It looks like it has gotten some graphical downgrades and each trailer seems less impressive than the last. I was really hyped for this game based on the E3 2016 presentation but now I'm not getting my hopes up too high based on everything since. Hopefully Bend surprises me.
I love open world games and pre-ordered it last week. I heard they won't release official reviews until the day before.
I don't really go by reviews anymore. I'll watch ACG do a review for games if he chooses to. Other than that if I think I'll enjoy it I buy it. 9 times out of 10 I never finish the games anyway. I don't really have that much time to play anyway but I still enjoy it. Some reviews are super picky and others are biased.
I actually prefer the user reviews more to get a feel of the game. No one is being paid to talk about it which can be a good thing depending on how you look at it. I'll usually scour Reddit after a game comes out to see what people think. I'm glad I did that for a few months for Anthem. I'm also glad I never bought it either because it's still a mess.I’ve become more picky about my gaming so I use them as a general barometer. Especially the user reviews.
First review up. ACG says wait for a sale. I think I'll still enjoy it since I've been waiting for a while and I like story based zombie games. He mentions for a Sony title it doesn't have the polish it should and he mentions the pop in of textures. He also harps on a few other technical issues which I think can be fixed but those may not be big deal to some.
There’s a good game in here somewhere, but it’s buried in a meandering storyline, repetitive missions, and just too much obligatory stuff to do without an eye on the smaller details that could have given it much more character
It's had 3-4 patches up until now. With 1.04 being a patch to fix bugs as well. Surprisingly, he didn't really go into depth on what technical issues were there besides the pop in of textures.Eh...well waiting for a sale may also mean patches for some of the issues.
Meta score currently 72 which is not that great.
IGN has this to say...
I don't know if you played dying light but that game was also low on reviews when it came out. My roommate played the crap out of that game and he really enjoyed it. I also liked it but the story sucked so I never finished it. I enjoyed watching him finish it and play the expansion as well.My copy arrives tomorrow. Can't wait. Looks good so far even with bugs and early reviews not picking at stuff. I love open world games and on a motorcycle to boot!
Eh...well waiting for a sale may also mean patches for some of the issues.
Meta score currently 72 which is not that great.
IGN has this to say...
I don't really trust IGN much anymore. They vary so much depending on the type of game they are reviewing. They gave alien isolation a low score and I enjoyed it so much. They gave mortal Kombat a 9 and it's a fighting game. Also, didn't they complain about "another white male lead character" a while back? I think a metacritic score of 70 and above means overall good.Eh...well waiting for a sale may also mean patches for some of the issues.
Meta score currently 72 which is not that great.
IGN has this to say...
I don't really trust IGN much anymore. They vary so much depending on the type of game they are reviewing. They gave alien isolation a low score and I enjoyed it so much. They gave mortal Kombat a 9 and it's a fighting game. Also, didn't they complain about "another white male lead character" a while back? I think a metacritic score of 70 and above means overall good.
I'm more interested in the user reviews though. As for the graphics everyone has been saying they are great. I will find out for myself tomorrow but I have no idea if they were downgraded or not because I got sick about hearing about this game and it's videos during E3 previews so I didn't pay much attention to it.
I dunno, if it depends on the reviewer, then it's possible for a game to get a lower score for example if the person that reviewed it isn't into that type of genre game. Big review companies do it for money too. So get a review out there quick for revenue.
I think it's funny that they call an open world game repetitive and mundane when even if mortal Kombat is a good fighting game, it's not much different than the last one so why wouldn't that one fall into the same category?
Like you said it all depends on who reviewed it. If the person reviewing it is a fan or likes that type of game, expect it to get a decent score.
The Witcher 3 was great. I still have to go back on over and hope my saves still work so I can finish it. I fully agree, that's how they should be if they are open world games. The difference is the Witcher 3 was done by a smaller company and everything was hand crafted whereas with days gone we are relying on engine generated algorithms that relay what will happen in the world at points in time which I guess makes it hard to create decent quests and side missions that aren't similar to each other.Cause nobody likes fetch quests and doing stuff for zero meaning in an open world game. It just makes the game tedious to play. Take Witcher 3, even the most minor quest from the most minor of characters was done very well and added a little bit to the lore of the world. Or added a side story that was well written and felt like it meant something. That’s what I think every open world game should strive for.
I think most times, games are compared to others in their genre. How does this compare to other open world titles and other action titles involving zombies etc. Comparing Mortal Kombat to other fighters quickly shows that MK is a quality title(although it’s not hard to be better than Street Fighter 5). I don’t know how this title would fair when compared to RDR2 for example.