TechRaptor - At one time or another I’m (Andrew Otton) sure we have all found ourselves looking at Metacritic. Sometimes we are only looking for some of the most critically acclaimed games for a particular year, another time we may just be looking at past popular games to get an idea of something we may be interested in, and yet another time we may, hopefully not too often, go to Metacritic so that we can use it as a tool for judging the worthiness of a game.
With so many games fighting for players' attention and interest losing out over time, time sink games are at risk of eventually losing steam.
It was worrisome to begin with.
It's a niche genre with only a handful of hits that can stand the test of time.
I like the sound of that!! I will for sure never support these gaas games.
Sony must be shocked at gamer's reaction, making them cancel a few of these and hopefully go back to the good heavy hitters they had us used to..
now bring on that PSPro reveal and show us some SP 1st party awesomeness.
It's pretty ridiculous.
Imagine having a breadth of data at your disposal to see the statistically low success rate of these games, only to be laser focused on the exceptional case studies.
Only a few will catch on. You need a perfect storm to be successful in GaaS and a bit of luck on top of that. But a potential cash cow will keep them trying and some will go out of business because of it.
Helldivers 2 manages just fine…
Keep production costs low… don’t just make custscenes until the mechanics and enemies are perfected first.
Make so much content that you can drip extra content for years, and the game already feels complete without them.
Most importantly: make weapons, enemies, levels, and mechanics that will stand the test of 1000 hours. This might require more devs embracing procedurally generated leveled, which I think separates Helldivers 2 from Destiny’s repetitiveness.
Nameer from eXputer: "Some exceptions aside, I don't think the battle pass is a net positive for gaming with how they're implemented in most live service titles."
I like the way Helldivers 2 does battle passes. It allows you to make purchases on each level of the battle pass and gives you the option of choosing which item to unlock first. The more purchases you make using medals the further you progress. There is no timer and you can earn medals towards purchasing stuff via personal orders and Major orders.
I haven't played much live service games that have battle passes but I remember some games that have battle passes where you progress through it linearly using an exp system. What makes it really bad is that the battle pass will have like 50 or more levels with the cooler stuff being closer to the end. They also have an in-game shop that sells exp boosters so you can reach the end of the pass before it refreshes. Everyone ilse will have to grind their way through.
battle pass in fortnite is perfect; buy one and it buys the rest for every other season as it gives you more money than the first cost. so 8.50 and season ends with you getting 13.00, it pays for the next and you have some pocket change to save up for cash shop. All of which is optional
Sony is taking actions as video by Moore’s Law is Dead, has been issued with a copyright claim.
And people say it's all fake because Sony haven't said anything 😂 conveniently forget the PS4 Pro was only announced 2 months before release.
Digital foundry put a video out saying what he leaked was exactly what they also knew about the PS5 PRO. So no it's not just stuff he made up
Aye because they'd go to the effort of copyright claiming it if it didn't exist 🙃😂 you'd have to be a special kind to be thinking its not a thing by now
U mean the specs that we'll established digital foundry which said these are the actual specs published a video on 2 weeks ago I mean they are only one of most trusted sites for tech information but they just made up a video for the sake of it
I would love for it all to be fake, but lots of people are saying they've seen/heard the same thing. But, man, we 100% don't need mid-gen upgrades when we're failing hard to optimize current hardware.
if I recall Sony lowered sales expectations for PS5 earlier this year. if that is the case we won't hear anything about a Pro until next year or shortly before/when it's dropping. After all, if the Pro was dropping this year/fiscal year they wouldn't have lowered expectations.
As for squashing rumors. Yeah, shit like this prevents potential buyers from adopting now, just like slim rumors in the past. It only makes sense to keep things under wraps from a business perspective. Despite living in a technological age of unfettered access to information we don't need to know whats going on behind closed doors be that at Sony, Nintendo, MS, or amongst any development studios. When the steak is done we shall feast.
By the time games are actually made to take advantage of the pro spec's the ps6 will be released or close to it.
Just announce it already! I want to preorder one asap. But in reality they don’t want to lessen PS5 sales until Pro is ready to launch so I understand the business part of it. September is probably when they announce it with an early November launch like the PS4 Pro
Pro won't lessen sales sames ps4 pro never and the ps4 pro was more relevant at the time cos move to 4k this not needed
Yea, my brother got his PS4 (coz of a good deal) after the PS4 Pro's release.
^^same here. I got a base 4 for only $100 off a guy who bought the Pro. then a few months later I found a guy on craigslist selling a pro for $100 because it was left behind by his former roommate who moved out. That was the beginning of my obsession to buy up the different variants of the PS4 that were released.
