p*ss Van Ord off??

 

How can he say D:OS is a 'glimpse of the future' but PoE is treading the fine line between clone and homage? I lost interest in D:OS pretty quickly, the world is just too fairytale and garish, and everything is covered in either slime, fire or ice!!

 

I'm shocked by this review. Genuinely shocked.

 

He also rated Bloodborne 9/10. To be honest, i can't seem to take him seriously anymore. If he can simply trash an excellent game (despite the earlier bugs), then i can also trash him giving him 2/10. Why can't i rate him when he can simply rate anything he likes?

Edited April 7, 2015 by Archaven

[Kriber22]

That is just not true. http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect this has a good score. Why? because it is a good game.

People rate bad EA/Bioware game the score they deserve.

 

Of course it has a good score; it was the first in the series, with no established fandom and nothing to compare it to. Not to mention that EA had not yet acquired BioWare. Look at the scores for ME2 and ME3 and you'll see what I mean about haters. Metacritic public scores are as meaningless as reality television.

[jackjack]

People still read Gamespot? That said, I think 8/10 is fair. DA:I should never have gotten a 9, however.

[archangel979]

 

That is just not true. http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect this has a good score. Why? because it is a good game.

People rate bad EA/Bioware game the score they deserve.

Of course it has a good score; it was the first in the series, with no established fandom and nothing to compare it to. Not to mention that EA had not yet acquired BioWare. Look at the scores for ME2 and ME3 and you'll see what I mean about haters. Metacritic public scores are as meaningless as reality television.

 

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect-2

You were saying what?

Can you please just go back to your bioware forum, we don't need EA apologists trolling us here.

[Sleazebag]

Metacritic user reviews are garbage, and you should not use them as a source on how good a game is.

[Trauma_Hound]

The game isn't a 9 or a 10 as it stands, wait until the final patch and all the mods to come out, only time will tell.

[archangel979]

Metacritic user reviews are garbage, and you should not use them as a source on how good a game is.

Except for your own personal reviews which are always more correct for any specific game, there is no better general metric than metacritic user scores if there are enough of them.

 

Well I think Steam review system is now better because you have to own the game and more people leave reviews than on Metacritic but not all games are on Steam.

Edited April 7, 2015 by archangel979

[PIP-Clownboy]

People still read Gamespot? That said, I think 8/10 is fair. 

 

People keep saying this, but no it's not. Not coming from Gamespot, which operate on a 6-10 scale with inflated value on a triple AAA publishers. 

[Gromnir]

it's a review... by a game journalist.

 

...

 

a random guy in an airport tells us that there is a new pizza place in town and it is awful.  we happen to like the pizza joint in question.  we tolerantly nod and smile as the self-proclaimed gourmand slanders the pizza we happily consumed within the last week.  we then go on with the rest o' our life and forget the encounter until just now as we recount it to you.

 

the review from gamespot is a random guy stating his opinion 'bout a game.  by definition, his opinion can't be wrong and the only reason we would care about the gamespot review is if we had read previous reviews by the author and found that his opinions and Gromnir's gaming preferences were in tune.  review o' a game we already has purchased and is playing for ourself is meaningless.

 

we find the whole notion o' railing about game journalism or game journalists to be ridiculously quixotic.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Stun]

Guys seriously, 8/10 is an excellent score. Lets not see it in a negative light or a bad reflection on Gamespot who I personally like

You took the words right out of my mouth for the first time ever, Bruce!

 

Yes. Lets stay focused on the big picture here. Gamespot is a member of the gaming mainstream. That they even spent screen space reviewing PoE in the first place is noteworthy. The fact that they gave it something as high as an 8/10 is a flat out victory for Obsidian.

 

 

Sidenote: what's with the D:OS hate? It's one of the best games I've played this decade. It does quite a few things better than PoE (Combat being one of them). Overall I rank the two games about even on a 10 scale.

Edited April 7, 2015 by Stun

[Archaven]

I've played many triple AAA games, strategy, MOBA, RPGs, Action Hack n Slash and i think this game don't deserve an 8. It deserves at least a 9/10. Also i'm not a fanboy. I rarely post and even criticised Obsidian during the development of the game.

[Zorfab]

I've played many triple AAA games, strategy, MOBA, RPGs, Action Hack n Slash and i think this game don't deserve an 8. It deserves at least a 9/10. Also i'm not a fanboy. I rarely post and even criticised Obsidian during the development of the game.

Why?

[Valmy]

Game journalists are pretty much glorified bloggers (and not even that glorified) I think what he actually says about the game is more important than his rating. I would want to know his biases and how relevant his opinions are going to be to mine.

 

But for a non-big publisher game 8/10 is a good score.