I personally believe it's a video game issue, and it comes down to length and interaction. You watch a 5 out of 10 movie, and you only wasted an hour or two of your time and may have still enjoyed aspects of it, or it was so bad it's good.
With games, you could be spending dozens of hours on them, and any game is far more repetitive compared to a book or movie. If the game is jank in any way, it'll become a slog to go through as you're doing the same annoying things over and over for those dozens of hours. Even good games are repetitive. It's almost impossible not to make a game that is mechanically repetitive.
It's easier to sit through a bad movie than it is to sit through an entire simply decent game. A lot of people already struggle sitting through the entirety of great games as is due to repetition and burn out.
NTA but video game reviews have a big problem.
You see, you mentioned movies. A movie that has 5/10 score can still be fun, good, and if you say it's one of the best movies you've seen some moron will call you a contrarian. Movies with 7/10 score are, in most cases, pretty good.
Games with overall score of 7/10 are something that most people avoid. 7/10 is reserved for only the ''hardcore fans'' of the series or genre, maybe 6/10 as well, while 5 and below are labeled as pure dogshit that should be avoided at all cost. That is the problem with vidya reviews and scores. Scores from 1 to 5 are basically identical and meaningless.
I'd give Drakengard a 5 out of 10, and it is one of my favorite games of all time. 1-5 aren't identical scores at all. It's just that most people avoid them because they don't want to put a ton of time in janky buggy experience.
If I could watch a movie that bugged out a lot and corrupted my save, forcing me to start the movie over or not loading in certain actors properly then nobody would watch any movie below a 6 either and it'd be rated the same way games are.
That's why game ratings don't need a scale of 1-10. 1-5 is more than enough. Easier to get an idea whether you should or not play a game. 4-5 play it. 3 only for long time fans/you might like it. 1-2 avoid.
That's how schools in most of Europe grade things. 5 is insufficient (you didn't pass) 6 is sufficient (you passed) 7 is ok, 8 is good, 9 is very good, 10 is perfect, 0-4 are different shades of trainwreck.
>There's also a throwaway transphobic line in a diary entry about the author not caring if drugs cause them to grow boobs that made me distinctly uncomfortable.
Isn't that the opposite of transphobic?
Heroes of the Storm's dev team put the fricking moronic 6.5/10 review from IGN in their game multiple times because it was so laughably bad
Man this game was based, not surprising when you see pictures of the now-dissolved dev team and it's all beardfats, chads, and stacies
He's right though. It's a shitty minigame/puzzle simulator with dogshit puzzles. Overstays it's welcome by a huge margin and it's boring. Amnesia The Bunker is Alien Isolation done right.
>Eurogamer game reviewer Ed Zitron awarded the game a rating of 2 out of 10.[64] However, this review was not received well as it contained several basic gameplay description errors, and Darkfall lead developer Tasos Flambouras claims that game server logs show that the Eurogamer reviewer played the game for under three hours, a claim denied by the writer.[65] Eurogamer's subsequent offer to compromise by commissioning a second opinion review[66] (by noted games critic Kieron Gillen) was declined by Flambouras,[67] but was carried out anyway, being awarded 4/10.[68]
imagine getting filtered so hard by the best Alien game and best Alien media since the first two movies. It makes a canon trilogy with them.
You're right, it should be much lower.
>make a scale from 1 to 10
>call 5 Bad
Are there bigger clowns that video games "reviewers"
That's just how Americans score things
I personally believe it's a video game issue, and it comes down to length and interaction. You watch a 5 out of 10 movie, and you only wasted an hour or two of your time and may have still enjoyed aspects of it, or it was so bad it's good.
With games, you could be spending dozens of hours on them, and any game is far more repetitive compared to a book or movie. If the game is jank in any way, it'll become a slog to go through as you're doing the same annoying things over and over for those dozens of hours. Even good games are repetitive. It's almost impossible not to make a game that is mechanically repetitive.
