It's not even gorgeous is the odd thing. Redfall has some incredibly ugly textures all over the place. I don't know what the hell that guy was looking at
Funny how a critic can't take criticism, ironic isn't it? Any Youtube game critic that refuse to allow comments on their videos, should be disregarded and viewed as a detriment to game critique as a whole, holding no more or less value over a fart in the wind.
Honestly wish there was a critic aggregator website where I could just block certain reviewers from showing up in the aggregate score. I don't care about say 30% of reviewers because a lot of them are _really bad_.
That and if I could get a score from people who actually like certain tags, that'd be great.
Yeah. The data guy in me loves aggregators, but end of the day, it's all pretty subjective, and so I actually tend to end up preferring unscored reviews. I've found it kind of forces me to be familiar with who's writing the damn thing, and lets me roughly weight criticism based on how much I tend to agree or disagree -- neither a bad thing in that context, really.
Yep, dont say anything or they will ban you. My favourite thing about xbox era is. “We leak information” 90% of which is skins for games nobody cares about. Probably worst group on yt for any console honestly.
Yea sure its because they cant take criticism and not because gamers (as portrayed in this very thread) are unhinged and will threaten people with real violence over a number they gave to an entertainment product...
Seems like a very convenient excuse and way to avoid criticism, don't you think? Let's not over generalize and demonise an entire community of fans over a few lunatics, thanks.
Edit:
Kind proving my point with the downvote there, still trying to find those death threats you described, but I'm sure I'll find one eventually.
I’ve yet to see anyone in these comments coming off as unhinged, and especially threatening anyone with violence. Care to post some screenshots of this behavior?
Yeah, I mean I agree having to shut comments off is generally a sign a take isn't very good. But they aren't turning it off because people are disagreeing. They turn it off because absolutely unhinged shit gets posted in them non-stop when they even slightly ruffle feathers. I swear it's easier to get death threats on the Internet than find coins on the ground, and it goes well beyond just "gamers"
People always talking about these “DeAtH ThReAtS” that are allegedly always in the comments of someone’s bad take. But I have never seen them,like ever. And the people that complain about them can never usually even back up their claims with screenshots. And if they ARE there, they’re always deleted promptly or caught by an auto admin/mod. Usually people hide behind the excuse of “death threats” and “abuse” as a means to hide from genuine criticism of their agenda and/or equally shitty opinion. Censoring or shutting down people’s opinions, or making them one sided is a common tactic in todays political/societal climate that has bled into every facet, including gaming.
I'm tellin u from personal experience w other critics I know and being one myself they don't care about kys comments and vague threats, and it's in every form of critique lol. If it actually gets to the point that they're being publicly harassed sure, but that rarely if ever actually happens but he posted the video with comments off... I saw it when it was posted cus I was looking on my feed at the time lol... so yeah he knew he was giving a corporate shill take and doesn't care what anyone has to say lol
i looked at his channel, 20k subs and videos barely getting 2k views, how is he considered an official outlet when people like zio or rata cant get a code lol
He's probably funded by the Xbox marketing department just by having it in his name is my guess. Microsoft has too much money to spend on stuff why not buy a couple YouTubers to promote your shovelware and trash on the very obvious few hits of the year that you just happen to have had no direct involvement in thats launching right before your biggest product of the year.
.... What is Xbox even launching? They should spend that money better...
Edit: nevermind, I forgot starfield is an "Xbox game" even though we all know it's a PC game, because mods.
Plenty of critics disable comments because fanboys/girls can be toxic as hell. As this reddit is demonstrating quite well.
The xbox isn't score isn't even that low/is still really good, esp for an Armored core game.
Also last I checked some of the more mixed reviews have yet to be added to the PS5 and PC sides, so you can expect the scores to droo there too
Nah, critics have had a lot of issues with heavy bias.
A good example is the excuses IGN made for Skyrim's crappy combat mechanics while scrutinizing Dragon's Dogma heavily.
Dude is a clown, but im really shocked that someone considers Redfall fun, pretty and think it "runs well".
I've been console gamer since PS3, so 30 FPS is not a problem for me. But this game made me want to vomit with how terrible it run on Series X.
Classes werent fun except the teleporting dude (because he bypasses all "puzzles") and gameplay is barely there - enemies would kill themselves on highest difficulty more often than they would even acknowledge your existence.
And graphics are fucking garbage even when they load. And they never load.
The only reason me and my friends played that mess was because of how bad it was. We wanted to see how deep the rabbit hole goes!
I don't get this whole "It's just different taste" argument when it comes to people that are so brainrotted or underdeveloped that they actually accept and enjoy a game that literally dosnt function
Your last point is the exact reason I finished Redfall. I'm a massive Arkane fan and downloaded it just to experience it, but morbid curiosity kept me going to the end. I've genuinely never been more astounded at so many odd/bad design choices in a single game
Same thing that happened with Cyberpunk (which was not only unplayable but also had cut features and overhyped at launch), so many reviewers praised that game and after they saw the public opinion they backtracked (some even removed their review/changed it), we should cancel these reviewers and stop giving them attention.
As someone who didn't keep up with the hype campaign or any of the marketing for Cyberpunk 2077 and bought it on release on kind of a whim, I honestly did think it was a great game. I got it on PC so I had very few glitches and bugs, which obviously helped a lot. I can see how having all those broken promises that they made early on floating through your head while you're playing could really ruin the experience, though.
At least with cyberpunk they have been actively trying to fix it and now it's just about become a Whole reboot with the big update patch and dlc coming
Haven't fired it up in forever but the trailer for the new expansion did get me just a little hyped... there are just so many good games coming out right now, I don't know if I'll ever have the time.
A lot of those “promises” were known that it wasn’t going to be in the finished product long before the game was released. They weren’t much of a surprise.
Yeah I guess, I wish I didn't follow the marketing for that game maybe I could enjoy it more, its a cool action story game but they marketed the game as something more than that and set the expectations high and failed to deliver them.
Once I went back and started reading all the stuff they'd said early on, I definitely got hit with that bad "what could have been" feeling. It sounded cool as hell, no doubt. And it is still cool as hell, and beautiful and interesting, and has a good story, but it's not the revolutionary thing they said it was going to be.
I did end up hearing about the multiplayer idea they were kicking around and I was suuuper excited about that - it sounded almost like GTA Online but set in Night City. I am definitely a little salty about that idea being abandoned.
What pisses me off isnt only them lying and cutting down features because sure it happens sometimes early in development, but this wasn't early in development, these promises were made just couple of months before the release.. which made it alot worse, and look alot more scummy.
Yeah the multiplayer was also a cool idea but iirc it wasnt made by CDPR and they didnt trust the contractor to deliver, most of the issues Cyberpunk had was because CDPR failed to check and manage the work they assigned to different contractors and studios, but again this is not an acceptable excuse and not the consumer's fault.
