Of course this happens, does anyone think it doesn't?
Jeff Gerstmann definitely did it to get more clicks for the Giant Bomb Fallout 4 review.
Of course this happens, does anyone think it doesn't?
There are more detailed impressions on the OT or even the review thread from me if you would like to see more detailed thoughts on this game from me.
But really, the game has REALLY tight controls, amazingly well made level design and platforming, the combat while never getting really super challenging can be very intense requiring fast reflexes. And the dungeons are truly something else, you have a good challenge, that you have to do it fast, finding hidden stuff and still never gets cheap.
I could go on, but just look at that:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R02nxT4XeZU
His reactions are pretty much the same I had while playing. How is that not amazing?
Edit: So yeah, I think it's warranted to call out reviews that crashed the end game for instance because the only reason they got stuck was because they avoided dungeons like that and said the game was a grind fest for having to explore and complete dungeons to get the cores.
Of course this happens, does anyone think it doesn't?
Jeff Gerstmann definitely did it to get more clicks for the Giant Bomb Fallout 4 review.
I doubt anyone suggests that a well written article that presents a personal review of why a score is low is "wrong". It's opinion.
Jeff Gerstmann doesn't do shit for clicks. He just doesn't like bad games.
There are more detailed impressions on the OT or even the review thread from me if you would like to see more detailed thoughts on this game from me.
But really, the game has REALLY tight controls, amazingly well made level design and platforming, the combat while never getting really super challenging can be very intense requiring fast reflexes. And the dungeons are truly something else, you have a good challenge, that you have to do it fast, finding hidden stuff and still never gets cheap.
I could go on, but just look at that:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R02nxT4XeZU
His reactions are pretty much the same I had while playing. How is that not amazing?
Edit: So yeah, I think it's warranted to call out reviews that crashed the end game for instance because the only reason they got stuck was because they avoided dungeons like that and said the game was a grind fest for having to explore and complete dungeons to get the cores.
Enlighten me then? So many people on GAF complain about the games media and review threads are littered with people calling out BS on reviewers and certain sites, but the moment an executive mirrors some of those ideas we find that people are really for the games media and crap on Phil for this comment that they themselves have said many many times.
Did you watch the video? The guy himself complains about the controls being imprecise. And you linked one moment from the game. Bad games can have good segments. That 5 minute section doesn't make up for the rest of the game if people dislike the rest of the game. Most players probably won't even bother with that section. Different people have different opinions and play games differently. I tried the trial and found the game to be unpolished and mindless. When reviews express their different opinion they're not necessarily trolling. They just have different expectations and perspectives.
And these people here are pointed to be salty... why just not accept the score? GiantBomb give Recore 2/5... do you think they scored it for clicks? No.In my opinion, I don't care if people thinks what he said is wrong or not. I'm personally glad he said it because in a way, he is right and it's something that people here discuss all the time.
The controls are not imprecise and I think the video itself shows that. I haven't read a single review of the game that cites the controls or any of the core gameplay to be the issue.
I'm sure they are out there though, but it doesn't seem to be the consensus.
Most of the negative points in the reviews were technical issues, bugs, or the content gating at the end of the game. To a lesser extent, I saw a lot of reviews point out that the story felt rushed in the last quarter of the game.
As I said before, I am obviously biased on this product but I don't really think that justifies knocking the score down to
I think he comes more off as dumb and that his comment will enable foolish people. As shown by this thread.Gears is scoring pretty well though, but it is true at times. Anyone see that 4/10 for Uncharted 4? Either that guy is an absolute moron or doing what Phil says. I don't think the major review places would do this but other ones here and there, certainly possible. He will come off salty here though.
Yeah, out of anger. Watch the whole video please.Did you watch the video? The guy himself complains about the controls being imprecise. And you linked one moment from the game. Bad games can have good segments. That 5 minute section doesn't make up for the rest of the game if people dislike the rest of the game. Most players probably won't even bother with that section. Different people have different opinions and play games differently. I tried the trial and found the game to be unpolished and mindless. When reviews express their different opinion they're not necessarily trolling. They just have different expectations and perspectives.
As something of a fan of Tom Chick, I'll tell you for free this absolutely does happen with regularity
And these people here are pointed to be salty... why just not accept the score? GiantBomb give Recore 2/5... do you think they scored it for clicks? No.
There are sports competitions where a Judge give a 8/10 and another give a 5/10... that is why there where always more than one judge to score.
It is not about clicks.
