PhantomFear94

1 Month On... is 71% on Metacritic Accurate?

28 posts in this topic

Posted (edited)

Hi Guys, 

 

Whilst I don't invest all my decision making into review scores by any means, I did use it as a deciding factor as to whether to get MK11 or Days Gone with my pay as the commentary going alongside a lot of the reviews greatly concerned me. I went with MK11, enjoyed it, and maxed out. Since then RAGE 2 and A Plague Tale: Innocence have come out, but I've also finished those, too. 

 

With nothing to really play for at least the month, is Days Gone worth it?

 

It's currently sitting at 71% on MC, which seems highly disappointing for a 1st party title (but not greatly unexpected). Looks buggy and very generic, and whilst I would have thrown caution to the wind if it was a 30-40 hours platinum, 70-hours is a long time to play a mediocre game. 

 

What's your opinion on Days Gone? What works? What doesn't work? Did the reviews get it wrong? 

Edited by PhantomFear94
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you pay something like 20$ and play about 10h of it and you enjoy it, it was worth it imo. From what I understood, you don't really have anything else to play right now, just I would just say go for it.

 

I haven't played the game at all, so take my advice as you wish.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

It doesn't do anything new, nor does it do anything really better than other games do. It's enjoyable but very derivative. Haven't encountered any of the bugs that plagued the pre-Day one patch that reviewers fell foul of with their advance copies. It's not on the level of God of War or Horizon: Zero Dawn but it's still pretty good. If a major lack of originality doesn't bother you then go for it. Personally I'd score it an 8 based on what I've seen so far. Other exclusives grabbed me and wowed me a lot faster.

Edited by Stan Lee
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

16 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

Yet another reason people should completely ignore "numbers" assigned to games, as if they actually mean anything substantial at all.

Personally, reviews (on average and not 1 person's review) provide something informative, at least for me anyways. When a collection of people point out flaws that repeatedly show up across most reviews that should tell you something. Another thing , most of the time a higher score will indicate a higher quality game. For instance games like RDR 2 or spiderman or whatever with a higher score than days gone (as an example, could be any game here with a relatively lower score) were well-received by the general audience more so than days gone so it seems the reviewers tend to get things right (once again on average). 

 

To wrap things up, I don't look at the reviews as the end all be all but I take it into consideration. Of course, I was interested in a game from the get-go I don't bother looking at them.  And finally if nobody cared about reviewers they would've been jobless by now. 

Edited by PooPooBlast
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, PooPooBlast said:

Personally, reviews (on average and not 1 person's review) provide something informative, at least for me anyways. When a collection of people point out to flaws that repeatedly show up across most reviews that should tell you something. Another thing , most of the time a higher score will indicate a higher quality game. For instance games like RDR 2 or spiderman or whatever with a higher score than days gone (as an example, could be any game here with a relatively lower score) were well-received by the general audience more so than days gone so it seems the reviewers tend to get things right (once again on average). 

 

To wrap things up, I don't look at the reviews as the end all be all but I take it into consideration.  If nobody cared about reviewers they would've been jobless by now. 

 

I agree with everything you said except this:

 

Quote

Another thing , most of the time a higher score will indicate a higher quality game.

 

Readers don't need a number if the review is done well.

 

I have no issues with reviews at all, reviews can be great. Assigning a number is dumb.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

18 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

Yet another reason people should completely ignore "numbers" assigned to games, as if they actually mean anything substantial at all.

 

I don't necessarily disagree with this in principle. Commentary and critique is the most important. For example, ACG is my favourite source for reviews as its really in depth and it assesses its game on value at the point of original purchase > arbitrary scores.  In reality, though, reviews do need be substantiated by some form of scale, in my opinion, as it provides a quick contextualization against other competing games. For it to be given a number is the conventional that most industries go against, not just gaming. If we were to go really philosophical, a review site free of scores that collates salient points > aggregation would be wonderful, IMO.

 

 

Edited by PhantomFear94
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, PhantomFear94 said:

In reality, though, reviews do need be substantiated by some form of scale, in my opinion, and for it to be given a number is the conventional that most industries go against, not just gaming.

 

Do they though? How is the "scale" decided consistently from reviewer to reviewer or outlet to outlet. Those numbers have no documented system for being assigned in gaming reviews. Other industries use numbers isn't really a good argument to have numbers. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

17 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

 

Readers don't need a number if the review is done well.