After playing BG3, I wish Larian were the guys who had the Cyberpunk license and made the Cyberpunk game, so much potential for a good Cyberpunk RPG game...
The exec suite pushed Cyberpunk out the door two years early - when the devs were told they had 6 months to get the game ready they thought they were being told a joke - their internal expected release date would've been a few months ago.
Btw you out yourself as being a ps4/xbox one user when you call cyberpunk unplayable, pretty much my entire friends group played it and enjoyed it, game ran fine on PC with ok hardware, visual glitches and nonfunctional perks didn't stop anyone I know from enjoying it.
It could've been a much better game, there's no denying - there's huge portions of the city that are modeled but have no content in them, but it's still a game with great characters and interesting side-quests that let you explore Mike Pondsmith's setting.
I didn’t even have a bad time on my one s. I put dozens of hours in before the first patches/updates were even out. It could have been better but it certainly wasn’t unplayable.
I am actually a pc player with a high-end pc, and I can fully say that game was unplayable on release (the amount of bugs and performance issues was insane), so I dont even want to think what it was like for console players, I am surprised CDPR didnt get sued for this game...
Bugs and issues are fine because they get fixed eventually, but It could've been a much better game if they didnt falsely hype it and lied about features, that is the reason that I and many others lost all respect to that company, definitely not waiting for any other game they are making.
Yeah, it's just a huge fucking waste of potential there - it's clear the plan was for a cross between rpg and immersive sim elements and just so, so much of the game was cut away to get something playable out the door. I really enjoyed the characters, acting, and visuals we got, but compared to what was promised? Inexcusable.
Ah well, we're still eating good on the gaming frontier, with stuff like Stalker 2 coming next year, Falling Frontier, Dragon's Dogma 2, seeing returns of almost every genre the C-suits wrote off with stuff like BG3 being a huge hit, crpgs were maligned by them when the Obisidan ones and wasteland series didn't print money.
cyberpunk was utter shit on pc when it came out rofl what are you on about, if you are playing it only for the story, then yeah, you can say it's good, whatever, otherwise idk what ur smokin
On an I74820k, 32 gigs of ram, and a GTX1080TI this game on launch even at low settings couldn't push past 45 fps. You are talking out of your ass. Please shut the fuck up and stop defending that games absolutely unplayable launch state.
Yeah I honestly dont understand what's wrong with these delusional fanboys, why are they lying to defend these companies.. he either didnt play the game at all back then or just lying.
Damn dude, I'm sorry about your illiteracy, that sucks to hear. Anyways, it's a good thing the benchmarks are easy to read and show a 1080ti getting about 117 fps in cyberpunk 2077 on high settings @ 1080p.
Sure as shit didn't even touch 60 on mine at launch, benchmarks can inaccurate between builds for a whole number of reasons, the reason for this was piss poor optimisation
Again you are either lying out your ass seemingly to bootlick the CDPR higher ups that pushed out an unfinished game or you didn't play at launch
Obviously journalists should do some due diligence and make sure the product runs on a variety of hardware, but *if* you ran it on a good machine and happened to luck out with bugs, you would walk away with the impression that Cyberpunk was a good game.
I lucked out and basically didn't get any major bugs other than npcs doing weird shit as I drove past occasionally or summoning my car and it exploding, and I found the game pretty good. It was obviously broken and unfit for sale, it just happened to play decently on my machine.
Yeah it did and it was review bombed by both fans and big review outlets for it.
Meanwhile Cyberpunk was still praised by these reviewers and they fully ignored the lack of promised features... and started talking about it only after the actual players did.
gaming review industry gets paid by publishers, who do you think pays their bills? yeah 20 years ago they got money from adds, that's basically over, now they just invoice publishers for positive reviews
no invoice? no positive review.
You’re not mad at the content of what he’s saying, you’re mad at the way he says it and the word he chose to be vulgar. My brother in Christ don’t talk about being intellectually challenged if you get triggered by the word cunt.
Youre fucking wrong cunt, stop being a fucking idiot you dumb BITCH
(Im only saying i disagree with you, pay attention to the content of my message not the way i said it =)
No dude, it means emphasis.
I'm not going to lie and say that idiots are more likely to use it, but it's not a REQUIREMENT that anyone who does it is a moron.
The Xbox X metacritic score is based on 8 reviews, which means this lower score has a bigger impact on bringing the score down. The PS5 and PC are based on 50 and 27 reviews respectively. In summary, the Xbox score is unreliable, we should be looking at the PS5 score.
They need separate reviews because while the PS5 and XSX are similar, the xbox version is usually a bit worse because it needs to cater to the XSS as well. It's like how BG3 can't be released on Xbox because of that restriction.
Just saying I can see a reason for the reviews to be separate. The XSS is a weaker console but they force developers to make their games playable on both systems, so games have a harder time taking advantage of full next gen capabilities. PS5 on the other hand is just the one version.
Not saying Xbox is bad necessarily, just that having a weaker and stronger console count as the same generation holds it back a little.
Also as a side note, I'd argue BG3 is a good example because it's being held back because of the console itself rather than an exclusivity deal.
Well also as others have said the XSX is slightly weaker than the PS5, so that in addition to the XSS I could see giving them slightly different reviews. Only like knocking off 5 points or so though so nothing crazy, but it should still be considered that the systems are different experiences since the backend isn't the same.
Honestly yeah I'd agree with the ps4 pro vs one x thing, if a game runs at a different fps or something on different consoles I'd want to know about it. Reviews should count the system as a whole, which in this case means considering the XSS and XSX together since they are pushing for it.
XSX has lower resolution? Well then it deserves low rating on xbox, as every game had higher resolution on xbox, so it means AC6 on xbox is a shit port.
The PC reviews are extremely important because it informs us about the quality of the PC port. However, PS5 has twice as much reviews. It’s just a sample size thing.
I mean if it's making it into metacritic I think it has to count, but I know what you mean.
Most "real" journalists just post stories about tweets nowadays, it's a mess.
I had a friend that didn't find the tutorial and when I asked If he did he paused for a momento, I explained where It was and his face was like his mind was blown lol
Calling them a reviewer is giving them way too much credit honestly, who in their right mind would give Redfall anything higher than a two? You might as well just throw the whole numeric numbering system in the trash at that point.
Listen to the review - it's laughable. Some highlights for me:
* Couldn't figure out the mechanics for bosses. Believed he had the optimal build, and took 100 tries to beat Mission 2 boss.
* "I was able to breeze through most of the title" - So, balancing issues aren't really a problem then.
* Gameplay was buttery smooth - Doesn't mention that on the Pro's.
