It is fun that the famous flop Sea of Thieves is still relevant after all these years.🤭
Xbox hasn't had an exclusive over 90 on MC not named "Forza Horizon" since 2011.
One of the most fantastic lem-triggering threads I've seen in some time. Absolutely dynamic.
@Mozelleple112: Dumbest? Bro, I could have a lobotomy and still be smarter than you.
And, I'm not a fanboy, I am a fan. There's a difference.
A fanboy would do something like "defend Redfall". I did no such thing; in fact, my response was "we need to take the L". When the 60fps patch came out, my comment was "It still sucks".
A fanboy would say "LOLZ! Spider-Man flopped with an 8". I, on the other hand, said it deserved a 9/10.
I defend the Xbox platform from Sony Ponies. I get excited about games coming to Xbox. And yes, I love Starfield.
@nod_calypse said:
One of the most fantastic lem-triggering threads I've seen in some time. Absolutely dynamic.
Cows got reked,nice damage control though👍🤣😂
@me2002 said:
@Pedro said:
It is fun that the famous flop Sea of Thieves is still relevant after all these years.🤭
Sea of thieves has really turned itself around, I heard it's fun now. Reminds me of FF14.
Maybe it is but the last time I played it was mediocre. Less mediocre than the initial release but mediocre.
@silentchief said:
@HalcyonScarlet said:
@silentchief: Its SWs we use GS. What's the point of 100 reviews when I trust like 4 of them. :-S
The over hype of PS games has always ruined them for me, they literally aren't any better. They're hyped like Ocarina of Time, but in reality they're Links Awakening. Just good games, and that's actually fine.
That's because MS games aren't exclusives. You're conflating two different conditions. Also MS worked pretty hard to paint their position worse than it was to regulators on purpose. They always do.
You trust everyone who's ever worked at Gamespot? Really? The reality is the industry cares about Metacritic not Gamespot.
You can keep saying that but that's not the reality. They have 5 top tier studios. Insomniac, Naughty Dog, Sony Santa Monica, Sucker Punch and Gurilla Games. ( I could add Blupoint once they do something beyond a remake). So once any of these studios release a game there's tons of hype because they are criticality acclaimed and sell very well. It's not all Playstation exclusives that receive this hype.
Microsoft went out of there way to paint themselves in a terrible position, this is true. The FTC tried to disprove that. Once the facts and evidence were analyzed Microsoft won because the reality is they havent been competitive since the 360 era. Again you don't spend 80 billion dollars in acquisitions because everything was going fine.
I own a XSX I want them to have great games. I think that could soon become a reality. But acting like they never had any issues is delusional. It also ignores the fact that Microsoft knew they had a problem and are trying to fix it.
The "industry" uses metacritic simply because it's an easy way to make quick generalised points. Doesn't means it's right.
Just for one example, I wouldn't trust IGN if they said rain was wet, never have. They were called 9GN for a reason. And this is the type of bs metacritic is made up of.
I never said MS doesn't have issues, I said they too make great games. And making up parameters to make it seem like this isn't the case to make a cheap point, isn't going to change that.
See, this is what I'm talking about. Those "top tier" studios make great games, sure. Some of the best looking with stories on the higher end of gaming. But when it comes to gameplay, it's really nothing better than anything else others are doing. And this is the kind of over hype and unrealistic expectations which ruins the games.
Kind of. These acquisitions may have started with a relation to PlayStation because of all the 3rd party exclusives Sony deals in, but that's just one part of it now. It's about what MS perceives could be the future of gaming which is on-demand services, and they're rushing to get in there before possible competitors can such as Amazon and Google etc. Gamepass needs more first party content, especially if it's true that Sony tells 3rd parties not to put their games on it. A small amount of 1st party and 3rd party isn't going to do it.
@HalcyonScarlet said:
@silentchief said:
@HalcyonScarlet said:
@silentchief: Its SWs we use GS. What's the point of 100 reviews when I trust like 4 of them. :-S
The over hype of PS games has always ruined them for me, they literally aren't any better. They're hyped like Ocarina of Time, but in reality they're Links Awakening. Just good games, and that's actually fine.
