inFAMOUS: Second Son Review | Quarter to Three

"Second Son looks fantastic and from a technical perspective, it’s a pretty impressive feat especially given that the game is out less than six months from the release of the Playstation 4. Unfortunately the gameplay isn’t up to par with the light show. Like the neon that Delsin channels, it’s all light and no heat."

[leemo19]

Same site that gave TLOU its only real bad score, don't even bother giving them the clicks.

[Riderz1337]

They've given:

Uncharted 3 - 2/5
Halo 4 - 1/5
Last of Us - 3/5
Journey - 2/5

And this website is on Metacritic...Lol

[Metallox]

Not only those games, but a lot more. For example, Super Mario 3D World went from 94 to 93 on Metacritic thanks to Quater to Three's review.

[randomass171]

They gave Halo 4 a 1/5? Who are they, Yahtzee Croshaw? :P

[coolbeans]

Given that the site reflects Netflix's Hated it/Loved it template, it's really not that big of a deal as you're making it out to be.

[Hicken]

@coolbeans: There are multiple problems with their reviews, though.

One is that they intentionally misunderstand games. They frequently act as if basic concepts in certain games just don't make sense. I died a little inside when I read the Journey review: it was so blatantly obtuse I felt my own intelligence lowering as I tried to understand how Chick had come to the conclusions he did.

He doesn't review games based on a "how well does this game do what it intends?" method, but rather a "let's see if I can smear the reputation of a popular developer or franchise for internet popularity" method. Usually, but not always, a Playstation exclusive is his target. And it's pretty clear that even if he's not the one doing the review, the site's MO remains.

The other big problem is that such an unprofessional source is given credibility when it comes to metacritic. That aggregate has enough reputation issues as it is, since they don't disclose the criteria by which they decide to include a site. And it's bad that the industry has come to, even if just a little, make decisions based on a game's average on that site.

Regardless of their love it or hate it style- which definitely does not fit in with the style of a site like metacritic- Chick and his group simply suck as it pertains to reviewing games.

[coolbeans]

@Hicken

First half: That's not really connected to what I stated anyways, but you're free to vent that frustration towards the written content of this review (and have at least acted mature to not just cry about scores), here or at that site.

"The other big problem is that such an unprofessional source is given credibility when it comes to metacritic."

For an "unprofessional source," he does have a history of posting reviews and articles on gaming sites prior to Quarter to Three was ever made. One example: http://www.ign.com/articles...

"Regardless of their love it or hate it style- which definitely does not fit in with the style of a site like metacritic..."

I figured that was an aspect to be applauded by metacritic. They're not only grabbing aggregates from different reviewers with mildly varying opinions, but also from those who utilize different templates altogether. Didn't we just go through a whole console generation of people complaining about the 7-10 grading scale?

And if undisclosed selection criteria and the industry's gross focus on metascores already has you at ends at trusting metacritic to begin with, why should it really matter if he's included?

[Hicken]

Oh, I've done plenty of venting about their "style" of reviewing. I've made many in depth critiques about their reviews in the past. Unfortunately, it's a site where Chick, in particular, has a little army of followers to support him, and he takes no such critiques seriously, because he knows he can get away with whatever he does. I don't visit the site anymore, because their agenda was and is clear. The only reason I even came to this article was because I hasn't seen one from them in a long time, and I was curious to see if they were still up to the same old tricks, as it were.

If you're talking about this guy, I know nothing about him. I do know that Chick was the writer of most if not all reviews in the past; I've come to expect low review scores and poorly written reviews from the site. I'm sure you'll forgive me for not giving this review the benefit of doubt after their past.

Or maybe not.

If he's that professional, why work at quartertothree? Surely that's a downgrade. Maybe he wanted to do his own thing or whatever, but he- speaking of Chick, here; don't know this guy from a hole in the ground- sure hasn't created a product that I would say is professional or quality.

The metacritic thing goes like this: the site is questionable BECAUSE they allow sites without explanation, when some- if not many- don't resonate with the crowds they're supposed to serve; most sites they include do NOT use the "love it or hate it" review scale, so the scores given that way don't mesh with the rest, meaning it gives a false impression of a title's quality.

People only really using 7-10 is irrelevant here. The problem is averaging "I hate this game" scores with "This is a poor quality game, but it's fun" score. Or even "I hate this game, but it's good quality."

It's these things that make metacritic not worth trusting. Things like including a site such as quartertothree, and not having a separate aggregate for the different type of grading scales that sites use, because they're not all weighted the same, but metacritic treats them sad if they all are.