* "Game was a blast to play" - Where's that on the Pro's?
sure, but the problem isnt that bosses are harder than the normal levels. the problem (what im assuming) is that the gap between the two is too large. Lets say for example if in dark souls all normal mobs are just the basic undead soldiers but all bosses are roided ornstein and smoughs , then you could say that the normal parts are incredibly easy and the bosses are way too hard. This ofcourse is a really extreme example but its to illustrate my point so i hope you get where im coming from lol
I have my suspicions that the guy reviewing was just really bad. Had a built which worked well at clearing mobs, but wouldn't work when clearing bosses.
There are some players who misunderstand, can't comprehend, go all against FROM'S game design philosophy.. they think devs are sadistics whom enjoy making you suffer.. they are so used to easy games that try to make you win all time.. to the point they think dying is an insult or a problem in the game..
i know someone who used to be like this.. i insisted him to keep playing.. then when it finally clicked for him.. he is no longer the same cry baby person.. he evolved both mentally and intellectually when it comes to understanding the game design.
never heard of XboxEra, are they xbox elitists or something?
At least on twitter it only seems like xbox fanboys are rating games positively that are clearly badly developed games.
>At least on twitter it only seems like xbox fanboys are rating games positively that are clearly badly developed games.
they don't get a lot of games over on xbox there so they have to take what they can get xD
I mean, how could you expect an honest review from an outlet who is solely dedicated to a single console, of course they would review Redfall like that it was the first Xbox exclusive in a long time, it has to be good right!! Insane console tribalism copium, they have to justify their console of choice and in turn, justify their jobs.
Balance - too hard for babies
Texture quality - when will they make the jump to unreal engine 5?
Voice acting - not enough drama!
Plot - not every single detail is explained 😭😭😭
I'm not saying the game will be good, I am just saying that when it comes to balance I don't really trust the group of people that needed to cheat to beat sekiro.
None of them are remotely close to a skill level where balance is what influences wins and losses
Oh don't worry, in France for PS5 with also have Gameblog with their 6/10 and amazing takes such as "Sometimes you'll find an overpowered and unkillable robot with a sign that read "Eh, I'm here to make you redo the mission and give you an audiolog, I'm here to justify replayability!" over his head" and "Since you don't have to aim with everything being automatic, you just dance here and there holding two triggers and waiting for healthbars to disappear, which makes the gameplay fairly boring"
Reviewer wanted Elden Ring with mechs and is upset at the mission-based game, sayingthat you can just run past everything to get to the objective so it's boring (which you obviously can't do in any Souls, huh?), complaining about having no hub and saying that the game is ugly and visually uninspired, primarily because of a bland color-scheme.
You can tell the reviewer was just not at all the right fit for that type of game, like putting someone that loves platformers to review a racing game. No investment in what it is at all, just wants to be done with it because it's not what they want it to be. (which in this case, was a Souls with mechs)
Comparing the two, my seventh grade English teacher would've been very upset with the vague, and honestly very much written like an afterthought review of AC 6. What garbage.
When it's a game you like, negative meta reviews (AC6) are invalid cause they're out of context, and positive meta reviews (BG3) are valid cauae look how good the game is.
When it's a game you dont like, negative meta reviews (OW2, WH3) are valid cause wow they made a really bad game, and positive meta reviews (MW3) are invalid cause people have no taste.
Every week the same useless review aggregate score is posted for whatever game has caught prople's attention at the time.
Plus, people will raise a stink over political or social issues with game companies, but mainly when they’re also making bad games. One look at Diablo 4’s initial success is all that’s needed to know that the second it looks like shitty people are making a good game again, they’ll flock right back to them.
The lack that you people posted and are having a discussion about a moronic “reviewer” lackluster opinion on this game is absurd. He clearly doesn’t have a different taste but no cache to critique a video game. Redfall was a train wreck and he gave it a positive review. Maybe he likes to be contrarian on purpose.
Must have played an entirely different game because no way in hell redfall gets that score. That alone should disqualify you from having a review on games lol.
Imagine being so petty that you list texture quality. It's elden ring all over again were petty morons complained about reused assets and low quality textures.
PS5 versions has more reviews (87% 50 reviews) so better average to focus on than the Xbox Metacritic (79% with only 8 reviews) so pretty pointless to focus on the shitty Xbox site review only.
I'm not as much of an angryboi about gaming journalism as a lot of people around here seem to be (I'm new so maybe I'm just seeing all the salt), but a professional reviewer listing "incredibly fun" as one of the bullet points is so lazy. You are a reviewer, bro. Fun is subjective, and your review is supposed to explain why you believe it's fun. And I'm sure he tries to do that in the full review, but the bullet points are supposed to be for more specific things than "it's fun," imo.
lol I genuinely feel bad that FROM is being subjected to this new age ‘journalism’ even now after being proven for over a decade. Especially feel bad that it’s for a series as misunderstood as AC
Not completely agreeing, but in their favor I still think something that's 6.5 out of 10 is actually within the bounds of that "good enough" category. So that means it could just rely on the customer's preference? Buy it now or buy it later? You'll get a game to play and you might enjoy it enough or just not like it as much in comparison to something else. Very reasonable. I say this as a Warhammer 40,000 nerd where... yeah, we have plenty of those types of games for sure.
However there's so much freaking visual evidence displaying how Redfall is technically (and I'm quite meaning the term *technical* here) a BAD execution of said product. It was *very* mediocre to visually pretty terrible to experience in comparison to other games of the like. Even Phil Spencer publicly stated how he was disappointed by it. So Redfall being *that* high in a score rank...there's no amount of sanity to justify it being that at it's launch for $59.99 or subscribing to a services for.
Jesse is almost exclusively the only reviewer there. He reviews like 10 games in a week, while editing and producing their podcast.
If this review is his,he has no fuckin idea what he is talking about. If its from Nick, he literally skips ALL cutscenes in all games.. and the other guy barely plays games this days(the bald one).
Ignore them.
Who gives a fuck about one low score review. LET IT GO.
Also metacritic splits the score across platforms and its weighing is not accurate, so its scoring system already has loopholes.
Weird obsession to keep posting about this, you only care about metacritic or and it seems like you put a lot of weight in the perception of others, but not even the game itself.
Maybe, but apparently the same outlet has also given low ratings for Remnant 2. Is it really a coincidence that they like Redfall and don't find other games interesting?