That's because MS games aren't exclusives. You're conflating two different conditions. Also MS worked pretty hard to paint their position worse than it was to regulators on purpose. They always do.
You trust everyone who's ever worked at Gamespot? Really? The reality is the industry cares about Metacritic not Gamespot.
You can keep saying that but that's not the reality. They have 5 top tier studios. Insomniac, Naughty Dog, Sony Santa Monica, Sucker Punch and Gurilla Games. ( I could add Blupoint once they do something beyond a remake). So once any of these studios release a game there's tons of hype because they are criticality acclaimed and sell very well. It's not all Playstation exclusives that receive this hype.
Microsoft went out of there way to paint themselves in a terrible position, this is true. The FTC tried to disprove that. Once the facts and evidence were analyzed Microsoft won because the reality is they havent been competitive since the 360 era. Again you don't spend 80 billion dollars in acquisitions because everything was going fine.
I own a XSX I want them to have great games. I think that could soon become a reality. But acting like they never had any issues is delusional. It also ignores the fact that Microsoft knew they had a problem and are trying to fix it.
The "industry" uses metacritic simply because it's an easy way to make quick generalised points. Doesn't means it's right.
Just for one example, I wouldn't trust IGN if they said rain was wet, never have. They were called 9GN for a reason. And this is the type of bs metacritic is made up of.
I never said MS doesn't have issues, I said they too make great games. And making up parameters to make it seem like this isn't the case to make a cheap point, isn't going to change that.
See, this is what I'm talking about. Those "top tier" studios make great games, sure. Some of the best looking with stories on the higher end of gaming. But when it comes to gameplay, it's really nothing better than anything else others are doing. And this is the kind of over hype and unrealistic expectations which ruins the games.
Kind of. These acquisitions may have started with a relation to PlayStation because of all the 3rd party exclusives Sony deals in, but that's just one part of it now. It's about what MS perceives could be the future of gaming which is on-demand services, and they're rushing to get in there before possible competitors can such as Amazon and Google etc. Gamepass needs more first party content, especially if it's true that Sony tells 3rd parties not to put their games on it. A small amount of 1st party and 3rd party isn't going to do it.
It's the average score from all critics. It's harder to get a 9 on Metacritic then Gamespot.
IGN and Gamespot are extremely close in their review scores actually. On Metacritic you can see the average score from every website. Gamespot is a 69 while IGN is a 71. A mere 2 points seperate them on a 100 point scale.
They have some great games sure, but for the amount of studios they should have far more. Until they spent 80 billion dollars, they only had three reliable IP's. Sony created more new IP's then that last gen alone. Hopefully they will utilize Activision/Blizzard IP's in the future and give us something new. I'd love a TPS in the Starcraft universe or a God of War style Action Adventure in the Warcraft universe. Will see if Microsoft delivers.
I disagree there. How many games have better combat then God of War? The only ones you could argue are DMC5 and Bayonetta. As much as I loved Ninja Gaiden it actually doesn't hold up that well today. How many games mix stealth, tps and melle combat as well as " the last of us"? How many open world games have combat as good as Ghost of Tsushima? ( Assasins Creed isn't close). How many open world games have combat and traversal as good as Spider-Man? ( Arkham is the only one that competes with it). So I disagree. I think the gameplay is among the best in their respective genres.
Well it depends. Leaked court documents showed Sony had to put little effort into getting Japanese companies to stay off Xbox. The games just don't sell on the platform. Regardless Google isn't even a competitor anymore and Amazon is barely holding on. At this point they own enough studios to be competitive with anyone. If they screw this up it's all on them.
@silentchief said:
@HalcyonScarlet said:
@silentchief said:
@HalcyonScarlet said:
@silentchief: Its SWs we use GS. What's the point of 100 reviews when I trust like 4 of them. :-S
The over hype of PS games has always ruined them for me, they literally aren't any better. They're hyped like Ocarina of Time, but in reality they're Links Awakening. Just good games, and that's actually fine.
That's because MS games aren't exclusives. You're conflating two different conditions. Also MS worked pretty hard to paint their position worse than it was to regulators on purpose. They always do.
