Try our new beta! Click here
Submitted by Barry_Burton_84 1126d ago | review

( Assassin's Creed III Review writes:

"Assassin's Creed III builds strongly on the series but fails to take a giant leap of faith into any real new territory. A new plot, the Colonial America setting, and sheer volume of things to do outweigh the disappointing bugs and glitches." (Assassin's Creed III, PC, PS3, Xbox 360) 8.5/10

cruxito  +   1126d ago
first comment >:) ..... this review was better thant the rest of N4G, im just gonna rent it and wait until the game of the year edition comes out. too many DLC store exclusives out there
Brian1rr  +   1126d ago
You need like a week to play the whole game. It's pretty long
-Gespenst-  +   1126d ago
"Assassin's Creed III builds strongly on the series but fails to take a giant leap of faith into any real new territory"

It's weird. A lot of people complain about high ratings like 8.5 / 10 merely because they're not 9 or 10 / 10. And I think that's partly to do with a game's expectations, like with how some games you just feel are going to be perfect scorers in advance of their release.

But when I read reviews like this, it makes me wonder how much journalists contribute to that understanding of and 8.5 as somehow sub-par.

The phrasing of the quote above is interesting. The game apparently "fails" to do something quite significant; to deliver on a certain promise. Now, it's hard to see how an 8.5 scoring game can really be said to "fail" on any level; "fail" seems too strong a word for the score it's receiving. Perhaps "falls slightly short" would be more apt.

This leads me to my point, how much of our understanding of high scores like 7.5s through 8.5s as somehow "bad" or signifying "failure", can be ascribed to journalists' phrasing?

We read lots of reviews, and how many of the 7.5s and 8.5s make use of inappropriately depreciative words like "fail."? Is it possible that the reason we think these scores are somehow bad has to do with trends in reviews and the language they use? Often that language doesn't reflect the objectively high score a game is given.

It seems like we've imagined some sort of big gulf of quality between an 8.5 and a 9, which is absurd. It's like the higher the score, the more hyperbolic and excitable a review becomes, it doesn't use critical restraint, and so you get a wide gulf between the associations built into each score. I.e. 8.5/10 = "good, but it fails on some levels" and 9/10 = "OMG BEST GAME EVER FFFUUUUU" and 10/10 "This is the greatest game ever made no other game can or will even come close, I can die now having played this."

And so I think this also effects our expectations and anticipations for a game. With these ideas sort of engrained in our heads, any game that was super hyped and receives an 8.5 / 10 is accompanied by a vague disappointment. Because the hype has made use of all the language of a 9/10 game.

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
New stories

Review: Rainbow Six: Siege | Stevivor

10m ago - Leo Stevenson -- "Siege creates the kind of anxious, pulse pounding action usually reserved for o... | PC

Review: Need For Speed - Connected Digital World

10m ago - Connected Digital World writes: Feeling the need? | Need For Speed

Blu-ray And DVD Highlights for November 2015

Now - With the spooky month of October all but ritualistically murdered and buried in a haunted house sitting a top an ancient Indian burial ground under... | Promoted post

Rainbow Six: Siege review - MMGN

10m ago - MMGN writes: There’s a discouraging trend in this industry to force shooters down the multiplayer... | PC

GotGame | Mario Tennis: Ultra Smash Review

10m ago - Nintendo typically has a large list of first party releases to fill up their holiday season, and... | Wii U

Fallout 4 Review: Priscilla Queen of the Wasteland | WASDuk

10m ago - WASDuk writes "It was always inevitable that Fallout 4 was going to set the world on fire. It’s a... | PC