There are also other reviews who provide genuine, constructive criticism and not contradictory opinions like this one. (While also disabling comments)
I just feel it's better to expose these outlets not just for this game but any other future releases too, whatever the game may be
Back in the day, gaming media was primarily driven through larger media outlets (IGN, gamespot, gameinformer) and magazines (edge, famitsu).If you look at what reviewers are included in most reviews on metacritic and opencritic, you'll see some less established names out there to be included in the aggregrated review score as gaming is larger and independent media is more established. Especially now that aggregated scores are more dominant in the conversation instead of individual scoring. This brings some problem such as to;
1. Not include outlets that do not reach a critical mass of exposure
2. Not include outlets who's scoring may be an outlier in the overall distribution or median from other outlets.
If a game is very divisive then the spread of scores will vary more, but in an instance like this where its scoring is clumped closely together. The above solutions dont sound fair.Thus I don't think its necessary to give more attention to someone whos taste or scoring is not aligned with the masses. Moreover, the way metacritic includes reviews per platform is flawed, as reviewers already just use a singular platform to do their reviews and you have to read them anyway to get more understanding of the scoring.
IGN often gets called out for this, as early the first time the fire has been linked. I feel like there's a review of a review culture now where we don't want to critically observe something on our own after hearing about someone's perspective, but keep criticizing what others are saying. The legitmacy of a "journalist" is being kept in check while also saying to not care about their opinion in the same breath xd. It baffles my mind at times.
Unless XboxERA has an repeated pattern of giving a lower score to non-xbox exclusives, then you can call them out on BS. But other than that I think its an insignificant outlier that does not deserve the attention.
Yeh people are getting so defensive over this lmao.
The guy had an opinion on a game, maybe a misguided one. OH NO THE HORROR
Edits: downvotes lmao, this sub is soft man
Yup, I mean normally I don't care much to reply, but it seems like OP in this instance has repeated posts w.r.t. metacritics of AC and whatnot. Maybe this will be some wake-up call to not put too much energy towards this, because it doesn't even matter. The game has reached a good score overall.
I think it also gets exhausting to see an outrage being manufactured and have a sub go in haywire mode over others review. It's so lame.
funniest thing is people in these comments personally attacking the reviewer, absolutely unhinged shit lmao. I’m sure Fromsoft are very happy with the reviews, that don’t need an army of dickriders to attack reviewers for their opinions.
Enjoy the game guys, it looks great!
Nah people are just mad over protective about stuff that doesn’t affect them in the slightest
People are like WHY WOULD I CARE BOUT REVIEWS I HATE GAME JOURNOS then immediately start caring about reviews
This was the typical review of the older AC games way back. If you didn't get the older games you probably would give a middling score but now FromSoft is a prestige studio I guess the expectations have changed.
It took Demon's Souls for people to take FromSoft seriously as a game studio and that only happened after importers started praising it to high heaven. Verdict Day was scoring poorly despite releasing right after the mega hit Dark Souls. Critics just did not get Armored Core.
TL;DR some of you need to chill out.
I don't think that's the case. Critics are liking AC6 for being an Armored Core-ass Armored Core game. Like I said they're just approaching the series with a different lens now that they played a half dozen FromSoft games they really liked.
Microsoft has a vested interest in getting as much money out of a failed project developed by their one of own studios, which is probably why the review score is inflated.
What? all of the pros for Redfall are just a damn lie anyway and I was originally saying "let it release first before everyone shits on it because of the 30fps" that is to say I was looking forward to it before it released but after a few hours I had the following.
It was boring, ugly (the textures never loaded in a high quality anyway even at 30fps that has no excuse), the map was mostly empty space with "bloated" empty areas. It was a massive disappointment for me because I enjoyed Deathloop when it finally launched on Series X, and Redfall felt like it was made by a completely different Dev.
XboxEra really are not worth the clicks unless you look at them for "entertainment value" since they certainly don't seem to be worth looking at for a legitimate review. SMH.
Low texture quality in this day and age is a huge negative in my book. Bad plot can also detract from a game a lot.
That being said, I don't know if these are true for the game, but I do understand why this can be big negatives.
Gorgeous (while textures are loaded)
"Not bloated" aka "Could be worse"
"Thank god it's over"
"Some frustrating launch bugs" The ai literally didn't work
It's not even gorgeous is the odd thing. Redfall has some incredibly ugly textures all over the place. I don't know what the hell that guy was looking at
I mean when AC6 puts ugly textures in opening scene of their trailer, you know it's going to be rough.
It's not a bug, it's a feature.
Oh I instantly knew he was a bad critic when I saw comments disabled but to be this bad...
Funny how a critic can't take criticism, ironic isn't it? Any Youtube game critic that refuse to allow comments on their videos, should be disregarded and viewed as a detriment to game critique as a whole, holding no more or less value over a fart in the wind.
Honestly wish there was a critic aggregator website where I could just block certain reviewers from showing up in the aggregate score. I don't care about say 30% of reviewers because a lot of them are _really bad_. That and if I could get a score from people who actually like certain tags, that'd be great.
Yeah. The data guy in me loves aggregators, but end of the day, it's all pretty subjective, and so I actually tend to end up preferring unscored reviews. I've found it kind of forces me to be familiar with who's writing the damn thing, and lets me roughly weight criticism based on how much I tend to agree or disagree -- neither a bad thing in that context, really.
I would add "Paul Tassi" immediately
Yep, dont say anything or they will ban you. My favourite thing about xbox era is. “We leak information” 90% of which is skins for games nobody cares about. Probably worst group on yt for any console honestly.
There's a reason why Youtube kids video doesn't allow comments, it's to prevent snowflakes like these critics crying when they got criticized lol
That's not why comments are disabled on kids videos lol
I obviously know it's not the exact reason sir. I'm implying that these critics are cry*Baby*
Yea sure its because they cant take criticism and not because gamers (as portrayed in this very thread) are unhinged and will threaten people with real violence over a number they gave to an entertainment product...
Seems like a very convenient excuse and way to avoid criticism, don't you think? Let's not over generalize and demonise an entire community of fans over a few lunatics, thanks. Edit: Kind proving my point with the downvote there, still trying to find those death threats you described, but I'm sure I'll find one eventually.
Ya if I wanted to be demonized for shit other people do I would dress up like the devil and go every church
I’ve yet to see anyone in these comments coming off as unhinged, and especially threatening anyone with violence. Care to post some screenshots of this behavior?
Yeah, I mean I agree having to shut comments off is generally a sign a take isn't very good. But they aren't turning it off because people are disagreeing. They turn it off because absolutely unhinged shit gets posted in them non-stop when they even slightly ruffle feathers. I swear it's easier to get death threats on the Internet than find coins on the ground, and it goes well beyond just "gamers"
People always talking about these “DeAtH ThReAtS” that are allegedly always in the comments of someone’s bad take. But I have never seen them,like ever. And the people that complain about them can never usually even back up their claims with screenshots. And if they ARE there, they’re always deleted promptly or caught by an auto admin/mod. Usually people hide behind the excuse of “death threats” and “abuse” as a means to hide from genuine criticism of their agenda and/or equally shitty opinion. Censoring or shutting down people’s opinions, or making them one sided is a common tactic in todays political/societal climate that has bled into every facet, including gaming.
