@cachinscythe First off, your referring to something in your so-called rant that revolved around Mass Effect 3 in a completely different post. I didn't respond to that. I responded to one your many replies to people basically telling them that a 76 aggregate score is not average, as if trying to disprove the overwhelming responses of people calling the game bad, terrible, saying it sucks, etc. So let's get things straight here. This back and forth doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with Mass Effect 3. If you want to turn this into a discussion about why Ubisoft has the right to defend it's game...you'll get no argument from me there. I never said they didn't. They can defend it all they want, but to say they are disappointed with poor critical reception and then pawn it off like they can't imagine why is asinine because all the negative reviews cited the same issues. That all goes back to your 76 aggregate defense.
"Now because you apparently have an issue with people latching onto one thing you say, I'll try to address everything..." You can hold yourself up right there. My comment that ended with that point was addressing Mr. MinerAvatar because he called me a fool for no justifiable reason so, let's not get cute here...
Now I'll go ahead and return the favor by addressing each of your points in turn. Where do you draw a comparison between the legitimacy of review scores from highly trafficked gaming sites vs the legitimacy of the most popular video games? My logic is that Call of Duty is the only franchise worth paying attention to??? No, I never said ANYTHING to that effect nor do I even get where you're attempting to refute my point with that. You're coming off like you're trying to put words in my mouth... My logic is that the 76 aggregate you used so much in an attempt to discredit other people's negative comments towards ZombiU includes critical acclaim level scores from sites that few if anyone has ever heard of. Why would people believe those scores over game sites that people have been patronizing for years when the difference is such a wide margin and the most credible sites largely agreed that the game was subpar, going to so far to cite the same exact issues? You keep avoiding the actual point by going off on tangents and drawing comparisons that have nothing to do with the actual debate as to why the critical reception is so polarizing.
I don't know who DDI is but let's take a look at the company that is actually behind the ZombiU. Ubisoft has many stellar games, like Assassin's Creed II & Brotherhood, Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory, Rainbow Six Vegas, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, Far Cry 3, etc. If you want to talk about the development house specifically, they made well-received games like The King Kong video game, Rayman 2, Rayman Origins, and Beyond Good and Evil. They also have a highly regarded and talented game developer there by the name of Michael Ancel. So yes, for Ubisoft and Ubisoft Montpellier a 76 is not something to be proud of. That's probably why they were disappointed. When you achieve major success and then experience a letdown, you tend to feel disappointed. New console doesn't have much to do with it either. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the King Kong game was a launch title on the Xbox 360...so they proved they can put a great game out for a brand new system. Bonuses for a high metacritic score is a positive thing to me. Its called incentive for making a good product. If the product is good...people will like it. So you get rewarded for that. How is that not a positive thing and what the hell does that have to do with EA's DLC policy? So you're implying then that we should support all publisher policies or none at all? I'd pick my answer to that one wisely...
You're long-winded rant into many highly touted franchises being boring is purely subjective. There are many reviews and user opinions to support that you are among the vast minority with that. I'm not sure what your point there is anyway. If you're saying those games weren't killer apps...then I suppose nothing is. But...if those games are killer apps, system sellers, trend setters, AAA quality titles, then that immediately speaks that the title of killer app so quickly placed on ZombiU was clearly a mistake. Either way, ZombiU is still not a killer app, not a AAA title, and its proving to not be a system seller either. If anything, NSMBU has filled that role. Also, I never suggested the Wii U launch window has nothing but crap. Maybe someone else said that but not me. Nonetheless I don't agree with that notion at all. NSMBU is a great game as are a number of multi-plat ports. Scribblenauts Madden 13, and NintendoLand have around the same aggregate as ZombiU. In fact, most of the top aggregates for the Wii U are multi-plats in the mid-high 80s along with NSMBU, the top first party exclusive. So no, a 76 doesn't stand out at all...its firmly in the middle of the pack.
I agree that descriptive terms for the quality of a video game do need to be defined...but they aren't. What else is there to say? You're not going to be the one to define them and neither am I or anyone else here. The game review community itself can't even get on the same page on that. I believe you said yourself that GameSpot considers a 76 to be 'good'. I believe (but I could be wrong) that GamesRadar considers that 'solid'. I said earlier that I felt that score was 'decent'. This was essentially what the whole back and forth with MinerAvatar was about. Me personally, I didn't use those semantics in a factual way, you can back and read my comments. I may have used them in a subjective way and even implied that the review scores from the major gaming sites were not flattering...but I came off being factual or scientific, I don't even talk that way. Once again you are addressing something with me that other people have brought up. I didn't want to bother with this with MinerAvatar and still don't because it was never my point...you guys seem to be missing that for some reasons. And what do you mean by me not speaking with clarity? I think I've been VERY clear with my posts...to the point of repeating things. Um, where you're going with the China comment I don't know so yeah whatever...you got me.
Now we're talking about the Great Depression? Really? I'm just going to leave that be. Look here dude, I never argued its factual that ZombiU was a bad game. I said 'clearly documented' reasons in that all the issues that the negative reviews covered...ya know, those ones people actually read/watched? They all cited the SAME stuff. If a bunch of people that do this for a living who are generally considered the best in the business at what they do all agree that the game suffers from this list of issues, then that implies truth behind it. The only way it doesn't is if you believe that they all got together to 'topple' ZombiU for unexplained motivations...that would imply some paranoia on the part of those that actually believe the latter don't you think?
You can be passionate...I never said anyone couldn't which is why I haven't responded to each and every person who has commented positively about the game. I only responded to you initially because you attempted to dispel negative comments towards the game with an argument that just doesn't hold water. If I haven't made that clear at this point, then we'll just have to agree to disagree.