It is about how the flaws actually decrease the enjoyment of the game for the reviewer... and you can't fight that when the review explain why the game didn't reach the score you expected.
I should give The Witcher 3 a 7/10 if I did a review just because I had no enjoyment due the subpar combat system... it is something that make I stop to play in little hours to never look back again.
That's also to say that it's occasionally kind of broken, from performance issues specific to the console versions to scripting glitches that might just prevent you from progressing to the same sort of "physics gone wild" moments that make for killer animated gifs and such. There's a great game in Fallout 4, but how much of that greatness gets through to you is largely dependent on your own tolerance levels for those glitches and how willing you are to play another game from the same template as Skyrim, Fallout: New Vegas, Fallout 3, and Oblivion.
All of the gameplay design elements in ReCore collectively have the makings of an excellent little character-driven action game like there haven't been enough of in recent years. The combat is fast and varied, the platforming is demanding and cleverly designed, and the progression has more than enough of that carrot-on-a-stick potential to make you want to keep upgrading. But the longer the game goes on, the more bugs large and small start to grate on your nerves, and the more disjointed and downright weird the pacing of the story becomes. I eventually lost track of the number of technical issues I ran into playing through this game; it's simply one of the buggiest games to come out of a major publisher, much less a platform-holder, in recent memory.
Yeah, out of anger. Watch the whole video please.
Next he'll be telling us that, sometimes, positive reviews are bought and paid for!
WhatJeff Gerstmann definitely did it to get more clicks for the Giant Bomb Fallout 4 review.
While it looks like the same issues maybe it is not... one can break the immersion/enjoyment of the game and other not.As someone pointed out above, this obviously is a much more nuanced conversation becuase you can't just focus on outlets but on writers themselves. However, it's still hard to see why Fallout 4 can be given this little caveat on it's Giant Bomb 4/5 review from Jeff:
However, on Brad's review of ReCore it seems like the end of the world:
When you take into account that one is a well-known IP that has had multiple iterations with the same exact problems and the other one is a fairly ambitious new IP with in a LOT of cases have much less critical bugs... I don't think Phil's comment about them being a bit harsh on it is too off-base.
You guys do realize Phil Spencer was talking about Forza Horizon 3, and not Recore right?
"I didn't try to tell anybody that it was a ten. I think we knew, as with any games, that there are certain things if we started from the beginning and we knew what we'd get, there's a couple of things we would've done slightly differently. But we're very proud of how the game ended up. And I think seven, eight, nine, like anywhere in there is fine. Three or four I mean somebody gave Forza Horizon 3 a four. I think there's certain reviews that are written more to get clicked on than they are to actually accurately reflect the quality of the game, and that kind of bums me out."
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/xbox-head-phil-spencer-talks-scorpio-ps4-pro-4k-re/1100-6444198/
I'm sure he's not wrong in some cases. When the modern game journalism business makes it's living from ad revenue generated by clicks, there's bound to be at least some 'foul play'. It's the nature of the world we live in.
Recore though sucked. A game with that kind of weight behind it could and should have been much better. They should know the game they made was average at best without needing to hear reviews.
Horizon 3 though is a clear 9/10 game. When someone gives it 3/10 or whatever then that is stupid and uncalled for. Obviously some people just don't like certain games which is fair. But then a game like FH3 should get at least a 6/10 on technical merit alone IMO.
And as for the fanboys who are constantly bickering with each other and being negative about the plastic box their mum didn't buy them for Christmas. They are indeed pathetic and not 'true gamers', as P3 has mentioned before. I wish there was a game forum that instabanned all that shit. But again, I suppose the clicks are more important tehehe!
You guys do realize Phil Spencer was talking about Forza Horizon 3, and not Recore right?
"I didn't try to tell anybody that it was a ten. I think we knew, as with any games, that there are certain things if we started from the beginning and we knew what we'd get, there's a couple of things we would've done slightly differently. But we're very proud of how the game ended up. And I think seven, eight, nine, like anywhere in there is fine. Three or four I mean somebody gave Forza Horizon 3 a four. I think there's certain reviews that are written more to get clicked on than they are to actually accurately reflect the quality of the game, and that kind of bums me out."
http://www.gamespot.com/articles/xbox-head-phil-spencer-talks-scorpio-ps4-pro-4k-re/1100-6444198/
I'm sure he's not wrong in some cases. When the modern game journalism business makes it's living from ad revenue generated by clicks, there's bound to be at least some 'foul play'. It's the nature of the world we live in.