 

I have no issues with reviews at all, reviews can be great. Assigning a number is dumb.

Ahh I finally understood what you meant by your initial comment. 

 

I see a point to this but I think that reviewers tend to do that to quantify a review. It's certainly a flawed system but I suppose they use it so that a person seeing a review can immediately formulate an idea about where the game stands. 

 

Oh and once again it allows other reviewers to put in their reviews in the review pool if you will to find the average score of the game. 

 

I've always been told as well that if you think a system is flawed you should offer an alternative and to not just poop on it lol. And to be honest, I've no other alternative for a numbering system that I think would work well. 

Edited by PooPooBlast
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
1
Just now, DaivRules said:

 

Do they though? How is the "scale" decided consistently from reviewer to reviewer or outlet to outlet. Those numbers have no documented system for being assigned in gaming reviews. Other industries use numbers isn't really a good argument to have numbers. 

 

Well within the context of MC it scales everything to 100, taking into account out of 10's, out of 5's, and percentages, so it is cross compatible to a degree (although not flawlessly so). To clarify, I didn't see 71% and think 'no purchase for me, then' straightaway, but it did admittedly give me indications that the game has problems. After reading 5-7 reviews I decided to wait.  As someone who is saving, paying rent/bills, studying, working as I'm sure most do I do appreciate the support of critical reception to help inform whether something is a Day 1 or a wait for a sale type of thing (much like Amazon 😆)

 
 
 
2 minutes ago, PooPooBlast said:

I see a point to this but I think that reviewers tend to do that to quantify a review. It's certainly a flawed system but I suppose they use it so that a person seeing a review can immediately formulate an idea about where the game stands. 

 This is pretty much what I was trying to get at, but worded better. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I'm not sure how's the game nowadays, but I believe that the major bugs were fixed already and that the major flaws of the game are lack of originally (theme done to dead) and being overhyped by Sony.. To some extent it wasto be expected to be a somewhat worse game than all other first party titles (at least in my eyes, but Zombies never really attracted me, even if I enjoy some post apocalyptic settings). 

 

I would suggest to check some more recent reviews of thr game, since those will be more accurate of the current state of the game. 

 

And as far as numbered scores go, although not an average review score, but the user score for a hidden gem, should tell you how much you can trust in the numbers alone.. 

 

https://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/dragon-fin-soup

 

Userscore: 8.0

 

(ya, don't take that last part seriously... Still quite funny). 

Edited by Han_the_Dragon
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I'm coming up to the end of the main storyline and i'm about 50-60 hours in. How I felt about this game changed drastically about 20 hours in. And I realised that i'd been approaching it the wrong way, because Ubisoft games (as much as I love them) pretty much dictate a fleeting quick gratification structure in their open world games. And pretty much all of my open world game experiences this year have been Ubisoft titles.

 

As someone who has Ubisoft open world fatigue at the moment, I found I was transferring that Ubisoft fatigue over to this Bend title and the first 20 hours was enjoyable but a bit generic. Going from A to B, clearing out camps, collecting things and turning them in. I thought the character was a complete dick to everyone, even his 'brother' Boozer at points and he was generally quite unlikeable. Happily killing indiscriminately and giving out shit to people asking for his help. He pretty much eye-rolled his way through the first act and every plea for help was met with a sigh.

 

But as the story progressed through a couple of big twists and I started to get to know more characters, visiting more camps, understanding more about what caused the apocalypse and what makes the freakers tick, I realised i'd been treating this game all wrong. It's meant to be a slow burn, I think. More like playing through a character driven TV show, where every character gets some time with Deacon and has the chance to show their different sides. Even dick-head Deacon started to change in my eyes, because you realise they intentionally wrote him as a dick because of the situations and world he is in. His dick-headery is a survival mechanism.

 

So for me (i'm in the final parts of the last act now) i'm at a point where i'm completely invested and the pacing and the way characters act is all falling into place. My character has some high end weapons, NERO serum upgrades (kinda like one-off permanent basic stat upgrades) and higher tier skills which in turn made me feel more comfortable in the harsh game world. I genuinely care about Deacon now and how all this is going to conclude. I'm also at a point where i'd happily pay for story DLC too.