You trust everyone who's ever worked at Gamespot? Really? The reality is the industry cares about Metacritic not Gamespot.
You can keep saying that but that's not the reality. They have 5 top tier studios. Insomniac, Naughty Dog, Sony Santa Monica, Sucker Punch and Gurilla Games. ( I could add Blupoint once they do something beyond a remake). So once any of these studios release a game there's tons of hype because they are criticality acclaimed and sell very well. It's not all Playstation exclusives that receive this hype.
Microsoft went out of there way to paint themselves in a terrible position, this is true. The FTC tried to disprove that. Once the facts and evidence were analyzed Microsoft won because the reality is they havent been competitive since the 360 era. Again you don't spend 80 billion dollars in acquisitions because everything was going fine.
I own a XSX I want them to have great games. I think that could soon become a reality. But acting like they never had any issues is delusional. It also ignores the fact that Microsoft knew they had a problem and are trying to fix it.
The "industry" uses metacritic simply because it's an easy way to make quick generalised points. Doesn't means it's right.
Just for one example, I wouldn't trust IGN if they said rain was wet, never have. They were called 9GN for a reason. And this is the type of bs metacritic is made up of.
I never said MS doesn't have issues, I said they too make great games. And making up parameters to make it seem like this isn't the case to make a cheap point, isn't going to change that.
See, this is what I'm talking about. Those "top tier" studios make great games, sure. Some of the best looking with stories on the higher end of gaming. But when it comes to gameplay, it's really nothing better than anything else others are doing. And this is the kind of over hype and unrealistic expectations which ruins the games.
Kind of. These acquisitions may have started with a relation to PlayStation because of all the 3rd party exclusives Sony deals in, but that's just one part of it now. It's about what MS perceives could be the future of gaming which is on-demand services, and they're rushing to get in there before possible competitors can such as Amazon and Google etc. Gamepass needs more first party content, especially if it's true that Sony tells 3rd parties not to put their games on it. A small amount of 1st party and 3rd party isn't going to do it.
It's the average score from all critics. The reality is it's harder to get a 9 on Metacritic then Gamespot.
IGN and Gamespot are extremely close in their review scores actually. On Metacritic you can see the average score from every website. Gamespot is a 69 while IGN is a 71. A mere 2 points seperate them on a 100 point scale.
They have some great games sure, but for the amount of studios they should have far more. The reality is until they spent 80 billion dollars, they only had three reliable IP's. Sony created more new IP's then that last gen alone. Hopefully they will utilize Activision/Blizzard IP's in the future and give us something new. I'd love a TPS in the Starcraft universe or a God of War style Action Adventure in the Warcraft universe. Will see if Microsoft delivers.
I disagree there. How many games have better combat then God of War? The only ones you could argue are DMC5 and Bayonetta. As much as I loved Ninja Gaiden it actually doesn't hold up that well today. How many games mix stealth, tps and melle combat as well as " the last of us"? How many open world games have combat as good as Ghost of Tsushima? ( Assasins Creed isn't close). How many open world games have combat and traversal as good as Spider-Man? ( Arkham is the only one that competes with it). So I disagree. I think the gameplay is among the best in their respective genres.
Well it depends. Leaked court documents showed Sony had to put little effort into getting Japanese companies to stay off Xbox. The games just don't sell on the platform. Regardless Google isn't even a competitor anymore and Amazon is barely holding on. At this point they own enough studios to be competitive with anyone. If they screw this up it's all on them.
I've been playing Ninja Gaiden Black/2 since release, I'm replaying it right now. It doesn't age at all. But it's also purely skill based which I love. I continue to learn new things and new ways of fighting. It's always going to go DMC/Bayenetta > NG > GoW. Or NG > DMC/Bayonetta > GoW. Ninja Gaiden Black is one of only a handful of 6th gen games which hasn't aged. Even graphically, the style still looks good enough.