It's easier to sit through a bad movie than it is to sit through an entire simply decent game. A lot of people already struggle sitting through the entirety of great games as is due to repetition and burn out.
NTA but video game reviews have a big problem.
You see, you mentioned movies. A movie that has 5/10 score can still be fun, good, and if you say it's one of the best movies you've seen some moron will call you a contrarian. Movies with 7/10 score are, in most cases, pretty good.
Games with overall score of 7/10 are something that most people avoid. 7/10 is reserved for only the ''hardcore fans'' of the series or genre, maybe 6/10 as well, while 5 and below are labeled as pure dogshit that should be avoided at all cost. That is the problem with vidya reviews and scores. Scores from 1 to 5 are basically identical and meaningless.
I'd give Drakengard a 5 out of 10, and it is one of my favorite games of all time. 1-5 aren't identical scores at all. It's just that most people avoid them because they don't want to put a ton of time in janky buggy experience.
If I could watch a movie that bugged out a lot and corrupted my save, forcing me to start the movie over or not loading in certain actors properly then nobody would watch any movie below a 6 either and it'd be rated the same way games are.
That's why game ratings don't need a scale of 1-10. 1-5 is more than enough. Easier to get an idea whether you should or not play a game. 4-5 play it. 3 only for long time fans/you might like it. 1-2 avoid.
That's how schools in most of Europe grade things. 5 is insufficient (you didn't pass) 6 is sufficient (you passed) 7 is ok, 8 is good, 9 is very good, 10 is perfect, 0-4 are different shades of trainwreck.
You're right, it does say "bad".
G4.
>Morgan ManJaw Webb called Beatmania a "Guitar Hero rip-off"
What a joke of a channel. Tech TV died for this.
No man's sky is good though
its like they flaunt how corrupt the ranking system is in your face
Always count on IGN
Shadow tactics?
lel
Miasma Chronicles, it's written there.
Genuinely thought that was the name of the site, my bad
Sadly, it's eurogamer.
>devs named The Bearded Ladies
They never had a chance...
Imagine them funding garbage like Hyenas but not a sequel to Alien:Isolation
They did but quickly cancelled it
>There's also a throwaway transphobic line in a diary entry about the author not caring if drugs cause them to grow boobs that made me distinctly uncomfortable.
Isn't that the opposite of transphobic?
Don't expect mentally ill people to have any semblance of logic.
Polygon gives Tropico 5 a bad score because the reviewer is offended by the game.
>a game about playing third world dictator lacks compassion
Conception 2 as well.
To be fair conception was a pretty shit game, even if you're into anime
that's a fair score, the game was purely just aesthetic
Heroes of the Storm's dev team put the fricking moronic 6.5/10 review from IGN in their game multiple times because it was so laughably bad
Man this game was based, not surprising when you see pictures of the now-dissolved dev team and it's all beardfats, chads, and stacies
You can throw out any review that uses scores outside the normal 1-10 scale. The difference between 7.7 and 7.8 is meaningless.
He's right though. It's a shitty minigame/puzzle simulator with dogshit puzzles. Overstays it's welcome by a huge margin and it's boring. Amnesia The Bunker is Alien Isolation done right.
>Why doesn't this SRPG have Mii support and motion controls >:(
This should just be an IGN thread instead
This was the review that made me permanently dismiss video game critics opinions.
all true observations
I fail to see the issue
>Eurogamer game reviewer Ed Zitron awarded the game a rating of 2 out of 10.[64] However, this review was not received well as it contained several basic gameplay description errors, and Darkfall lead developer Tasos Flambouras claims that game server logs show that the Eurogamer reviewer played the game for under three hours, a claim denied by the writer.[65] Eurogamer's subsequent offer to compromise by commissioning a second opinion review[66] (by noted games critic Kieron Gillen) was declined by Flambouras,[67] but was carried out anyway, being awarded 4/10.[68]
I remember some guy at ign and Angry Ignacio got in a argument over a tenth of a point from their titanfall review
The game is a little long but mediocre it is not.