- Joined
- Nov 4, 2007
- Messages
- 15,005
The guy that did the IGN review gave Prey 5/10.Christ how bad must the game be to get a 7 from IGN, even Diablo 4 got a 9!
The guy that did the IGN review gave Prey 5/10.Christ how bad must the game be to get a 7 from IGN, even Diablo 4 got a 9!
good video, mortismal is based
And just like that, the Codex trusts reviews from gaming journalist and e-celebs. When it's something you hated, codex, before even knowing what it was, then journalist and youtubers are the end all be all of opinions. Go get your asshole stretched by a bear. You are the NPC meme.
The introduction letter of Bethesda sandboxes have always signed in this section what is called 'wow moment'. The path down the hill to Riverwood in Skyrim and the feeling of being immersed in a believable world. The exit from the Oblivion sewer, which in the middle of 2006 left your jaw on the ground. The escape from Vault 101 in Fallout 3 and the presentation of a hopeless wasteland. In Starfield we woke up in a mine. After five minutes we already crushed stone as a tutorial on minerals and their collection. Half an hour passes and you already have your character customized, the first pirate squadron eliminated and the control panel of your ship in your hands, ready to take off towards the unknown. Two, five, ten hours pass and that moment never comes. Nor will it in the coming hours.
prey (2017) wasn't great but 5/10 is pretty low honestly hard to believeThe guy that did the IGN review gave Prey 5/10.Christ how bad must the game be to get a 7 from IGN, even Diablo 4 got a 9!
It's not just about their score. Starfield reeked of mediocrity from the very beginning. Also we are not dealing with an experimental indie game. It's a mainstream Bethesda shit.It's funny how the RPGCodex takes IGN, Gamespot and mainstream reviewer's words seriously when it's convenient, for example Gamespot gave Pathologic 2 a 5/10 which implies Starfield is better which is obviously fucking stupid
good video, mortismal is based
Pretty much anyone who get the game for free in advance will make shitty reviews because:
1. They get game for free without paying and can play it
2. They can make more money on youtube thanks to exclusive pre-release review
3. They will not get more games if they bash them
4. You need a solid integrity to get game for free and bash it, and then you risk having your youtube "game journo" money dry up.
5. Therefore most will falsely praise the game or at least give it 6/7 even if its pure shit.
This is a shortsighted policy on behalf of invidivual, as it will grant him immediate pleasure and benefit at a relatively low personal cost, while worsening the standards of the indsutry for the future and other consumers.
prey (2017) wasn't great but 5/10 is pretty low honestly hard to believeThe guy that did the IGN review gave Prey 5/10.Christ how bad must the game be to get a 7 from IGN, even Diablo 4 got a 9!
It's not just about their score. Starfield reeked of mediocrity from the very beginning. Also we are not dealing with an experimental indie game. It's a mainstream Bethesda shit.It's funny how the RPGCodex takes IGN, Gamespot and mainstream reviewer's words seriously when it's convenient, for example Gamespot gave Pathologic 2 a 5/10 which implies Starfield is better which is obviously fucking stupid
I knew it's going to be shit as soon as I heard those claims about it having "1000 explorable planets".
When it comes to games that are hyped like this, usually the initial reception should be very positive, because after a couple of months, the cracks start to show and the true verdict comes out. If the initial reception is already mid/mixed, that's just fucked up.
I really hope that Baizuo's Gate 3 outsell this game. Because maybe, just maybe Bugthesda will not decline TES VI more than TES V was already declined.
that's kinda funny, I think back in 2017 there was the whole "gamers getting mad about unfinished games" zeitgeist maybe this writer was trying to bandwagon on that but somehow stepped on a landmineprey (2017) wasn't great but 5/10 is pretty low honestly hard to believeThe guy that did the IGN review gave Prey 5/10.Christ how bad must the game be to get a 7 from IGN, even Diablo 4 got a 9!
It was 4/10 because he encountered a game breaking bug, changed it to 8/10 after patches but probably because he received a lot of backlash
Late Bloomer on a scale from 1 to 10, how butthurt are you now?
That's accurate. (ok, maybe 6/10)The guy that did the IGN review gave Prey 5/10.
BG3 is like Dark Souls 1, all the good content is frontloaded and the last 33% sucks. Starfield is a more consistent experience. Vanilla Minecraft isn't great, either
You know the Codex is full of fags now if people are genuinely, unironitcally considering playing this normie filth.
Based on the small amount of footage I have seen I am expecting it to play a lot like FO4. Which is fine, I enjoyed FO4 and won't mind playing space FO4. I will have fun with that even if the space stuff winds up being lackluster.
I think there are probably a lot of people that are setting unrealistic expectations for this game though, and they might wind up pretty disappointed. It'd be great if Todd proves me wrong and puts out an amazing space game. I'm not holding my breath, though.
I didn't buy the game, lmao. I've got Gamepass, so I'm waiting a week anyway. That's if I play past the intro which I doubt I will because I haven't played games for like six months.Fuk uOh, after midnight. That's disgusting.