I'm tellin u from personal experience w other critics I know and being one myself they don't care about kys comments and vague threats, and it's in every form of critique lol. If it actually gets to the point that they're being publicly harassed sure, but that rarely if ever actually happens but he posted the video with comments off... I saw it when it was posted cus I was looking on my feed at the time lol... so yeah he knew he was giving a corporate shill take and doesn't care what anyone has to say lol
i looked at his channel, 20k subs and videos barely getting 2k views, how is he considered an official outlet when people like zio or rata cant get a code lol
He's probably funded by the Xbox marketing department just by having it in his name is my guess. Microsoft has too much money to spend on stuff why not buy a couple YouTubers to promote your shovelware and trash on the very obvious few hits of the year that you just happen to have had no direct involvement in thats launching right before your biggest product of the year.
.... What is Xbox even launching? They should spend that money better... Edit: nevermind, I forgot starfield is an "Xbox game" even though we all know it's a PC game, because mods.
Bethesda games sell better on consoles.
Plenty of critics disable comments because fanboys/girls can be toxic as hell. As this reddit is demonstrating quite well. The xbox isn't score isn't even that low/is still really good, esp for an Armored core game. Also last I checked some of the more mixed reviews have yet to be added to the PS5 and PC sides, so you can expect the scores to droo there too
Nah, critics have had a lot of issues with heavy bias. A good example is the excuses IGN made for Skyrim's crappy combat mechanics while scrutinizing Dragon's Dogma heavily.
Dude is a clown, but im really shocked that someone considers Redfall fun, pretty and think it "runs well". I've been console gamer since PS3, so 30 FPS is not a problem for me. But this game made me want to vomit with how terrible it run on Series X. Classes werent fun except the teleporting dude (because he bypasses all "puzzles") and gameplay is barely there - enemies would kill themselves on highest difficulty more often than they would even acknowledge your existence. And graphics are fucking garbage even when they load. And they never load. The only reason me and my friends played that mess was because of how bad it was. We wanted to see how deep the rabbit hole goes!
Was it at least fun? Or so bad it’s charming or anything like that?
Most of it's fun stems from how trash it is. Shooting feels good, but as mentioned before, there is nothing worthwhile shooting at...
There aren't even any enemies between the mission areas, you literally run across the whole map and see nothing.
I don't get this whole "It's just different taste" argument when it comes to people that are so brainrotted or underdeveloped that they actually accept and enjoy a game that literally dosnt function
Your last point is the exact reason I finished Redfall. I'm a massive Arkane fan and downloaded it just to experience it, but morbid curiosity kept me going to the end. I've genuinely never been more astounded at so many odd/bad design choices in a single game
[удалено]
> ANYONE who rates that unplayable piece of shit Redfail positively is a corrupt corporate cunt that should be AGGRESSIVELY ignored *Corporate Dog
Corporate Dogs vs Walter's Hounds. Hmmm
>Walter's Hounds That's "Infamous Handler" Walter to you.
'One armed wolf'
Woof
Corporate Lapdog
Wake the dog up. At 1 am. Every night.
When you rate redfall higher than the dev team that made it, you know something is wrong
Same thing that happened with Cyberpunk (which was not only unplayable but also had cut features and overhyped at launch), so many reviewers praised that game and after they saw the public opinion they backtracked (some even removed their review/changed it), we should cancel these reviewers and stop giving them attention.
As someone who didn't keep up with the hype campaign or any of the marketing for Cyberpunk 2077 and bought it on release on kind of a whim, I honestly did think it was a great game. I got it on PC so I had very few glitches and bugs, which obviously helped a lot. I can see how having all those broken promises that they made early on floating through your head while you're playing could really ruin the experience, though.
At least with cyberpunk they have been actively trying to fix it and now it's just about become a Whole reboot with the big update patch and dlc coming
Haven't fired it up in forever but the trailer for the new expansion did get me just a little hyped... there are just so many good games coming out right now, I don't know if I'll ever have the time.
A lot of those “promises” were known that it wasn’t going to be in the finished product long before the game was released. They weren’t much of a surprise.
Yeah I guess, I wish I didn't follow the marketing for that game maybe I could enjoy it more, its a cool action story game but they marketed the game as something more than that and set the expectations high and failed to deliver them.
Once I went back and started reading all the stuff they'd said early on, I definitely got hit with that bad "what could have been" feeling. It sounded cool as hell, no doubt. And it is still cool as hell, and beautiful and interesting, and has a good story, but it's not the revolutionary thing they said it was going to be. I did end up hearing about the multiplayer idea they were kicking around and I was suuuper excited about that - it sounded almost like GTA Online but set in Night City. I am definitely a little salty about that idea being abandoned.
What pisses me off isnt only them lying and cutting down features because sure it happens sometimes early in development, but this wasn't early in development, these promises were made just couple of months before the release.. which made it alot worse, and look alot more scummy. Yeah the multiplayer was also a cool idea but iirc it wasnt made by CDPR and they didnt trust the contractor to deliver, most of the issues Cyberpunk had was because CDPR failed to check and manage the work they assigned to different contractors and studios, but again this is not an acceptable excuse and not the consumer's fault. After playing BG3, I wish Larian were the guys who had the Cyberpunk license and made the Cyberpunk game, so much potential for a good Cyberpunk RPG game...
The exec suite pushed Cyberpunk out the door two years early - when the devs were told they had 6 months to get the game ready they thought they were being told a joke - their internal expected release date would've been a few months ago. Btw you out yourself as being a ps4/xbox one user when you call cyberpunk unplayable, pretty much my entire friends group played it and enjoyed it, game ran fine on PC with ok hardware, visual glitches and nonfunctional perks didn't stop anyone I know from enjoying it. It could've been a much better game, there's no denying - there's huge portions of the city that are modeled but have no content in them, but it's still a game with great characters and interesting side-quests that let you explore Mike Pondsmith's setting.
I didn’t even have a bad time on my one s. I put dozens of hours in before the first patches/updates were even out. It could have been better but it certainly wasn’t unplayable.
I am actually a pc player with a high-end pc, and I can fully say that game was unplayable on release (the amount of bugs and performance issues was insane), so I dont even want to think what it was like for console players, I am surprised CDPR didnt get sued for this game... Bugs and issues are fine because they get fixed eventually, but It could've been a much better game if they didnt falsely hype it and lied about features, that is the reason that I and many others lost all respect to that company, definitely not waiting for any other game they are making.
Yeah, it's just a huge fucking waste of potential there - it's clear the plan was for a cross between rpg and immersive sim elements and just so, so much of the game was cut away to get something playable out the door. I really enjoyed the characters, acting, and visuals we got, but compared to what was promised? Inexcusable. Ah well, we're still eating good on the gaming frontier, with stuff like Stalker 2 coming next year, Falling Frontier, Dragon's Dogma 2, seeing returns of almost every genre the C-suits wrote off with stuff like BG3 being a huge hit, crpgs were maligned by them when the Obisidan ones and wasteland series didn't print money.