As of now I am really only missing the 500m one and the gold slim but otherwise I have pretty much all the other retail ones. https://consolevariations.c...
Anyone with 4K that appreciates 60fps is gonna disagree about it not being needed.
DLSS is a god send for Nvidia, and there's been nothing like it for AMD...yet ...
They will announce it around E3 timeframe about May-June whenever they do a showcase for the year.
I don't think it will pll still haven't seen the potential of ps5 yet
agreed, but it might sell if they announce some 1st party games to lead the way. if people see the difference with the base version they can move on. for my sake I am still gaming mainly on PS4 (still not finished with RDR2 due to lack of gaming time). I have a huge backlog on PS5 I am hoping to get into.
why? game makers havnt even come close to maxing out current spec yet, were getting al lthese new TFlops and game maker are making crappy remakes not worthy of the ps3
People keep saying that, yet we still have games running at near HD resolutions, 30fps, and ray tracing features turned off.
I would take that video and upload a torrent of it, fuck that copyright bullshit. If your going to do something that has a chance of being taken down, make a torrent first share it. Then Sony or any other company is helpless and you can laugh in their faces, taunting them to try to take it down 🤣
As much as the PS4 Pro didn't represent a major % in the playerbase, announcing a 'better' model will hinder sales from the 'base' model. They are right, business-wise.
Yes, use Gamerankings instead for more accuracy since it accounts for the two extra decimal places in the store.
While I think the stuff about the averages is interesting, I really doubt as much effort really goes into the average process as the author is suggesting. In a lot of ways I think it's all a lot of PR speak for "we have an advance algorithm that makes our averages a lot more meaningful than they actually are". For sake of argument, I took a look at Flower (PS4) on MC, which has a score of 91 and if you add up the scores and then divide by the number of reviews it comes out to 91.18 or the score that MC displays. Now, I don't have the time to look over every score to make sure they all match, though I doubt they would put a different score on their site if the site had a score in the first place.
In either case, neither of these things are what I consider "wrong" with Metacritic. For me, the biggest problem is that Metacritic is basically a fruit bowl and while the bowl has apples, oranges, bananas, maybe a mango and other things, they're all treated as a pear.By this I mean there is a different stats and figures, which are all changed to conform to new data and can result in skewed figures. To give you an idea, MC has a lot of sites that review games on different ratios. 1 out of 100 / 10 / 5, A - E / F, good or bad and in some cases nothing. Now, there are some people that claim that an 80, 8 and 4 mean different things, even though they're divisibly the same (4/5 or 8/10 or 80/100 is still 80%) and this maybe true. A lot of sites also toy with what exactly is considered "average", which varies from some saying it's 5 out of 10 (median), PSLS considers it a 6, several gamers and outlets consider it a 7 and Metacritic requires a 75/100 average to be "green" (this is like 61+ in every other medium). So, even if all the sites are giving the game "average" scores across the board, it still might be tanked by sites scoring things differently. Another problem I've heard of is letter graders are typically assigned a 1 / 5 score, so a C is 50, A is 100 and E is 0, which can VASTLY change the average, even though I've heard sites that consider an E as a 5/10 by default. Then there is Quarter to Three, which is based off how much the guy likes the game and crap like that shouldn't be on MC in the first place, as I consider it less helpful and relevant than even some troll reviews on Amazon or Best Buy...
Arguably another big issue with MC is that everything is viewed as something of a "snapshot". As the article mentions, they constantly talk about quality, but sites are typically only evaluated once and put on the site from then until the end of time. The problem with that is the site can change a lot in a couple of months and some writers might not meet Metacritic "standards", though they're listed simply because they work for a prestigious site. This is somewhat problematic, since it largely defeats the point of having an approval process in the first place.
I can keep getting into problems with Metacritic, but in the end it's hard to make a system that works without a lot of time and effort, which typically isn't feasible for any site. In the end, "smart" readers should find people that match their beliefs and trust their reviews or simply avoid reviews in the first place. After doing the critic thing for a number of years, there is a lot of backdoor / politics / biases / side factors that come into play and make many reviews questionable at best.
I always like to judge a game myself peoples tastes differ i only use scores of any type as a guideline.
And the world keeps on spinning.
I like to judge a game for myself, 'm currently going through my backlog. Just finished playing Brutal Legends, and now I'm currently playing Kane & Lynch....Literally playing a game released in 2007. Approximately 25 more games to go after I complete this one.