I think Activisions hands are kind of tied by that 10 year CoD deal, because CoD ties up way too much of Activions studios and talent. This is a huge concern with them imo. CoD makes a lot of money, but WHAT A WASTE of talent. High moon studios did the Fall of Cybertron games for example. It's something like, two main studios work on CoD with Infinity Ward and Sledge Hammer, but a further 2 - 4 studios full time support it. And imo it's a problem. Because otherwise Activision is just CoDivision indefinitely.
Remember Activisions output before they solely focused on CoD?
I mean, with Bobby Kotick going by the end of the year, we'll see. But don't expect too many short term gains outside of a load of games going to Gamepass.
I predict the short, medium gains will be Gamepass content, Blizzard games. And maybe Activision talent helping MS with live service struggles in terms of consulting, such as Halo multiplayer. Halo has made improvements with Season 5, but in terms of development team structure etc... But MS may not be able to untangle Activision until the deal expires if that's even their plan.
@me2002 said:
@silentchief: There was Starcraft: Ghost if you're old enough to remember lol.
Yes, but it never released.
If you like consoles just buy Nintendo and ignore the others.
And a PC.
@me2002: it's funny...you barely post here, with 3000 posts in 21 years...but ever since spiderman 2 missed the mark with an 8, you've been frantic.
Cows are losing it.
@me2002: who are any of us? Me I'm a lem, and I'm here to make sure you cows stay in line.
@dabear: Your IQ is equivalent to room temperature, and it might even be Celsius, not Fahrenheit.. And you definitely are the definition of a fanboy.
- You only own an xbox and nothing else
- you talk smack about games you cannot even play
- You call mid games like Starfield game of the generation simply because it is exclusive to the box you love.
@Mozelleple112 said:
@dabear: Your IQ is equivalent to room temperature, and it might even be Celsius, not Fahrenheit.. And you definitely are the definition of a fanboy.
- You only own an xbox and nothing else
- you talk smack about games you cannot even play
- You call mid games like Starfield game of the generation simply because it is exclusive to the box you love.
First, I could have a 10" steel rod shoved all the way up my nose and I would still wipe the floor with you on an IQ test.
Yes, I have a life outside of video games - Watching sports with my buddies, riding motorcycles, BBQing, hanging out with my wife, time trials with my Hellcat (my newest passion); all are more important than video games. Just because I can afford every platform available, why would I p*ss my money away on something that I am not going to use that much?
The only "smack" I talk about is that I don't like Sony-style "movie" games. And yes, I have played most of them (my next door neighbor has a PS5). For that same reason, I have zero hype for the next Hellblade, because that game plays just like Horizon or GoW. Also, I own but hate the Guardians Of the Galaxy game for the same reason.
Starfield is awesome, and it got some bad reviews due to bias. How do I know that? The sites that bombed it (like GameSpot) have gone as far as to make articles trying to defend their shit score: GameSpot had it's "Cyberpunk leaves Starfield in the dust on Steam", and PC Gamer just posted an article ranking all of Bethesda's RPGs, ranking Starfield last - below Fallout '76. Truly pathetic.
Finally, Starfield is not "exclusive to Xbox", you can play it on the PC. For someone talking shit about IQs, you sure do miss a lot of facts.
@silentchief said:
Ragnarok has sold over 2x the amount of sea of thieves and has been out for less then half the time.
Last reported sales numbers
God of War Ragnarok: 11 million
Horizon Forbidden West: 8.4 million
Sea of Thieves: 5 million.
It appears based off factual data Xbox gamers buy significantly less games then Playstation gamers. 🤷♂️
Please supply us a link showing that the total sales of Sea of Thieves is 5 million.
@kvallyx said:
@silentchief said:
Ragnarok has sold over 2x the amount of sea of thieves and has been out for less then half the time.
Last reported sales numbers
God of War Ragnarok: 11 million
Horizon Forbidden West: 8.4 million
Sea of Thieves: 5 million.
It appears based off factual data Xbox gamers buy significantly less games then Playstation gamers. 🤷♂️
Please supply us a link showing that the total sales of Sea of Thieves is 5 million.
Please show us a link where Sea of Thieves had outsold any of the titles I mentioned. MS never reported Sea of Thieves sales numbers so that's not a good sign.