And THAT matters because the industry has decided that metacritic scores matter.

[coolbeans]

@Hicken

"I've made many in depth critiques about their reviews in the past. Unfortunately, it's a site where Chick, in particular, has a little army of followers to support him, and he takes no such critiques seriously, because he knows he can get away with whatever he does."

Given what you've complained about already, I'm willing to go out on a limb and question the validity of all your so-called 'in-depth critiques' instead of him just shrugging off everything you've had to say.

It looks like it's his site, so I wouldn't call that a downgrade. As for the different reviewer in question, he's credited with 15 years of QA experience and worked at different gaming sites beforehand.

http://www.quepublishing.co...

"The metacritic thing goes like this: the site is questionable BECAUSE they allow sites without explanation.."

Okay, them never listing their prerequisites for qualifying does make that aspect sketchy. But the rest of your assumption isn't based on what metacritic actually is, by that I'm meaning what they've actually provided in their about section.

"...when some- if not many- don't resonate with the crowds they're supposed to serve; most sites they include do NOT use the "love it or hate it" review scale, so the scores given that way don't mesh with the rest, meaning it gives a false impression of a title's quality."

No such arbitrary determinations for what "crowd" they're supposed to serve are ever brought up by the site though. Their score's interpretation is only meant to communicate a greater amounts of better REVIEWS for said product. The only false impression that can be made is in one's own ignorance in understanding how to interpret a metascore...

-"The problem is averaging 'I hate this game' scores with 'This is a poor quality game, but it's fun' score. Or even 'I hate this game, but it's good quality.'"

...which is what seems to be the case here. You're throwing in so many different intrepretations that the site never intended. Instead it had the resolve to set their parameters as such for games:

-Universal Acclaim (90-100)
-Generally Favorable Reviews (75-89)
-Mixed or Average Reviews (50-74)
-Generally Unfavorable Reviews (20-49)
-Universal Dislike (0-19)

"It's these things that make metacritic not worth trusting. Things like including a site such as quartertothree, and not having a separate aggregate for the different type of grading scales that sites use, because they're not all weighted the same, but metacritic treats them sad if they all are."

When you actually understand the language metacritic presents regarding these scores, though, it's apparent no such accommodations need to be made.

"And THAT matters because the industry has decided that metacritic scores matter."

What? All of that blame should be placed on the industry in that regard, not on either QTT or metacritic for not conforming to your rationality in quantifying a single reviewer's scores, especially when those scores do work within their system already. Given how overall stature and quality is given to the "weighted average" of these games anyways, not a whole of "damage" can be done since they don't post many reviews anyways.

[DEEBO]

LOL ok

[DigitalRaptor]

Tom Chick, bahahahhahahahhahahhahah!

Oh well it's actually a shame his idiot reviews contribute to sites like Metacritic.

[Izzy408]

The score sounds about right to me. Nice looking game, but that's about it.

[Beastforlifenoob]

Ahaha says the XBX1 fanboy who probably loves Ryse haha what is Ryse then?

Lets look at your old comments to see what a fanboi you are

"Agreed. Seriously, one must either have too much time of their hands or have a warped state of mind in which any little thing that threatens the "superiority" of the PS4, necessitates a call to arms. #29.1
9d ago by Izzy408 | View comment"

"Look at all of the insecure PS fanboys desperately trying to downplay this. LMAO. Now, i'm not saying im completely sold on this yet, but at least now we know it's not all B.S. #57
11d ago by Izzy408 | View comment"

Hmmm.. there's something fishy about this article. #28
11d ago by Izzy408 | View comment WHEN TALKING ABOUT XBX1 BEING UNDERPOWERED COMPARED TO PS4

"The Chainsaw Incident? I've never even heard of this game before. Anyways, just saw some gameplay and couldn't care less if it's not on the X1. Looks more like a WiiU game to me. #15"

"Give it a rest already, PS fanboys; jeezus. Stop making a big deal about Titanfall being an Xbox/PC exclusive. You have exclusive games too. Deal with it! #4"

"Calm down, it's only been a few months since release. Quit acting like the PS4 has given its users all of the features it promised them. #25"

"Give me a break. PS fanboys post similar pics all the time and everyone kisses their a**. #1.2.1"

By that argument, I should see a bunch of PS fanboys crying about Mario or Zelda not being a PS game. But no; only when it comes to "Xbone" games, you guys lose your s***.

First you'll complain about the game being exclusive (because Sony shares all of their majors titles), and then when you can't get the game on your platform, you'll criticize the hell out of it, even though the full game hasn't been released.

