Battlefield 3 Devs Are All About The Review Scores

[Rad Party God]

As wrong as that sentence is, I can't really argue with that. At least, the score junkies may buy the game if it gets a high enough score.
I'm getting this game either way.

 

[dmase]

I tend to agree but a lot of it has to do with reviewers preference. One thing A LOT of reviewers will take off for is when a game makes a sequel that adds nothing really to the experience. I mean FPS's set in modern times with realistic enemies are hard to manipulate to make something new. You can't really revolutionize game mechanics each iteration, the trigger button is still going to fire and the reticle is where the bullets are going to go. You can add things like vehicle or gunnery rounds but those things are small sections in an other wise big game. Then there is story which will be the same except a new plot twist. Visuals will for the most part be gritty with spurts of lush green or all white snow.

I mean putting all that together 8.5, if it was the first in the series it would have a 10. It's still an incredible game but we expect too much. I'm fine with some series keeping the same formula i mean my favorite niche game is the Dragon quest series, every addition to the series after 8 just pissed me off but if FF where to stagnate people will call foul like no tomorrow. We have different expectation for different games, I feel like Call of duty is a solid pleasurable game that should remain classic and arcadey. Battlefield can do the innovation.

 

[harvz]

I can pretty much guarantee that it will have its review score bombed by CoD fans, not to mention that the pc reviews will probably be dropped due to EA's idiotic decision to force pc gamers to use origin and have to manually find servers.

long story short, if you want good reviews, make sure EA is not a part of your game. EA has the combined intelligence of a heavily sedated ape, smells similar too.

 

[FreakSheet]

Let me translate that for you: " We know MW3 will outsell us, thats why we believe review scores are a better indicator.

 

[gigastar]

Going by sales data: Duke Nukem Forever is pretty good, Ubisoft's execrable Imagine: Babyz is better than Okami and Call of Duty: Black Ops is the best game ever made. I'm not sure which part of that sentence is the most awful.

Imagine being better than Okami possibly, followed by a close second to Black Ops being the best game ever.

OT: Its a fair point and one thats nigh impossible to compromise without looking like a total douche while failing to make a valid counter. When all is said and done, some people have to ask themselves "Do we make a game to be the best it can possibly be? Or a game that will sell by the millions regardless of its issues?"

 

[Zyxzy]

Eh, I think both review scores and sales are imperfect indicators of quality. They're usually reliable, but sometimes they muck-up.

 

[CardinalPiggles]

I quite like Yahtzee's way of looking at it. Tell us all about the bad stuff and how bad it is, rather than focus on the good. A pessimist is never disappointed.

 

[BabyRaptor]

Reviews are subjective. And they're only part of why people buy games.

Also. Imagine: Babyz? Do I even want to know?

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

By that logic Dragon Age 2 is the best game I've played this year. DA2 was fucking awful compared to DA:O. Infact I'd rather play DNF than DA2.

But yet I thought DA2 was superior to DAO! Ahhh the mysteries of life!

 

[Csae]

This is also sadly true due to Origin.

I would love to play BF3, but i am in no mood for Origin, so its lost a sale, not due to the quality of the game.

 

[Soviet Heavy]

He said, knowing full well that Battlefield 3 will never outsell Modern Warfare 3, but still looking for a way to win the pissing contest.

Ubisoft's execrable Imagine: Babyz is better than Okami

If Imagine: Babyz has controls that work properly, damn right it's better than Okami. Okami rates with stuff like ET for the 2600 and Big Rigs Over the Road Racing thanks to its awful, unresponsive, broken controls.

...... What console were you playing Okami on? Wii or PS2? I haven't played the Wii edition so I can't comment, but I never had a problem with the Dualshock controls.

 

[Lorechaser]

So, is this why Jim Sterling and Rock, Paper, Shotgun didn't get review copies early? Not because EA thinks the game isn't good, but they expected that their scores would be lower than the expected result?

If Metacritic was based on a standard deviation ranking across individual critics, placing their scores in a normalized continuum or the like, then maybe. But the sheer amount of flak Jim Sterling got for giving Gears 3 an 8.5 (which was quite a good review, and a high score for his scale) indicates that making Metacritic numbers your sole ranking is trash.

Also, the fact that Arkham Asylum receeved a 6 of out 5 (which would be 120 on Metacritic) kind of makes the entire numerical scores idea a complete farce anyway.

 

[Vault101]

fact is if a game is below a certain score then I may stay away...or if Im interested enough give it a go

 

[The Random One]

Going by sales data: Duke Nukem Forever is pretty good, Ubisoft's execrable Imagine: Babyz is better than Okami and Call of Duty: Black Ops is the best game ever made. I'm not sure which part of that sentence is the most awful.

Neither do I, reading each of them made me vomit roughly the same amount.

 

[Vault101]

By that logic Dragon Age 2 is the best game I've played this year. DA2 was fucking awful compared to DA:O. Infact I'd rather play DNF than DA2.

so the reveiws wre "wrong" becaue YOU didnt like the game

Eh, I think both review scores and sales are imperfect indicators of quality. They're usually reliable, but sometimes they muck-up.

how does somone muck up their own opinion?

its like if I buy a COD game, becuase it has a score of 9, yet i hate it because its brown..shooty and a pathetic single player....would it be fair of me to turn around and acuse ALOT of reveiws of being "wrong"?

no, if I bought COD then I should have known what i was getting into, its not hard thease days we have the internet (and no Im not applying this to DA2, I know why you didnt like it)

 

[aPod]

I thought the people who decided if a game is good was the fans.

A great game will have a thriving community and shitty game will get all mellow dramatic alone in the Sahara because we just done understand em.

 

[Vault101]

I really have to disagree with this guy, forum word of mouth is a far more reliable indicator of a games quality than both reviews and sales. There are threads of people complaining and hating, but generally are people pretty good about it.

yeah but people on the internet can and will hate everything and anything, and otfen without a fair look at somthing..I tend to get put off by overwhelming negativity, yeah some peopel say reveiws are crap and somtimes paid off, while they arnt perfect (the real probelm is giving too many games to higher reveiws), Im going to trust a "prfessional" over some whiny asshole on the internet

Wow, invite all the whining about people "ruining" a metascore.

I have news. Sales don't determine how good or bad a game is, but it's an outright lie to try and say sales are not as important as reviews. All game companies are for profit. Meaning that making art falls a distant second to making money. I hate this kind of thing, if for no other reason than we have all been burned by reviews, professional or otherwise. And if a game gets a fantastic review, and it's sales suck, it's because you have made a great game no one want to play, so that is a fail. I seem to recall a company called Team Bondi, who made a game that did pretty darn good in the review area, but sales sucked horribly, and now they are not around anymore.

This is taken right from wikipedia: Sterne Agee analyst, Arvind Bhatia, is optimistic that L.A. Noire has 'potential' for 4 million sales.[115] To date L.A. Noire has shipped 4 million copies to retailers.

Also, it's worth noting that when released in May, it had the highest sales during that month with just under one million.

Sales weren't the problem.

what WAS the probelm? I thourght that game was supoes to be good, though I havnt played it yet

 

[Thaius]

The title made me think they were saying review scores meant the most out of anything. But seeing as they're actually saying that reviews mean more than sales about a game's quality, I have to agree with them wholeheartedly. I'm sorry (well, not really), but Black Ops is not hundreds of times better than Okami. It just isn't.