@MinerAvatar Its BS to me (as in "I" don't care about it). Why? Because what mediocre correlates to in real numbers regarding a game score means something different to every person. There is no standard.
I'm the wrong guy to debate with because I'm not the one person who insisted that 76 is not average multiple times in replies to other people's comments. I'm a fool because I'm ignoring stats that don't agree with my opinion? Please tell me...what stats am I ignoring and what is my opinion? I don't even know what you're talking about at this point...
Mitt Romney? You're getting very far off topic here and reading much too far into anything I've said here. All of my comments are discussing ZombiU. I don't care if a 76 = 'C'. Means nothing to me. I interpret a 76 to be decent. GameSpot interprets a 76 to be good. Some people think its bad...whatever. You missed my entire point dude. Its was that what 76 correlates to in descriptive terms means something different to everyone. Saying 76 is or isn't average is pointless. Please tell me you got that because I don't want to have to repeat myself again...
By the way, I'm a fool yet you're reply to me is fixated on one specific word I used rather than addressing or refuting anything else in my entire post....and you didn't even refute the one inference I did make that you took and ran with.
@MinerAvatar I don't care to argue over the accuracy of descriptive terms for game scores. You're addressing the wrong guy for that debate. I pretty clearly dismissed that as finicky bulls*** in my post. Besides, does it really matter? The point is that a 76 aggregate is not noteworthy. I think on that we agree...
You've said the same thing five times at this point, in addition to a veritable book on a number or related points. 76 aggregate includes praise from sites that people don't trust. Why don't they trust them? Because they have a track record of biased or ill-informed reviews.
I'll say what I've already stated earlier one last time. All of the sites that are recognizable...that people know...that people go to for game info? Most of them gave the game mediocre scores. 5s....6s. Yes...fact. They all cited certain issues. It just so happens that those issues are the exact same things that other major publications cited. Mind=blown! Why would say that? Because they want to topple ZombiU? No, that can't be it because that makes zero sense. Maybe they said it because its true? Hmm, could be...
By the way, 76 isn't mediocre or so you very astutely pointed out numerous times. I happen to agree with that. But is 76 something to be proud of? Do publishers award development houses with bonuses for achieving a 76 aggregate? Does that score sway people on the fence to go buy it? Does that score justify the title 'killer app'? Does that score sell your system in a critical launch window? Does that score standout from the bunch? No, it does not.
Do you want to just go back and forth on what mediocre, good, great, decent, bad, or any other descriptive term can be substituted for a game score actually constitutes in the mind of each and every person here?
I don't know what is so hard about this. The game was not well-received for rather clearly documented reasons. There's nothing for Ubisoft to be confused about. If you like the game, if other users like the game...hey, whatever floats your boat but...there is nothing for Ubisoft to be disappointed about unless its the realization that the game is just not representative of what everyone knows their company is capable of.
@bluefox755 @im2cool123 You just made my whole point. If you give a game that is mediocre at best a score like 9+ out of 10 for a reason like the system is new...that is misleading. That is why people will trust what gamespot, and ign, and game informer, and game radar will say over a Nintendo game site.
So deceptive journalism is okay? Hell no it isn't. The only people that want that kind of journalism are fanboys...and that is what tabloid sites like Kotaku exist for.
@im2cool123 Okay I read that wrong. But here's my response. If Sony sites get bashed for praising All-Stars yet other major sites say the game sucks...that's just another example of blind praise. So Sony sites just did in that case what I'm saying Nintendo sites did here.
If they are seemingly being discredited its because the most respected game journalism outlets are all saying the game is bad and citing the same issues. Its not like they pandered together to bring the game down for some motivation that can't be explained. On the flipside, sites that cater to Nintendo have plenty of reason to mislead people and say the game is fantastic...especially when the game got huge exposure prior to release and it was supposed to be the jewel of their launch lineup.
@im2cool123 I didn't say it was a conspiracy I implied they were dillusional because 1) the most respected sites/publications agreed it was a bad game and 2) ZombiU was highly touted as the 'killer app' for the system, so game media outlets that support Nintendo and patronize Nintendo with their reporting and articles just so happen to LOVE the game even though there a host of things wrong with it that those same respected sites/publications all cited in their reviews.
I don't know where you're getting my assumptions from. I never said anything about all Nintendo games. We're talking about ZombiU here. NSMBU was well received by both Nintendo sites and these major ones that people actually trust...seeing the difference here?
And how does Sony sites bashing Playstation All-Stars help your argument that its not a 'conspiracy' that sites who cater to Nintendo gave ZombiU critical acclaim? Seems like that supports my implication that those Nintendo sites are just blindly praising it...doesn't it?
@Prats1993 @Seshohama I don't necessarily disagree but who you gonna throw in to round out the top 10, CheatCodeCentral? Escapist? Edge? I don't think so...
Look the ones people flock to all thought it was a bad...that was my main point.
The bad reviews are a minority but if you want to get serious and take a look at the reputable, reliable, highly trafficked and highly regarded gaming media outlets...yep, most of those thought it was a bad game.
gamespot 4.5/10
game informer 5/10
ign 6.3/10
games radar 3/5
machinima 6/10
gametrailers 6.5/10
destructoid 8/10
giant bomb 4/5
eurogamer 9/10
joystiq 9/10
Two of the top three critic scores recorded on metacritic come from outlets with Nintendo in their NAME! Hello???? Anybody connecting the dots here?
Seshohama's comments