Members see less ads - sign up now for free and join the community!
-
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.
I'd feel for Tabata and the team first and foremost because I know they tried their best and worked so hard to make this the best they could with what they had.
I'd be feeling skeptical tbh. Like I said in previous posts I don't fully believe the reviews western outlets give to Japanese games since the bias is so obvious.
Some Western titles didn't deserve scores as high as they did (GTA4 got 98 for some reason since the driving drove me mental and the story was so so) so that tells me to not take their scores as gospel.
Also CoD winning GOTY? It's a damn fps. All you do is shoot shit even though I do have fun with friends with it.
That's the state of western reviewers and game rewards.
I'd be disappointed at the reviewers, not the game itself.
I'd be feeling skeptical tbh. Like I said in previous posts I don't fully believe the reviews western outlets give to Japanese games since the bias is so obvious.
Some Western titles didn't deserve scores as high as they did (GTA4 got 98 for some reason since the driving drove me mental and the story was so so) so that tells me to not take their scores as gospel.
Also CoD winning GOTY? It's a damn fps. All you do is shoot shit even though I do have fun with friends with it.
That's the state of western reviewers and game rewards.
I'd be disappointed at the reviewers, not the game itself.
Last edited:
By deserving do you mean the content within the game wasn't up to par?
From what I've played, read, and seen, I highly doubt it's a game that deserves low 80's.
Great art direction, dungeon design, set pieces, character development, side quests, music etc etc.
So much variety and things that they got right with this game. No game is perfect and got every single aspect right.
So one flaw completely firebombing 15's score is suspicious to me when fallout 4, a mess of a game, managed to score highly.
FF13 was low 80's. This game being anywhere near that is concerning and insulting to the dev team imo since that game didn't have anywhere near the variety 15 does.
From what I've played, read, and seen, I highly doubt it's a game that deserves low 80's.
Great art direction, dungeon design, set pieces, character development, side quests, music etc etc.
So much variety and things that they got right with this game. No game is perfect and got every single aspect right.
So one flaw completely firebombing 15's score is suspicious to me when fallout 4, a mess of a game, managed to score highly.
FF13 was low 80's. This game being anywhere near that is concerning and insulting to the dev team imo since that game didn't have anywhere near the variety 15 does.
Same. Jub.
Like, unless you're a niche japanese title release (which is 50/50 imo), the chances of an abitious story-driven console JRPG getting critical acclaim these days is downright narrow so much its criminal compared to the PS1/2 days (yes i know times changed but still).
As far as plot development goes, while i'm not saying XV's plot is flawless going by impressions, i'd be lying if i said i wouldn't be baffled over how a game like MGSV, which many noted had serious content & story flaws somehow managed to get away with it via critical acclaim by press. Bioshock Infinite included.
That shit bugs me. Tabata and BD2 have shown plenty amount of honesty which I rarely see much from plenty of the bigger video game companies and have been absolutely passionate with putting their all into having FFXV bring new life to the franchise, which would greatly sadden me to see ignored or brushed aside into to focus on bad instead of the good.
I just really want Japanese companies to do well this gen, Platinum Games included which can tough being a fan of when you see sales figures of their excellent projects get bought up.
Like, unless you're a niche japanese title release (which is 50/50 imo), the chances of an abitious story-driven console JRPG getting critical acclaim these days is downright narrow so much its criminal compared to the PS1/2 days (yes i know times changed but still).
As far as plot development goes, while i'm not saying XV's plot is flawless going by impressions, i'd be lying if i said i wouldn't be baffled over how a game like MGSV, which many noted had serious content & story flaws somehow managed to get away with it via critical acclaim by press. Bioshock Infinite included.
That shit bugs me. Tabata and BD2 have shown plenty amount of honesty which I rarely see much from plenty of the bigger video game companies and have been absolutely passionate with putting their all into having FFXV bring new life to the franchise, which would greatly sadden me to see ignored or brushed aside into to focus on bad instead of the good.
I just really want Japanese companies to do well this gen, Platinum Games included which can tough being a fan of when you see sales figures of their excellent projects get bought up.
Last edited:
i would be i bit upset, because i want the franchise to have a good reception; unfortunate we see a lot of over the top reaction to metacritic
"im a FF fan, but only if it's above 90+ on metacritic"
just because a title have less points doesn't mean it's not worth it, might not be amazing or revolutionary like the PS1 games, but are still great games on their own.
the "problem" with the franchise lately is that it changes too much tho.
take a series like demon/dark souls, or pokemon; they dont change or overhaul their systems, they refine it, and that leads to a consistent reception (that's what FF did in the past), while now FF moved to something more experimental and risky (each title have a new battle system, or one is super linear and another open-world).
most of the time when you do something for the first time it won't come out amazing, but that point will come with refinement, i think FF needs to follow a basic formula from here on, and not to try to reinvent itself each time (as much as i love change); also the fact that each title have different teams divisions kinda leads to this as well.