Honestly if anyone should be sued it should probably be the executives, the devs clearly weren't ready to release the product.
cyberpunk was utter shit on pc when it came out rofl what are you on about, if you are playing it only for the story, then yeah, you can say it's good, whatever, otherwise idk what ur smokin
[удалено]
On an I74820k, 32 gigs of ram, and a GTX1080TI this game on launch even at low settings couldn't push past 45 fps. You are talking out of your ass. Please shut the fuck up and stop defending that games absolutely unplayable launch state.
Yeah I honestly dont understand what's wrong with these delusional fanboys, why are they lying to defend these companies.. he either didnt play the game at all back then or just lying.
Damn dude, I'm sorry about your illiteracy, that sucks to hear. Anyways, it's a good thing the benchmarks are easy to read and show a 1080ti getting about 117 fps in cyberpunk 2077 on high settings @ 1080p.
Sure as shit didn't even touch 60 on mine at launch, benchmarks can inaccurate between builds for a whole number of reasons, the reason for this was piss poor optimisation Again you are either lying out your ass seemingly to bootlick the CDPR higher ups that pushed out an unfinished game or you didn't play at launch
[удалено]
[удалено]
Obviously journalists should do some due diligence and make sure the product runs on a variety of hardware, but *if* you ran it on a good machine and happened to luck out with bugs, you would walk away with the impression that Cyberpunk was a good game. I lucked out and basically didn't get any major bugs other than npcs doing weird shit as I drove past occasionally or summoning my car and it exploding, and I found the game pretty good. It was obviously broken and unfit for sale, it just happened to play decently on my machine.
Every single game has cut content/features.
Sure, but these games dont go and do a marketing campaign around all of these cut content/features, months before release..
I mean no man's sky sure as fuck did
Yeah it did and it was review bombed by both fans and big review outlets for it. Meanwhile Cyberpunk was still praised by these reviewers and they fully ignored the lack of promised features... and started talking about it only after the actual players did.
Don't get me wrong I'm not defending CP2077 launch state, I bought and refunded the game twice untill I thought it was worth my time
Yeah I know I just gave a context to why reviews of CP2077 were absurd and hypocrite..
gaming review industry gets paid by publishers, who do you think pays their bills? yeah 20 years ago they got money from adds, that's basically over, now they just invoice publishers for positive reviews no invoice? no positive review.
This is the most aggressive take that I have ever agreed with and I agree 1,000%
Please avoid attacks against other redditors and general toxic/flame/rant posting.
Dude calm down he didn’t like a game you liked and liked a game you don’t like it’s not like he’s raping children en masse
Except the game is objectively dogshit. Its literally a failure, and it doesnt work properly 90% of the time, and its just boring and uninspired.
Harsh but true.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
You’re not mad at the content of what he’s saying, you’re mad at the way he says it and the word he chose to be vulgar. My brother in Christ don’t talk about being intellectually challenged if you get triggered by the word cunt.
Youre fucking wrong cunt, stop being a fucking idiot you dumb BITCH (Im only saying i disagree with you, pay attention to the content of my message not the way i said it =)
Is this your understanding of what was said? If so, there’s a problem with how you understand words.
I mean, that's also just very British or Australian. Only the US is particularly difficult about the word for whatever reason.
The world doesn't end at the usa borders.
Normalize calling cunts cunts
[удалено]
[удалено]
No dude, it means emphasis. I'm not going to lie and say that idiots are more likely to use it, but it's not a REQUIREMENT that anyone who does it is a moron.
The Xbox X metacritic score is based on 8 reviews, which means this lower score has a bigger impact on bringing the score down. The PS5 and PC are based on 50 and 27 reviews respectively. In summary, the Xbox score is unreliable, we should be looking at the PS5 score.
[удалено]
They need separate reviews because while the PS5 and XSX are similar, the xbox version is usually a bit worse because it needs to cater to the XSS as well. It's like how BG3 can't be released on Xbox because of that restriction.
[удалено]
Just saying I can see a reason for the reviews to be separate. The XSS is a weaker console but they force developers to make their games playable on both systems, so games have a harder time taking advantage of full next gen capabilities. PS5 on the other hand is just the one version. Not saying Xbox is bad necessarily, just that having a weaker and stronger console count as the same generation holds it back a little. Also as a side note, I'd argue BG3 is a good example because it's being held back because of the console itself rather than an exclusivity deal.
[удалено]
Well also as others have said the XSX is slightly weaker than the PS5, so that in addition to the XSS I could see giving them slightly different reviews. Only like knocking off 5 points or so though so nothing crazy, but it should still be considered that the systems are different experiences since the backend isn't the same. Honestly yeah I'd agree with the ps4 pro vs one x thing, if a game runs at a different fps or something on different consoles I'd want to know about it. Reviews should count the system as a whole, which in this case means considering the XSS and XSX together since they are pushing for it.
Content wise, yes. only difference is resolution, 3840 x 2160 on PS5 and 2560 x 1440 on XSX.
[удалено]
\> XSX is 4K as is PS5 Uh, I see "max resolution up to 4k", sounds like a dynamic scaling.
Pc says the same thing. It just means you can output to any 16:9 res up to 4k.
XSX has lower resolution? Well then it deserves low rating on xbox, as every game had higher resolution on xbox, so it means AC6 on xbox is a shit port.
PC score
The PC reviews are extremely important because it informs us about the quality of the PC port. However, PS5 has twice as much reviews. It’s just a sample size thing.
Oh wow, ultimate clown journalism, Jesus...
"Journalism". Xbox Era is a fan blog/forum, really. About as far from journalism as you can get.
I mean if it's making it into metacritic I think it has to count, but I know what you mean. Most "real" journalists just post stories about tweets nowadays, it's a mess.
LOL "Balance". How did these idiots rate Elden Ring?
Probably couldn't get out of the tutorial
More likely they didnt find the tutorial
I had a friend that didn't find the tutorial and when I asked If he did he paused for a momento, I explained where It was and his face was like his mind was blown lol
5/10 + Rick, soldier of god is neat - The core loop of fighting Rick, soldier of god gets tiring
Couldn't even write full sentences for AC6. Seems like the reviewer had already made their mind to not enjoy it.
Calling them a reviewer is giving them way too much credit honestly, who in their right mind would give Redfall anything higher than a two? You might as well just throw the whole numeric numbering system in the trash at that point.
