Considering the massive popularity of the franchise in question, review scores may have little impact on sales.
Probably not, although first impressions make me think this will win critics (myself included) back.
Why review scores still matter in this day and age is beyond me. We have Yotube, and each platform has livestreaming capabilities, both of which are perfect for forming an opinion of any game and making a judgement on if you deem it worthy of it's asking price....the opinions of other individuals or other collectives should be unnecessary.
Yes and no. I don't think it'll matter too much being as many fans will buy it either way...I'm sure pre-orders are already mounting. However, I think it will matter MORE than other recent CODs, being as this is a "new" company taking the lead and it's further into the future...people will have questions and concerns. The reviews will matter a bit to those that have drifted away from COD...it might help them decide to come back or not.
"Considering the massive popularity of the franchise in question, review scores may have little impact on sales." Do scores ever really matter? You can look at several critically successful titles (Tearaway, Zero Escape, Rayman Legends, Okami, Bayonetta, Vanquish, etc) and you'll see that many of these games had poor sales despite having an average of 85+ on Metacritic. Likewise, there are several games that didn't get amazing review scores, but sold just fine. In the end, as much as VGRHQ wants to believe / propagate the notion that reviewers / critics can decide the fate of a game, the reality is that their opinions have a very small impact on what people do.
Nobody is "propogating" anything, besides analysts and publishers, who continue to put a huge emphasis on review scores because - per our recent interview with EEDAR - it almost ALWAYS results in better sales. There's a reason publishers have incentives for developers related to scores; get a higher average Metascore, get bonuses. Because the game typically sells a lot better. There's a reason former EA boss John Riccitiello constantly said in his interviews that they strive to put out 9+ games. That wasn't for reputation purposes. It was for sales. All you did is cite a few games in all of history that didn't necessarily rocket to success because of high reviews. But even then, most of them did a million times better than they ever would've had they been panned by critics. The other reality? Reviews are not entirely "opinions." That's wrong. For more, check our recent interview with DualShockers News Editor Giuseppe Nelva.
I'd argue a lot of what you're talking about relates more to the games quality than the score and review scores are being used as a simple metric to define said quality. Like, if John Riccitiello said they strive for "high quality" games, then it would be a lot more vague* than saying "9+". Anyway, we can argue both sides of this all day, but in the end it's one belief vs another. Ultimately I don't believe reviews have a huge impact on sales, since there are countless games that scored 78+ on Metacritic, but didn't do terribly well in terms of sales. I mean, you mention I cited a few examples, but I can keep going if I had to. Theres still Yakuza 3, Yakuza 4, Persona 4 (many people on N4G consider the the best Vita game and a must own with a 93 MC average...), Muramasa, Dragon's Crown, Ninja Gaiden and plenty more. Trust me, I could keep listing titles all day, but the point remains the same. That just because a game is critically successful, doesn't mean it will be commercial successful. But I digress, since this starts to get more conceptual and I rather not argue about concepts / theories all day. "Reviews are not entirely "opinions." That's wrong." Where did I say they were? "...the reality is that their opinions have a very small impact on what people do." Thats all I said, though I would argue that your statement is wrong regardless. Ultimately everything boils down to opinion, since "facts" can be interpreted differently and held with different regards. In fact, I have the perfect examples of this. According to MC, Nintendo Power gave SSFIV (3DS) a score of 90, Dead or Alive Dimensions (3DS) also got a score of 90 and BlazBlue CSII (3DS) only scored 85 points. Now, going off straight up facts, unlike SSFIV and DoA, BlazBlue CSII doesn't support standby (when you close the 3DS, the screen turns off), it doesn't have online, nor does it even support the ****ing thumbstick. Yet regardless of these pretty glaring problems (in my opinion), whomever reviewed it thought the game was an 85. Now, if you can't tell me thats purely opinion, then I don't know what to say. "For more, check our recent interview with DualShockers News Editor Giuseppe Nelva." Real creditable source. * For instance, SCEE says "Get top-rated * games on PS4, PS3 and PSVita at no extra cost" in regards to PlayStation Plus and then defines top-rated as something scoring 70+ on Metacritic.
Should the review score even matter in the first place? Try games and make up your own opinions robots!!
The actual scores hardly ever matter to me. I focus more on what the complains are. If the complaint is the save points are to far and you die too much, I tend to want the game more, if it is a genre that I like to play. This is why the first splinter cell and morrowind were my favorites of those respective series.
Gamers are far too reliant on reviews. Best opinions are your own.
Reviews can still be helpful, especially what they say as opposed to a general score. I think we are lucky now that we have Youtube, Twitch and other sources as our leisure as well.
They don't matter anyways, if you enjoy it. why should it matter if the review scores are low?
The point is that it helps to guide your decision. There are always outliers.
No most reviewers will give it 10s for the name cod because they are afraid of fan backlash or if theyre major sites Activision backlash. Call of duty games should get 5-7s because of how poor they always are.
But the games arent poor the series is simply worn out and fans are fatigued because theres so little innovation and change but he games arent inherently bad
That is true but any other franchise does what COD does there score is lowered for repeating and not innovating. But COD gets a free pass every year. I feel they should have been getting sevens for every game after MW2
@resi5 Yes they are bad. They have poor map designs, the gameplay is stale, stiff, and too easy, the character designs are bland, the balance in the game is atrocious, and the online stability is either really bad or really buggy making cheaters and hackers rampant. I don't know about you but none of those things makes a game good. It's finally starting to click in some peoples heads that COD will never change, never be a proper sequel and through in new ideas to freshen the gameplay up while improving the old ideas that worked well.
When's the last time you saw a CoD get a 10 from any reputable source? Check the Metascore for Ghosts, if you please.
MEtacritic is a horrible source but Ghost was the start of the fall. Every issue people had with Ghost was very much alive in the past games. I was glad when Ghosts got poor reception.
Don't CODs always get 9-10 regardless?
I think totalbiscuit talks about this subject in one of his videos. On average, If you compare a 9/10 game and an 8/10 game you'll actually see a quite significant difference in sales. There are of course exceptions. The number rating system is flawed and shouldn't really be used if the goal of the review is to show the consumer what's good or bad with a game. A lot of people will just look at the score instead of what the reviewer has to say. I remember seeing Infamous:SS and Titanfall (just using recent examples, I'm not trying to say one is better than the other) get scores as low as 6 or whatever. Did anyone read the reviews? No. Instead they were immediately labeled as click baits, biased and so on even though the complaints the reviewer had were very much legitimate. There are also instances where the score IS used as click bait and that fucks the system even more.
Well said, scores are a load of rubbish most the time. Ive enjoyed some 5/10s far more than some 9/10s. I prefer reviews that don't give a score and instead a detailed list of pros and cons.
I think a large percentage of people who love and buy "CALL of DUTY" games, do not even watch or read reviews!!!
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.