 

I also managed to take down a non-story related Horde too single handedly, which was an amazing feeling, because holy shit, I found their mechanics to be genuinely terrifying.

 

For me this is an easy 85% - 90% and a highlight of my gaming in 2019 so far.

Edited by Crispy_Oglop
4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, PhantomFear94 said:

What's your opinion on Days Gone? What works? What doesn't work? Did the reviews get it wrong? 

 

Reviews I've read have generally been on point IMO.

 

Pros:

- Main characters are great and well developed over the duration of the game, and well acted.

- Melee combat, stealth and gunplay are all pretty solid.

- Hordes are fun to kill, intimidating to look at, and impressive technically.

- Story has some really great high points.

- The survival aspects around maintaining your motorcycle aren't too oppressive but keep things interesting as you ride around.

 

Cons:

- Frequent performance issues, glitches, etc.  Even crashed a few times in my playthrough (once as the end credits finished just for the cherry on top, not giving me my "completed" save file and forcing me to re-play the end from an earlier save lol).  Disappointing in general, but especially for a first party product.

- Main story has pacing issues, especially early on.  Too much filler, numerous secondary characters are introduced but contribute nothing to the bigger story and waste time, etc.

 

I personally enjoyed the game a lot.  Those two cons nearly ruined the game early for me, but I stuck with it because the game itself is otherwise very solid... and I'm glad I did stick with it.  You're not wrong that both zombie games and open world games are completely played out at this point.  But Days Gone felt genuine enough to not necessarily make me too hung up on that fact.  If the reviews are basically saying it's a "good, not great" game (which IMO 7-8 out of 10 is)... I could buy that.  Your mileage may vary.

Edited by Dreakon13
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope.  It's a 9/10 from me.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PooPooBlast said:

I see a point to this but I think that reviewers tend to do that to quantify a review. It's certainly a flawed system but I suppose they use it so that a person seeing a review can immediately formulate an idea about where the game stands. 

 

Oh and once again it allows other reviewers to put in their reviews in the review pool if you will to find the average score of the game. 

 

I've always been told as well that if you think a system is flawed you should offer an alternative and to not just poop on it lol. And to be honest, I've no other alternative for a numbering system that I think would work well. 

 

Why does it need to be quantified? So people can skip all the review, just look at the number and make snap decisions (immediately formulate an idea)? That seems counter intuitive to the work the reviewer is putting in. 

 

Here's my alternative recommendation: Reviewers write the review. If people value reviews, they'll just read it. There doesn't need to be an alternative to quantifying an opinion, because it's unnecessary.

 

"People are in a hurry to spend their money and need to buy a game in the next 10 seconds so they need a game between 8.7 and 10, which game should they buy? Check the numbers!" Is that a thing?

 

When I read book reviews, they don't need a number. Why do video games?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

 

Why does it need to be quantified? So people can skip all the review, just look at the number and make snap decisions (immediately formulate an idea)? That seems counter intuitive to the work the reviewer is putting in. 

 

Here's my alternative recommendation: Reviewers write the review. If people value reviews, they'll just read it. There doesn't need to be an alternative to quantifying an opinion, because it's unnecessary.

 

"People are in a hurry to spend their money and need to buy a game in the next 10 seconds so they need a game between 8.7 and 10, which game should they buy? Check the numbers!" Is that a thing?

 

When I read book reviews, they don't need a number. Why do video games?

You'd be surprised at the amount of book review sites use a star system 1-5

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reviews were made when the game was in a very bad technical state and some of them were written by people with an agenda - that's what resulted in this game being scored lower than it deserves. During the time I spent with it, I would say it's in a state that's worth a buy. I thoroughly enjoyed it and consider it one of my favourite Sony exclusives this generation.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I won a copy in a competition and honestly I can't really get on with it, I don't think its great, a little boring from the few hours I put in.

 

I'm going to give it another go at some point.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

2 hours ago, PooPooBlast said:

Personally, reviews (on average and not 1 person's review) provide something informative, at least for me anyways. When a collection of people point out flaws that repeatedly show up across most reviews that should tell you something. Another thing , most of the time a higher score will indicate a higher quality game. For instance games like RDR 2 or spiderman or whatever with a higher score than days gone (as an example, could be any game here with a relatively lower score) were well-received by the general audience more so than days gone so it seems the reviewers tend to get things right (once again on average). 