Your claim that PlayStation gamers don't buy games doesn't really hold up when they consistently outsell Xbox games that are available day 1 on two platforms.
@silentchief said:
@kvallyx said:
@silentchief said:
Ragnarok has sold over 2x the amount of sea of thieves and has been out for less then half the time.
Last reported sales numbers
God of War Ragnarok: 11 million
Horizon Forbidden West: 8.4 million
Sea of Thieves: 5 million.
It appears based off factual data Xbox gamers buy significantly less games then Playstation gamers. 🤷♂️
Please supply us a link showing that the total sales of Sea of Thieves is 5 million.
Please show us a link where Sea of Thieves had outsold any of the titles I mentioned. MS never reported Sea of Thieves sales numbers so that's not a good sign.
Your claim that PlayStation gamers don't buy games doesn't really hold up when they consistently outsell Xbox games that are available day 1 on two platforms.
You claimed Sea of Thieves was 5 million total sales. YOU back it up. I never made any claims.
@dabear said:
@Mozelleple112 said:
@dabear: Your IQ is equivalent to room temperature, and it might even be Celsius, not Fahrenheit.. And you definitely are the definition of a fanboy.
- You only own an xbox and nothing else
- you talk smack about games you cannot even play
- You call mid games like Starfield game of the generation simply because it is exclusive to the box you love.
First, I could have a 10" steel rod shoved all the way up my nose and I would still wipe the floor with you on an IQ test.
Yes, I have a life outside of video games - Watching sports with my buddies, riding motorcycles, BBQing, hanging out with my wife, time trials with my Hellcat (my newest passion); all are more important than video games. Just because I can afford every platform available, why would I p*ss my money away on something that I am not going to use that much?
The only "smack" I talk about is that I don't like Sony-style "movie" games. And yes, I have played most of them (my next door neighbor has a PS5). For that same reason, I have zero hype for the next Hellblade, because that game plays just like Horizon or GoW. Also, I own but hate the Guardians Of the Galaxy game for the same reason.
Starfield is awesome, and it got some bad reviews due to bias. How do I know that? The sites that bombed it (like GameSpot) have gone as far as to make articles trying to defend their shit score: GameSpot had it's "Cyberpunk leaves Starfield in the dust on Steam", and PC Gamer just posted an article ranking all of Bethesda's RPGs, ranking Starfield last - below Fallout '76. Truly pathetic.
Finally, Starfield is not "exclusive to Xbox", you can play it on the PC. For someone talking shit about IQs, you sure do miss a lot of facts.
The whole Gamespot is bias argument doesn't hold up after they low balled Spider-Man 2 with a 8 when it's meta score is a 91. They also gave the original" the last of us" which is regarded as one of the best games of all time an 8.
Sorry but some people just don't like Starfield ( including myself). I put about 16 hours into it and it's just not a good game. It doesn't do one thing particularly well. I always find it funny people criticize Playstation exclusives as ( movie games) usually due to the cutscenes then praise something like Starfield. You literally spend nearly half your time in Starfield talking to badly animated NPC's. The rest is spent playing below average combat or watching loading screens.
@silentchief said:
@dabear said:
@Mozelleple112 said:
@dabear: Your IQ is equivalent to room temperature, and it might even be Celsius, not Fahrenheit.. And you definitely are the definition of a fanboy.
- You only own an xbox and nothing else
- you talk smack about games you cannot even play
- You call mid games like Starfield game of the generation simply because it is exclusive to the box you love.
First, I could have a 10" steel rod shoved all the way up my nose and I would still wipe the floor with you on an IQ test.
Yes, I have a life outside of video games - Watching sports with my buddies, riding motorcycles, BBQing, hanging out with my wife, time trials with my Hellcat (my newest passion); all are more important than video games. Just because I can afford every platform available, why would I p*ss my money away on something that I am not going to use that much?
The only "smack" I talk about is that I don't like Sony-style "movie" games. And yes, I have played most of them (my next door neighbor has a PS5). For that same reason, I have zero hype for the next Hellblade, because that game plays just like Horizon or GoW. Also, I own but hate the Guardians Of the Galaxy game for the same reason.
