I don't know, he really doesn't sound as excstatic as with other games.
He is saying positive stuff about it, but also points out some negative stuff too. I don't usually watch his stuff, but at the same time as being generally positive, he sounds a bit deflated/flat when expressing it to me. Its almost like he's speaking in a 7 out of 10 tone of voice, whilst saying he cant stop playing it.watch again , he is praising everything about the game.
also takes a few jibes at the naysayers and a certain.....................group of fans
9 out of 10 tone of voice is what i felt when watching thatHe is saying positive stuff about it, but also points out some negative stuff too. I don't usually watch his stuff, but at the same time as being generally positive, he sounds a bit deflated/flat when expressing it to me. Its almost like he's speaking in a 7 out of 10 tone of voice, whilst saying he cant stop playing it.
I dont watch the guy, maybe he just never sounds very infused. He's certainly enjoying it and looking forward to the future with DLC and mods etc...9 out of 10 tone of voice is what i felt when watching that
Wow. Is it really true that in space you're only limited to a small corridor essentially? I.e. there's no space exploration? If so, what was the fucking point of marketing the exploration aspects of the game...
Because it is.The more I see the more this feels like a wait for sale type of game.
Dannnn.
I dont know why hes getting this hate. hes not the only one. gamespot and PC gamer also gave it a 7 and lets face it, eurogamer is giving it a 3 star out of 5 which will show up as a 60 on metacritic.
Why is Dan Stapleton from IGN catching ALL the shit for his 7/10 review, when Gamespot gave the exact same score? I'm not sure if the reviewer for Gamespot is relieved or pissed his review got no attention.
Yeah, it's bizarre. There are other 7s beside IGN and Gamespot. Well, there are lower than 7 scores, even 5/10, why no one talk about it lolWhy is Dan Stapleton from IGN catching ALL the shit for his 7/10 review, when Gamespot gave the exact same score? I'm not sure if the reviewer for Gamespot is relieved or pissed his review got no attention.
I don't have a problem with the 7, per se, but this same guy gave The Outer Worlds an 8.5. There's an inconsistency there that feels off.
They didn't lie folks they just omitted some things.
The PCgamer and Gamespot 7/10 reviews are big red flags. It's one thing to see a single big media outlet giving a big release low scores, it's another when you see multiple doing it.Yeah, it's bizarre. There are other 7s beside IGN and Gamespot. Well, there are lower than 7 scores, even 5/10, why no one talk about it lol
So... He liked outer worlds better?I don't have a problem with the 7, per se, but this same guy gave The Outer Worlds an 8.5. There's an inconsistency there that feels off.
I appreciate a good
how can ppl defend this is beyond me, geez
Those games are not for me. Happy to leave them behind.I think this is a Microsoft thing, Forza Horizon 5 also has pronouns, female clothes for male players etc.
I imagine a lot of games will be going the same way nowadays, as society has decided (or it's been decided for us) that we're going down this path. We either overlook it or give up buying the games I guess.
Nice tryBecause Starfield is another regression
I haven't played Starfield yet; I don't do the early access stuff. But the complaints he leveled against Starfield in his review, and that he talked about on the IGN podcast, Unlocked, are so absolutely features that are also present in The Outer Worlds.It's not inconsistent. There are just things in Outer Worlds he found more value in than Starfield. I'm not a fan of this argument I see all the time where someone goes "Well this reviewer gave that game from 5 years ago this score. So their opinion to me is invalided toward the game I'm emotionally invested in."
I mean it's not worded like that, but if this were the film Liar Liar, it'd be worded like that.
Well, it's more about the content of the review and how the negatives that he applied to Starfield also apply to The Outer Worlds.So... He liked outer worlds better?
Dannnn.
So, the negatives he applied are similar or the same, but he weights them heavier if the developer is Bethesda who has supposedly worked on the brand new IP for 7 plus years with god knows how many developers and lighter with a much smaller developer... Okay.Well, it's more about the content of the review and how the negatives that he applied to Starfield also apply to The Outer Worlds.
Shingeki no Starfield
Must be over the target, eh?Wow, clearly this guy has an agenda, shouldn't have reviewed the game then.
Skyrim space bugs. Finally I feel like home.
Can't wait for Wednesday.
Remember, "well polished" according to DF.Im compiling all of this for the OT thread, it will be funny.
It's why they are called DF.Remember, "well polished" according to DF.
Yeah, you shouldn't do that.So, the negatives he applied are similar or the same, but he weights them heavier if the developer is Bethesda who has supposedly worked on the brand new IP for 7 plus years with god knows how many developers and lighter with a much smaller developer... Okay.
That's... Probably the worst take I've read on GAF ever since I've been a member here. Kudos man!Yeah, you shouldn't do that.
A game is a game, regardless of who makes it. If you are a small developer or a large one, a bad game is a bad game, a good game is a good game, and a great game is a great game.
We shouldn't give out participation points for smaller developers trying something that's outside of their capability. And we certainly shouldn't take away points for larger developers making something that's well within their capability. We should just play the games and rate them based on what we play, as opposed to who made it. And maybe learn to use a rubric so that there's consistency.
Nah 400 devs and 400 million dollars has an expectation. All products have expectations, just as all teams do. A small developer with limited resources punching above thier weight is rare and incredible when it happens and should be recognized as such. But a studio with that many people with damn near infinite resources barely meeting its expectations should be questioned.Yeah, you shouldn't do that.
A game is a game, regardless of who makes it. If you are a small developer or a large one, a bad game is a bad game, a good game is a good game, and a great game is a great game.
We shouldn't give out participation points for smaller developers trying something that's outside of their capability. And we certainly shouldn't take away points for larger developers making something that's well within their capability. We should just play the games and rate them based on what we play, as opposed to who made it. And maybe learn to use a rubric so that there's consistency.
Remember, "well polished" according to DF.
Why? It's the same game if it's a studio of 5 or a studio of 500. Same exact game, different scores? That's not a very logical way to analyze/criticize a product.Nah 400 devs and 400 million dollars has an expectation. All products have expectations, just as all teams do. A small developer with limited resources punching above thier weight is rare and incredible when it happens and should be recognized as such. But a studio with that many people with damn near infinite resources barely meeting its expectations should be questioned.
Why? It's the same game if it's a studio of 5 or a studio of 500. Same exact game, different scores? That's not a very logical way to analyze/criticize a product.
and i think most reviewrs for Starfield just turned a blind eye cause Bethesda is a behemoth, a small developer like Hello games ( No Man Sky ) that made a game that in my opnion is way more much more ambitious in terms of space exploration, has ( nowadays ) a good space combat, co-op and most of the features promissed, got a lot more criticism on Reviews for the bug mess and lack of features promissed on launch that Bethesda Starfild got it.Nah 400 devs and 400 million dollars has an expectation. All products have expectations, just as all teams do. A small developer with limited resources punching above thier weight is rare and incredible when it happens and should be recognized as such. But a studio with that many people with damn near infinite resources barely meeting its expectations should be questioned.