Reviewers won't give anything below a 70% and marketing material is just that. Also, it rubs me the wrong way when a game's first section is full of scripted stuff specifically to "trick" reviewers, who invariably go "WOW look at the scenic shot here!" As long as it keeps working they're going to keep doing it. Bad ratings and record sales, why would they change?
this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2023
133 points (93.5% liked)
Patient Gamers
11337 readers
241 users here now
A gaming community free from the hype and oversaturation of current releases, catering to gamers who wait at least 12 months after release to play a game. Whether it's price, waiting for bugs/issues to be patched, DLC to be released, don't meet the system requirements, or just haven't had the time to keep up with the latest releases.
^(placeholder)^
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
There's no such thing as reviewers for video games. Anyone actually critical gets blacklisted quickly. It's just more marketing at this point.
Reviewers have always considered themselves and been considered part of the games industry. With a few rare exceptions they’re a glorified marketing wing.
videogamedonkey ia the one and only game critique
I find him too emotional. Nakey is a better "joke" response.
At this point I really only watch ACG, he seems the most honest out of them all.
Seems like most reviews are afraid to say bad stuff about a game until the general consensus has turned against it.
They make money from this, and I think many feel they'll be locked out of getting review copies if they don't "play ball" with these companies.
I pretty much only watch Mortismal Gaming at the moment, who 100%'s every game before reviewing it, but I think with a strategy like that you're highly biased into playing games you're already going to enjoy, so it's not great at finding which games are bad. I believe he has also quit games in the past if he was not enjoying them, and then didn't review them as a result.
I think there are also other reasons that reviews trend positive - it's probably better for ad revenue/engagement to prey on people's hopes that a game is good, and people like for their purchases/prepurchases to be validated. Not as many people will stick around through a 30 minute review of nonstop negativity.
I like Steam forums for PC games, since they are the ones who pick up things like game having mouse issues or lack of fov options. So many reviewers completely ignore that aspect. Even ones like digital foundry might be technical, but it's only for performance and graphics.
Actual pc gameplay quality is one users have been more informative on making me a lot of my times go wow none of these reviewers must use a mouse and keyboard, or they just copy paste their console review to the PC.
Worth a Buy is also solid!
Assassins Creed games are basically the Derek Zoolander calendar where each month showcases a different one of his looks.
What a beautiful image!
Played Starfield so I can have memories of how it used to be. Putting it down for a year for the modders to do their holy work.
Arkham Asylum is dope. My favourite of the trilogy.
Have fun with this one :)
Just bought Cyberpunk 2077 after the 2.0 update dropped and it was half off. Worth it!
Arkham Asylum was a blast, any of the Arkham series really is a solid choice
Took me a while to realize what you meant by that list of games. I thought I was on the piracy community so I was thinking "why would I want to pirate any of those???"
Is there anything non-indie that's released in the last 2-3 years and hasn't been an absolute shit show on launch?
Elden Ring, Tears of The Kingdom, Baldurs Gate 3 comes to mind.
Armored Core 6 as well
The release of Baldur's Gate 3 was when I re-purchased Baldur's Gate 1 for a play. Owned the physical for windows 98 back in the day and wanted to give it a nostalgia run while I wait for the price to come down on BG3.
Elden Ring PC port was rough but the game itself was great
I definitely seem to have gotten lucky with that. Were the issues performance related or something else?
Yeah, performances were shit, barely playable in the open world with a r7 2700 and a 1080ti
Nintendo's first-party titles are usually very polished on release (Pokemon being a notable exception). Other than that, Elden Ring and Baldur's Gate 3 are two recent major titles that I didn't hear many complaints about, though I'm not sure if the latter counts since it released a couple years ago in Early Access.
Pokémon games are developed by Game Freak, so although they’re published by Nintendo & The Pokémon Company I wouldn’t put them in the same category as a Zelda or Mario game.
lol I kept being like, "oh, there was..." and then remembering that it was an indie game.
God of War: Ragnarok was pretty polished at launch. There was also LEGO Star Wars: The Skywalker Saga that launched in really good shape, IIRC. Tears of The Kingdom wasn't too bad either. Those are the only AAA games that I can think of from the last couple of years that weren't shitshows.
Well, at least it's not empty; but that's a pretty short list...
Gamers who preorder non-physical games need a legitimate intervention
I did it ONCE and got burned so bad I've never even considered it ever again. Just Cause 4. So bad, it's not even on the lists of biggest letdowns. A letdown of letdowns.
But ... but... collector and exclusive content!
If it's not physical swag it's just DRM'd pixels that you don't actually own. 🤷