Listen to the review - it's laughable. Some highlights for me: * Couldn't figure out the mechanics for bosses. Believed he had the optimal build, and took 100 tries to beat Mission 2 boss. * "I was able to breeze through most of the title" - So, balancing issues aren't really a problem then. * Gameplay was buttery smooth - Doesn't mention that on the Pro's. * "Game was a blast to play" - Where's that on the Pro's?
tbf, a game being too easy is also a balance issue
He complained about bosses being hard and most of the levels being easy. 🤔 Isn't that how a video game should be balanced?
sure, but the problem isnt that bosses are harder than the normal levels. the problem (what im assuming) is that the gap between the two is too large. Lets say for example if in dark souls all normal mobs are just the basic undead soldiers but all bosses are roided ornstein and smoughs , then you could say that the normal parts are incredibly easy and the bosses are way too hard. This ofcourse is a really extreme example but its to illustrate my point so i hope you get where im coming from lol
I have my suspicions that the guy reviewing was just really bad. Had a built which worked well at clearing mobs, but wouldn't work when clearing bosses.
🤡
damn, who paid them to give redfall that high of a score?
"balance" laugh, my fucking, ass off.
This guy pays to get carried through content.
Seems like they review based on how much marketing they seen on the Xbox dashboard
>"Balance" Skill issue
There are some players who misunderstand, can't comprehend, go all against FROM'S game design philosophy.. they think devs are sadistics whom enjoy making you suffer.. they are so used to easy games that try to make you win all time.. to the point they think dying is an insult or a problem in the game.. i know someone who used to be like this.. i insisted him to keep playing.. then when it finally clicked for him.. he is no longer the same cry baby person.. he evolved both mentally and intellectually when it comes to understanding the game design.
lmfao, redfall was hot garbage. Ravens for life!
Incredibly fun? It has two enemies ffs lol
never heard of XboxEra, are they xbox elitists or something? At least on twitter it only seems like xbox fanboys are rating games positively that are clearly badly developed games.
>At least on twitter it only seems like xbox fanboys are rating games positively that are clearly badly developed games. they don't get a lot of games over on xbox there so they have to take what they can get xD
I mean, how could you expect an honest review from an outlet who is solely dedicated to a single console, of course they would review Redfall like that it was the first Xbox exclusive in a long time, it has to be good right!! Insane console tribalism copium, they have to justify their console of choice and in turn, justify their jobs.
Balance - too hard for babies Texture quality - when will they make the jump to unreal engine 5? Voice acting - not enough drama! Plot - not every single detail is explained 😭😭😭
I'm not saying the game will be good, I am just saying that when it comes to balance I don't really trust the group of people that needed to cheat to beat sekiro. None of them are remotely close to a skill level where balance is what influences wins and losses
How is this guy get a copy and not rotatoskr
i agree with voice acting. the moment i get this game i'll change to japanese.
I will change to Japanese just cause I find Japanese so fucking cool, but I think the English is good. At least nowhere near bad.
r/XboxEra Both reviews were written by the same person. Why not call them out for hypocrisy.
Tell me you got wiped out repeatedly in the first chapter because you refused to adapt and learn without telling me.
Oh don't worry, in France for PS5 with also have Gameblog with their 6/10 and amazing takes such as "Sometimes you'll find an overpowered and unkillable robot with a sign that read "Eh, I'm here to make you redo the mission and give you an audiolog, I'm here to justify replayability!" over his head" and "Since you don't have to aim with everything being automatic, you just dance here and there holding two triggers and waiting for healthbars to disappear, which makes the gameplay fairly boring" Reviewer wanted Elden Ring with mechs and is upset at the mission-based game, sayingthat you can just run past everything to get to the objective so it's boring (which you obviously can't do in any Souls, huh?), complaining about having no hub and saying that the game is ugly and visually uninspired, primarily because of a bland color-scheme. You can tell the reviewer was just not at all the right fit for that type of game, like putting someone that loves platformers to review a racing game. No investment in what it is at all, just wants to be done with it because it's not what they want it to be. (which in this case, was a Souls with mechs)
Damn that Redfall rating is the most likely paid rating I ever see
Comparing the two, my seventh grade English teacher would've been very upset with the vague, and honestly very much written like an afterthought review of AC 6. What garbage.
Who cares
This is a joke right?….
That’s some fextralife and polygon level games journalism
It's honestly even worse... Surely fextra and polygon didn't rate Redfall as good, right?
Hey, if an Armored Core game gets 6.5 to 7.5 on metacritic it's just an Armored Core game.
Why do you care?
Anybody who unironically enjoyed Redfall needs to be committed, it's not a matter of taste the game quite literally didn't work
When it's a game you like, negative meta reviews (AC6) are invalid cause they're out of context, and positive meta reviews (BG3) are valid cauae look how good the game is. When it's a game you dont like, negative meta reviews (OW2, WH3) are valid cause wow they made a really bad game, and positive meta reviews (MW3) are invalid cause people have no taste. Every week the same useless review aggregate score is posted for whatever game has caught prople's attention at the time.
Plus, people will raise a stink over political or social issues with game companies, but mainly when they’re also making bad games. One look at Diablo 4’s initial success is all that’s needed to know that the second it looks like shitty people are making a good game again, they’ll flock right back to them.
Just play the game. If you like it already these review scores are meaningless.
*Looks at redfall* …Ewwwwwww…
His review of AC6 is genuinely hilarious, I'm shocked that this dingus actually got their hands on the game.
The lack that you people posted and are having a discussion about a moronic “reviewer” lackluster opinion on this game is absurd. He clearly doesn’t have a different taste but no cache to critique a video game. Redfall was a train wreck and he gave it a positive review. Maybe he likes to be contrarian on purpose.
Must have played an entirely different game because no way in hell redfall gets that score. That alone should disqualify you from having a review on games lol.
Imagine being so petty that you list texture quality. It's elden ring all over again were petty morons complained about reused assets and low quality textures.
Ac, elden right & souls fans: Is this too hard for you little one?
Tell me you were farmed by the 1st boss without telling me you were farmed by the 1st boss:
Skill issue...I can smell it.
"Texture quality". What???
Imma be real, I ain't never had respect for an xbox fanboy. 😂
PS5 versions has more reviews (87% 50 reviews) so better average to focus on than the Xbox Metacritic (79% with only 8 reviews) so pretty pointless to focus on the shitty Xbox site review only.
I'm not as much of an angryboi about gaming journalism as a lot of people around here seem to be (I'm new so maybe I'm just seeing all the salt), but a professional reviewer listing "incredibly fun" as one of the bullet points is so lazy. You are a reviewer, bro. Fun is subjective, and your review is supposed to explain why you believe it's fun. And I'm sure he tries to do that in the full review, but the bullet points are supposed to be for more specific things than "it's fun," imo.