 

To wrap things up, I don't look at the reviews as the end all be all but I take it into consideration. Of course, I was interested in a game from the get-go I don't bother looking at them.  And finally if nobody cared about reviewers they would've been jobless by now. 

 

I feel the same way. I mostly just watch ACG for his reviews, but you can see a pattern forming when you skim through other reviews. Mostly technical problems and/or game design flaws.

 

They have to be ACTUAL technical problems and problems that the majority of the gaming population will experience.

 

My dude in GTA killing hookers or playing a white biker dude in Days Gone...those are not flaws or technical issues. Subjective complaints like that are SJW mumbo jumbo.

 

Edited by Chocolate GiddyUp
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Steam "rating" system is the only one that's worth keeping around in my opinion. The percentage of users that liked a game is actual tangible data, and not a completely arbitrary number that a nobody reviewer spit out.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to keep in mind that when a reviewer reviews a game the score generally comes from a whole variety of different points, bugs/glitches, story and character development, how multiplayer servers fare, not just their general enjoyment of the game. I prefer user reviews because they are more generally geared towards how much they enjoyed playing. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say that's a fair metacritic score for the game. 75 would be more fair but that's just a few points higher. I think the critics were too hard on the game and it really isn't as bad as they make it out to be. I think if they got the "fixed" version of the game they probably would have liked it better. Days Gone pales in comparison to the other Sony first party exclusives and is definitely the weakest one out of the bunch but that's not a bad thing. They still put out an enjoyable experience. Days Gone just doesn't take any risks, they made a very "safe" game. They borrowed a lot of elements from other open world games that worked and threw them into this one, without expanding on them or making them worse.  It's painfully average but it didn't effect my enjoyment of the game. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just watch this review. But the game is a masterpiece, critics didn't give it the time it needed to shine and that's why it got rated low. It's a 40 hour story and critics put maybe around 10 hours in before they reviewed it.

 

Also 70 is still a decent score, Days Gone IMO should be at minimum 80. I'd personally give it 9/10.

 

The big problem is it has a really slow start and once you get past that you'll be blown away.

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DaivRules said:

Why does it need to be quantified? So people can skip all the review, just look at the number and make snap decisions (immediately formulate an idea)? That seems counter intuitive to the work the reviewer is putting in.

Not quite! It's more so that , that number can be used to aggregate all the scores and form an average. 

 

But like I said it's a flawed system and I'm not saying it's the best out thing out there. 

 

Ultimately and my way of choosing a game involves this:

 

1) I have a good history with a certain dev so I'll most likely buy their games if the concept sounds good. 

2) watch gameplay videos/ read a quick synopsis about the story

3) if it's a sequel to something I enjoyed it's probably an instant buy

4) consider reviews to the games that didn't go through steps 1-3 but I heard about them from a friend. It's more so like a last resort you know? 

 

And besides, my backlog atm consists of roughly 10 games and I'm plenty occupied :). I hardly have to think so hard about buying new games because I go through them quite slowly. 

 

Anyways I digress but that's my way of choosing. I don't want to get off topic from the intended topic so let's leave it here. Have a good day!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Crispy_Oglop said:

I'm coming up to the end of the main storyline and i'm about 50-60 hours in. How I felt about this game changed drastically about 20 hours in. And I realised that i'd been approaching it the wrong way, ....

 

So for me (i'm in the final parts of the last act now) i'm at a point where i'm completely invested and the pacing and the way characters act is all falling into place. My character has some high end weapons, NERO serum upgrades (kinda like one-off permanent basic stat upgrades) and higher tier skills which in turn made me feel more comfortable in the harsh game world. I genuinely care about Deacon now and how all this is going to conclude. I'm also at a point where i'd happily pay for story DLC too.

 

I also managed to take down a non-story related Horde too single handedly, which was an amazing feeling, because holy shit, I found their mechanics to be genuinely terrifying.

 

For me this is an easy 85% - 90% and a highlight of my gaming in 2019 so far.

 

Exactly what he said.

I was disappointed in the beginning as well, but after a few hoursI really started to enjoy it. Got the platinum and basically did everything you could do after the story had ended, looking for every collectible, killing all hordes, just because I wanted to stay a little longer. Now I am really looking forward to the DLCs. (And I really liked that there were no multiplayer trophies)  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.