But lets be real here.... #36.2.1

"Just give it a rest already, PS fanboys. I swear, it almost seems like you get paid to troll Xbox articles. #44"

"And here come the PS fanboys to throw a fit about the xbox selling well. Let it go already. #2"

"Give it a rest Sony fanboys. They're just numbers. Just enjoy your console and don't mind the competition. #44"

"Brace yourselves, people; a ps fanboy storm is coming. #47"

Brace yourselves, people; a ps fanboy storm is coming. #47 WHEN TALKING ABOUT RYSE

Just because one company hasn't figured out how to make it work (Sony), doesn't mean other companies can't come up with a solution. In this case, MS has invested billions in cloud technology; so of course they are more advanced in this matter. #3

Give it a rest already PS fanboys. #7.1

If Ryse were a PS4 game, we wouldn't hear the end of it. But since it's for the X1, well.... just read the comments above. The funny thing is, most people haven't even played the game. #34

Let it go already, PS fanboys. #20

Angry PS fanboys are angry. #42

Because ONE person feels like BF4 looks slighly better on the PS4? There are just as many people out there who see it as the exact opposite. So why does one person's opinion mean more than everyone else? Only a dummy would think that way. #63.1

haha EVERY SINGLE FUC*ING COMMENT THIS GUY POSTS IS TRYING TO START A FLAM WAR BURNING. F THIS GUY HE SHOULD BE BANNED

[Izzy408]

I prefer xbox, you prefer the ps... so what's your point? If N4G started banning people based on preference, you, me and about 70% of the PS fanboys that make up this site would be gone. But I guess my opinion must really got you butt-hurt since you were compelled enough to look up my history. Talk about too much time on your hands.

[fonger08]

@izzy408 just ignore him, if you looked at his previous statements and the reasoning behind his one bubble, you'd see he has no room to call anybody a troll.

[SpiralTear]

The overarching concern that I read was that the reviewer thought the missions were boring. However, that criticism alone doesn't seem to equal a full 2/5 score in my eyes.

Were the missions that much of a downer to justify that low a score? The guy sounded like he had a lot of good stuff to say about everything else.

Whatever. Your opinion, pal.

[candy_mafia]

2/5??...Wow!

The people that run this site are anti-Ps or begging for hits....in the face ;/

[VersaVulture89]

I'll be honest, I prefer my Xbox One, but I bought a PS4 specifically for Infamous: Second Son and I haven't regretted that purchase. It's a phenomenal game and I can't wait to see what other exclusives Sony will roll out!

[Rowco147]

Well said bubble up... at no time did I feel I was forced to finish this game to get my moneys worth. Sad when I finished it all.excellent game

[iceman06]

It's hard to argue a quality title...regardless of console. It really is a fun, great game. You can rush and finish it, or do all of the side stuff. It's totally up to you. It's not perfect, but for a first try on a new gen console, I'll more than take it. I can't wait to get to my evil play through so I can just go crazy. Right now, I'm trying my best to be good!

[VersaVulture89]

I always play the "good side" first because that's a challenge. It's so easy to be bad in games with morality, but being good has its own set of challenges that an be tedious.

[iceman06]

Agreed! I love the challenge of being good, but I love the destruction and fun of just not caring. This is what I love about Infamous, and other games in it's ilk. It allows me to express the side that is often suppressed in actual life...the wanton disregard for anything and everything. LOL

[LordMaim]

Story Quality - WTF?
Like this website? - No

...Aaaand done.

[thejigisup]

http://img.4plebs.org/board...

I'm pretty shocked by this site and reviewer. Something funny there if you check out the other reviews they have posted. Smh.

[Killzoner99]

It's a blatant anti-Sony site. Don't take any Sony related reviews seriously from this site. They only post these low scores for clicks. I don't understand why this site hasn't been banned by N4G yet.

[Metallox]

Don't feel surprised, Tom Chick gives low scores to many high praised games. But his rating system is weird. Sometimes 3/5 =/= 60, sometimes is that. Yet Metacritic puts his reviews on the website.

[psforward]

Late to the party with a controversial score...click bait detected.

[Jaqen_Hghar]

A man recalls this site giving Uncharted 3 and Halo 4 similar grades if not worse. Definite troll site for companies to not have to pay their devs because it lowers the meta (yes people get paid based on that at certain companies).

[monochromer]

The epitome of clickbait.

[csreynolds]

Clickbait, pure and simple. This site is renowned for giving great games awful scores.

Sorry quartertothree.com, you're not getting my click...

[CaptainPunch]

Can't believe this site is on metacritic.