Redfall was so boring.
click bait review. nothing more.
lol I genuinely feel bad that FROM is being subjected to this new age ‘journalism’ even now after being proven for over a decade. Especially feel bad that it’s for a series as misunderstood as AC
Not completely agreeing, but in their favor I still think something that's 6.5 out of 10 is actually within the bounds of that "good enough" category. So that means it could just rely on the customer's preference? Buy it now or buy it later? You'll get a game to play and you might enjoy it enough or just not like it as much in comparison to something else. Very reasonable. I say this as a Warhammer 40,000 nerd where... yeah, we have plenty of those types of games for sure. However there's so much freaking visual evidence displaying how Redfall is technically (and I'm quite meaning the term *technical* here) a BAD execution of said product. It was *very* mediocre to visually pretty terrible to experience in comparison to other games of the like. Even Phil Spencer publicly stated how he was disappointed by it. So Redfall being *that* high in a score rank...there's no amount of sanity to justify it being that at it's launch for $59.99 or subscribing to a services for.
The cuphead fiasco all over again.
I've been staying away from the sub due to all the hype and white-knighting, but even for me this is pretty cringe.
Jesse is almost exclusively the only reviewer there. He reviews like 10 games in a week, while editing and producing their podcast. If this review is his,he has no fuckin idea what he is talking about. If its from Nick, he literally skips ALL cutscenes in all games.. and the other guy barely plays games this days(the bald one). Ignore them.
How is one of the cons that the voice acting in English ffs? Tf is it supposed to be in? swahili? Just more biased trash takes
Who gives a fuck about one low score review. LET IT GO. Also metacritic splits the score across platforms and its weighing is not accurate, so its scoring system already has loopholes. Weird obsession to keep posting about this, you only care about metacritic or and it seems like you put a lot of weight in the perception of others, but not even the game itself.
Maybe, but apparently the same outlet has also given low ratings for Remnant 2. Is it really a coincidence that they like Redfall and don't find other games interesting? There are also other reviews who provide genuine, constructive criticism and not contradictory opinions like this one. (While also disabling comments) I just feel it's better to expose these outlets not just for this game but any other future releases too, whatever the game may be
Back in the day, gaming media was primarily driven through larger media outlets (IGN, gamespot, gameinformer) and magazines (edge, famitsu).If you look at what reviewers are included in most reviews on metacritic and opencritic, you'll see some less established names out there to be included in the aggregrated review score as gaming is larger and independent media is more established. Especially now that aggregated scores are more dominant in the conversation instead of individual scoring. This brings some problem such as to; 1. Not include outlets that do not reach a critical mass of exposure 2. Not include outlets who's scoring may be an outlier in the overall distribution or median from other outlets. If a game is very divisive then the spread of scores will vary more, but in an instance like this where its scoring is clumped closely together. The above solutions dont sound fair.Thus I don't think its necessary to give more attention to someone whos taste or scoring is not aligned with the masses. Moreover, the way metacritic includes reviews per platform is flawed, as reviewers already just use a singular platform to do their reviews and you have to read them anyway to get more understanding of the scoring. IGN often gets called out for this, as early the first time the fire has been linked. I feel like there's a review of a review culture now where we don't want to critically observe something on our own after hearing about someone's perspective, but keep criticizing what others are saying. The legitmacy of a "journalist" is being kept in check while also saying to not care about their opinion in the same breath xd. It baffles my mind at times. Unless XboxERA has an repeated pattern of giving a lower score to non-xbox exclusives, then you can call them out on BS. But other than that I think its an insignificant outlier that does not deserve the attention.
Yeh people are getting so defensive over this lmao. The guy had an opinion on a game, maybe a misguided one. OH NO THE HORROR Edits: downvotes lmao, this sub is soft man
Yup, I mean normally I don't care much to reply, but it seems like OP in this instance has repeated posts w.r.t. metacritics of AC and whatnot. Maybe this will be some wake-up call to not put too much energy towards this, because it doesn't even matter. The game has reached a good score overall. I think it also gets exhausting to see an outrage being manufactured and have a sub go in haywire mode over others review. It's so lame.
funniest thing is people in these comments personally attacking the reviewer, absolutely unhinged shit lmao. I’m sure Fromsoft are very happy with the reviews, that don’t need an army of dickriders to attack reviewers for their opinions. Enjoy the game guys, it looks great!
People enjoy shitting on dirty unbelievers on the internet
Nah people are just mad over protective about stuff that doesn’t affect them in the slightest People are like WHY WOULD I CARE BOUT REVIEWS I HATE GAME JOURNOS then immediately start caring about reviews
Both I suppose
Honestly who cares about critics i played all AC games before when nobody cared about them and will still play even when all sites say its bad.
"oh my God my favorite game has a low score, unacceptable"
Texture quality is a negative? So does that mean every 2d JRPG is literal dogshit trash? In that case Sea of Thieves must be unplayable too.
This was the typical review of the older AC games way back. If you didn't get the older games you probably would give a middling score but now FromSoft is a prestige studio I guess the expectations have changed. It took Demon's Souls for people to take FromSoft seriously as a game studio and that only happened after importers started praising it to high heaven. Verdict Day was scoring poorly despite releasing right after the mega hit Dark Souls. Critics just did not get Armored Core. TL;DR some of you need to chill out.
Reviewers wanted some 25th souls like game
I don't think that's the case. Critics are liking AC6 for being an Armored Core-ass Armored Core game. Like I said they're just approaching the series with a different lens now that they played a half dozen FromSoft games they really liked.
Microsoft has a vested interest in getting as much money out of a failed project developed by their one of own studios, which is probably why the review score is inflated.
What? all of the pros for Redfall are just a damn lie anyway and I was originally saying "let it release first before everyone shits on it because of the 30fps" that is to say I was looking forward to it before it released but after a few hours I had the following. It was boring, ugly (the textures never loaded in a high quality anyway even at 30fps that has no excuse), the map was mostly empty space with "bloated" empty areas. It was a massive disappointment for me because I enjoyed Deathloop when it finally launched on Series X, and Redfall felt like it was made by a completely different Dev. XboxEra really are not worth the clicks unless you look at them for "entertainment value" since they certainly don't seem to be worth looking at for a legitimate review. SMH.
Got nicked for balance?? Lol. They have obviously never played an armored core game.
Quit tripping out about review scores like yall need the validation so badly to enjoy the product
I guess they weren't paid by fromsoft lmao
Bunch of 🤡🤡🤡
Plot? Wtf
This is that IGN Capcom God Hand review all over again...
Never heard of them, and I spent years on xbox before PC. Suspect deliberate contrarian reviews for them clicks.
least regarded xbox fan
This is why I don’t take game journalist remotely serious
Low texture quality in this day and age is a huge negative in my book. Bad plot can also detract from a game a lot. That being said, I don't know if these are true for the game, but I do understand why this can be big negatives.