Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.
The Outer Worlds - Obsidian RPG
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,094 CMod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 27808
Homelander wrote: »Completely agree. But there's a big difference between a flawed promising game (say, 5/10) and a downright terrible game (say 3/10 or lower). I doubt any decent gamer would argue Dead Island, for example, was a 3/10 game, but it got that very score from some outlets on release.
Your argument here is based on the troubling suggestion that any given critic is only allowed operate within a narrow window of opinion when it comes to any given game.
The Internet has created the strangest views on critics, but really it’s simple: a critic can come down wherever they want on any given game, so long as they do so convincingly and in good faith. There’s no reason a critic can’t write a scathing, 1/10 review of an otherwise universally praised title, again once it comes from a place of genuine feeling. Everyone perceives any given game different, and while naturally strong craft and quality will typically be widely recognised, there is no single, objective, ‘true’ reading.
I’d personally give Red Dead Redemption 2 maybe a 2/10 or a 3/10 because I think it’s a fumbling, confused mess of a game and ultimately a catastrophic failure of vision. Many others think it’s a masterpiece. I have no doubt most are sincere and honest in their assessment of it, but I’d hope they’d also recognise my belief comes from a place of good faith and honesty too
Views diverge wildly; it’s not just because the demands for web traffic. 0 -
-
johnny_ultimate wrote: »
I’d personally give Red Dead Redemption 2 maybe a 2/10 or a 3/10 because I think it’s a fumbling, confused mess of a game and ultimately a catastrophic failure of vision. Many others think it’s a masterpiece. I have no doubt most are sincere and honest in their assessment of it, but I’d hope they’d also recognise my belief comes from a place of good faith and honesty too Views diverge wildly; it’s not just because the demands for web traffic.
That opens a whole can of worms Johnny with all due respect, because it perscribes to exactly what I mentioned - reviewers judging games on expectations rather than merit. And that's not to say that expectatations and context can't play some level of role in a review.
Think, to yourself, about what such a rating signifies. To most people, such a rating is tantamount to a title being entirely unplayable, worthless, devoid of any redeeming features and not worth a cent of your hard earned money.
I think Rambo: The Video Game, one of the worst titles in recent memory, had a similar rating. Does Read Dead belong in that category, simply for not living up to personal expectations?
I would say not. Don't get me wrong....game reviews are entirely subjective things and should rightly be so, but let's not lose sight of what forms an objectively 'OK' game either. It's perfectly OK to go against the grain whatever the medium of enterainment, but we should at least take a step back and let our harshest criticism fall on the faults, but take stock of what the game at least accomplishes.
I, for one, found GTA V not to my taste, but I somewhat objectively recognise that it's an astounding achievement in the technical aspect of gaming at the very least, regardless of my indifference to it.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 49998
I'm sorry that's just plain wrong.
I'd also give Red Dead Redemption 2 a 3/10 based on the fact that it was absolutely zero craic to play. Still I like to read about the people that liked the game and their reasons why.
Reviews are subjective, it's not a science. People have different opinions and I'd much rather there be a wide range of varying opinions that can back those opinions up than a bunch of bay sheep jumping on every bandwagon.
0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
I don't think Obsidian are harshly rated. They gave a great go with New Vegas but were basically given an impossible task due to a short timeframe & having to work on someone else's engine which even Bethesda can't manage to work with successfully. KOTOR 2 was clearly similar where they had a short timetable to work & it was unfinished which says to me they aimed for the moon with far too little time.johnny_ultimate wrote: »I’d personally give Red Dead Redemption 2 maybe a 2/10 or a 3/10 because I think it’s a fumbling, confused mess of a game and ultimately a catastrophic failure of vision. Many others think it’s a masterpiece. I have no doubt most are sincere and honest in their assessment of it, but I’d hope they’d also recognise my belief comes from a place of good faith and honesty too Views diverge wildly; it’s not just because the demands for web traffic.
RDR2 is a lot of things but it absolutely is not a failure of vision; as that is the game Rockstar wanted to make whether people like that is another matter.
From the drawn out animation, overthinking of the smallest details, the level of acting & it looks absolutely incredible. It's nowhere near my favourite Rockstar game as when the realisation slips in that it very much resembles an interactive movie whereas something like GTA 3 was do whatever the f**k ya want stimulator. Rockstar didn't try make that game.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 49998
I'm just glad there's reviewers out there that aren't blown away by technical achievements and are able to critique a game on how well it succeeds at being a game because in my eyes, RDR2 is a failure of a game. Too many reviewers get caught up in the hype but good there's some out there that give more measured opinions.
And it doesn't even succeed at being an interactive movie as it's a bad one interrupted by bad gameplay in boring missions.
0 -
-
-
-
-
Icyseanfitz wrote: »and fallout 76 bringing a $100 annual subscription model in at the same time this gets released
Obsidian are one of the few good devs left in my opinion, have this pre loaded and ready to go with game pass
Same but I read about a fair lump of a day one patch for it.
EDIT: Might not apply to digital, but 18GB for physical release.0 -
Icyseanfitz wrote: »and fallout 76 bringing a $100 annual subscription model in at the same time this gets released Obsidian are one of the few good devs left in my opinion, have this pre loaded and ready to go with game pass
Yea, just read an article about that.
It's embarrassing. Put a bullet in Fallout 76 at this stage0 -
-
Advertisement
Advertisement