Starfield is awesome, and it got some bad reviews due to bias. How do I know that? The sites that bombed it (like GameSpot) have gone as far as to make articles trying to defend their shit score: GameSpot had it's "Cyberpunk leaves Starfield in the dust on Steam", and PC Gamer just posted an article ranking all of Bethesda's RPGs, ranking Starfield last - below Fallout '76. Truly pathetic.
Finally, Starfield is not "exclusive to Xbox", you can play it on the PC. For someone talking shit about IQs, you sure do miss a lot of facts.
The whole Gamespot is bias argument doesn't hold up after they low balled Spider-Man 2 with a 8 when it's meta score is a 91. They also gave the original" the last of us" which is regarded as one of the best games of all time an 8.
Sorry but some people just don't like Starfield ( including myself). I put about 16 hours into it and it's just not a good game. It doesn't do one thing particularly well. I always find it funny people criticize Playstation exclusives as ( movie games) usually due to the cutscenes then praise something like Starfield. You literally spend nearly half your time in Starfield talking to badly animated NPC's.
Are their damage control articles out about Spider-Man justifying the 8/10 score?
@silentchief said:
@dabear said:
@Mozelleple112 said:
@dabear: Your IQ is equivalent to room temperature, and it might even be Celsius, not Fahrenheit.. And you definitely are the definition of a fanboy.
- You only own an xbox and nothing else
- you talk smack about games you cannot even play
- You call mid games like Starfield game of the generation simply because it is exclusive to the box you love.
First, I could have a 10" steel rod shoved all the way up my nose and I would still wipe the floor with you on an IQ test.
Yes, I have a life outside of video games - Watching sports with my buddies, riding motorcycles, BBQing, hanging out with my wife, time trials with my Hellcat (my newest passion); all are more important than video games. Just because I can afford every platform available, why would I p*ss my money away on something that I am not going to use that much?
The only "smack" I talk about is that I don't like Sony-style "movie" games. And yes, I have played most of them (my next door neighbor has a PS5). For that same reason, I have zero hype for the next Hellblade, because that game plays just like Horizon or GoW. Also, I own but hate the Guardians Of the Galaxy game for the same reason.
Starfield is awesome, and it got some bad reviews due to bias. How do I know that? The sites that bombed it (like GameSpot) have gone as far as to make articles trying to defend their shit score: GameSpot had it's "Cyberpunk leaves Starfield in the dust on Steam", and PC Gamer just posted an article ranking all of Bethesda's RPGs, ranking Starfield last - below Fallout '76. Truly pathetic.
Finally, Starfield is not "exclusive to Xbox", you can play it on the PC. For someone talking shit about IQs, you sure do miss a lot of facts.
The whole Gamespot is bias argument doesn't hold up after they low balled Spider-Man 2 with a 8 when it's meta score is a 91. They also gave the original" the last of us" which is regarded as one of the best games of all time an 8.
Sorry but some people just don't like Starfield ( including myself). I put about 16 hours into it and it's just not a good game. It doesn't do one thing particularly well. I always find it funny people criticize Playstation exclusives as ( movie games) usually due to the cutscenes then praise something like Starfield. You literally spend nearly half your time in Starfield talking to badly animated NPC's. The rest is spent playing below average combat or watching loading screens.
I have close to 100 hours in Starfield and you are right, it's not a good game. It's a GREAT game.
@kvallyx said:
@silentchief said:
@dabear said:
@Mozelleple112 said:
@dabear: Your IQ is equivalent to room temperature, and it might even be Celsius, not Fahrenheit.. And you definitely are the definition of a fanboy.
- You only own an xbox and nothing else
- you talk smack about games you cannot even play
- You call mid games like Starfield game of the generation simply because it is exclusive to the box you love.
First, I could have a 10" steel rod shoved all the way up my nose and I would still wipe the floor with you on an IQ test.
Yes, I have a life outside of video games - Watching sports with my buddies, riding motorcycles, BBQing, hanging out with my wife, time trials with my Hellcat (my newest passion); all are more important than video games. Just because I can afford every platform available, why would I p*ss my money away on something that I am not going to use that much?