"im a FF fan, but only if it's above 90+ on metacritic"
just because a title have less points doesn't mean it's not worth it, might not be amazing or revolutionary like the PS1 games, but are still great games on their own.
the "problem" with the franchise lately is that it changes too much tho.
take a series like demon/dark souls, or pokemon; they dont change or overhaul their systems, they refine it, and that leads to a consistent reception (that's what FF did in the past), while now FF moved to something more experimental and risky (each title have a new battle system, or one is super linear and another open-world).
most of the time when you do something for the first time it won't come out amazing, but that point will come with refinement, i think FF needs to follow a basic formula from here on, and not to try to reinvent itself each time (as much as i love change); also the fact that each title have different teams divisions kinda leads to this as well.
Last edited:
Likes:
Hynad
As Huber says, even 7s deserve some love.
Currently my hype is max, but my expectations are non-existent. Not because I don't care or anything, but because I want to go into the game without any preconceived notions of how the story is going to be. I haven't been on a blackout like some other people, but I still don't know much about the story and don't want to ruin it (in any way possible) with my own thoughts about it before I get into it.
Currently my hype is max, but my expectations are non-existent. Not because I don't care or anything, but because I want to go into the game without any preconceived notions of how the story is going to be. I haven't been on a blackout like some other people, but I still don't know much about the story and don't want to ruin it (in any way possible) with my own thoughts about it before I get into it.
Actually, with regards to MGSV, the explanation might be a bit more sinister.
See, Konami didn't actually send review copies to reviewers. They sent the reviewers to "boot camp," where they had four 8-hour days to play the game for their review.
And MGSV is the type of game that would benefit from those sorts of controlled circumstances most heavily, given that its unique content is front-loaded and its final act is clearly incomplete. It's very likely that Konami's decision to give reviewers 32 hours under less-than-ideal conditions was designed to ensure that most of them wouldn't actually finish the game before writing their reviews. The reviewers' tendency to overlook the game's flaws probably has a lot to do with that. >_>;
The problem with incremental enhances on a formula is that there's only so much one can do with a formula before the audience tires of it, and it's a lot harder to draw them back in for something new if your selling point was being more of the same. Pretty much every series that's lasted as long as FF has did so due in large part to a willingness to switch things up and make massive changes in the way they play (just look at Mario and Zelda).
Besides, there are way too many formulaic games on the market as-is. Attempting something new, even if the result is imperfect, offers something to the medium that following a formula never could. To quote one very positive impression of FFXV, "Games are just better when things like this exist."
See, Konami didn't actually send review copies to reviewers. They sent the reviewers to "boot camp," where they had four 8-hour days to play the game for their review.
And MGSV is the type of game that would benefit from those sorts of controlled circumstances most heavily, given that its unique content is front-loaded and its final act is clearly incomplete. It's very likely that Konami's decision to give reviewers 32 hours under less-than-ideal conditions was designed to ensure that most of them wouldn't actually finish the game before writing their reviews. The reviewers' tendency to overlook the game's flaws probably has a lot to do with that. >_>;
The problem with incremental enhances on a formula is that there's only so much one can do with a formula before the audience tires of it, and it's a lot harder to draw them back in for something new if your selling point was being more of the same. Pretty much every series that's lasted as long as FF has did so due in large part to a willingness to switch things up and make massive changes in the way they play (just look at Mario and Zelda).
Besides, there are way too many formulaic games on the market as-is. Attempting something new, even if the result is imperfect, offers something to the medium that following a formula never could. To quote one very positive impression of FFXV, "Games are just better when things like this exist."
Likes:
Nova
Personally, I don't really care about what reviewers score this game - It certainly won't detract from my enjoyment. It'll be annoying from a development team point of view because obviously, they'll want great media reception for it.
I don't understand why a bad review will effect peoples experience with the game though - That's just ridiculous and to be honest, childish.
There are very view decent journalists out there that review games. Most are bias towards one genre or another so if it's good or bad, you don't really know if that's because of bias - most of the time, or because of a particular franchises history - Fallout 4 is an absolute prime example - Bethesda's worst game by far. I loved Fallout 3 so damn much, but 4.. Well.
Also, there will be a lot of reviewers that will down rate this game based on the 10 year wait. They'll conclude with ''it's a great game, but not a 10 year wait great game'' or something stupid like that. Also, remember - A bad review of this game will get a lot of traffic due to controversy.
In any event, I will certainly read the reviews - But I won't take any of them as gospel.
I don't understand why a bad review will effect peoples experience with the game though - That's just ridiculous and to be honest, childish.
There are very view decent journalists out there that review games. Most are bias towards one genre or another so if it's good or bad, you don't really know if that's because of bias - most of the time, or because of a particular franchises history - Fallout 4 is an absolute prime example - Bethesda's worst game by far. I loved Fallout 3 so damn much, but 4.. Well.
Also, there will be a lot of reviewers that will down rate this game based on the 10 year wait. They'll conclude with ''it's a great game, but not a 10 year wait great game'' or something stupid like that. Also, remember - A bad review of this game will get a lot of traffic due to controversy.
In any event, I will certainly read the reviews - But I won't take any of them as gospel.