The only "smack" I talk about is that I don't like Sony-style "movie" games. And yes, I have played most of them (my next door neighbor has a PS5). For that same reason, I have zero hype for the next Hellblade, because that game plays just like Horizon or GoW. Also, I own but hate the Guardians Of the Galaxy game for the same reason.
Starfield is awesome, and it got some bad reviews due to bias. How do I know that? The sites that bombed it (like GameSpot) have gone as far as to make articles trying to defend their shit score: GameSpot had it's "Cyberpunk leaves Starfield in the dust on Steam", and PC Gamer just posted an article ranking all of Bethesda's RPGs, ranking Starfield last - below Fallout '76. Truly pathetic.
Finally, Starfield is not "exclusive to Xbox", you can play it on the PC. For someone talking shit about IQs, you sure do miss a lot of facts.
The whole Gamespot is bias argument doesn't hold up after they low balled Spider-Man 2 with a 8 when it's meta score is a 91. They also gave the original" the last of us" which is regarded as one of the best games of all time an 8.
Sorry but some people just don't like Starfield ( including myself). I put about 16 hours into it and it's just not a good game. It doesn't do one thing particularly well. I always find it funny people criticize Playstation exclusives as ( movie games) usually due to the cutscenes then praise something like Starfield. You literally spend nearly half your time in Starfield talking to badly animated NPC's. The rest is spent playing below average combat or watching loading screens.
I have close to 100 hours in Starfield and you are right, it's not a good game. It's a GREAT game.
I'd say it's average at best but to each their own.
@dabear said:
@silentchief said:
@dabear said:
@Mozelleple112 said:
@dabear: Your IQ is equivalent to room temperature, and it might even be Celsius, not Fahrenheit.. And you definitely are the definition of a fanboy.
- You only own an xbox and nothing else
- you talk smack about games you cannot even play
- You call mid games like Starfield game of the generation simply because it is exclusive to the box you love.
First, I could have a 10" steel rod shoved all the way up my nose and I would still wipe the floor with you on an IQ test.
Yes, I have a life outside of video games - Watching sports with my buddies, riding motorcycles, BBQing, hanging out with my wife, time trials with my Hellcat (my newest passion); all are more important than video games. Just because I can afford every platform available, why would I p*ss my money away on something that I am not going to use that much?
The only "smack" I talk about is that I don't like Sony-style "movie" games. And yes, I have played most of them (my next door neighbor has a PS5). For that same reason, I have zero hype for the next Hellblade, because that game plays just like Horizon or GoW. Also, I own but hate the Guardians Of the Galaxy game for the same reason.
Starfield is awesome, and it got some bad reviews due to bias. How do I know that? The sites that bombed it (like GameSpot) have gone as far as to make articles trying to defend their shit score: GameSpot had it's "Cyberpunk leaves Starfield in the dust on Steam", and PC Gamer just posted an article ranking all of Bethesda's RPGs, ranking Starfield last - below Fallout '76. Truly pathetic.
Finally, Starfield is not "exclusive to Xbox", you can play it on the PC. For someone talking shit about IQs, you sure do miss a lot of facts.
The whole Gamespot is bias argument doesn't hold up after they low balled Spider-Man 2 with a 8 when it's meta score is a 91. They also gave the original" the last of us" which is regarded as one of the best games of all time an 8.
Sorry but some people just don't like Starfield ( including myself). I put about 16 hours into it and it's just not a good game. It doesn't do one thing particularly well. I always find it funny people criticize Playstation exclusives as ( movie games) usually due to the cutscenes then praise something like Starfield. You literally spend nearly half your time in Starfield talking to badly animated NPC's.
Are their damage control articles out about Spider-Man justifying the 8/10 score?
8 is technically still a good score so they probably didn't feel the need to. However it's still early days so who knows. However they ding it for being similar and then turn around and give Mario a 9 🤣
I can't expect everyone to agree with me, but I stand by my opinion: Starfield is one hell of a game and right up there with most 90+ Metacritic games. Not that Metacritic scores changes anything for me really. It is about enjoying playing games, not marvelling at their scores.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment