Bloodborne; Did The Critics Get it Wrong?

Bloodborne is a PS4 exclusive action RPG that has received critical praise across the board. It is developed by From Software, a company best know for the punishingly difficult Souls series of games. Several very interesting articles have highlighted that despite the rave reviews Bloodborne is clearly not a game for everyone and further questioned whether the critical reception of Bloodborne is a failure of gaming journalism in general.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
the_dark_one1208d ago

Oh my, we get a game ,The Order, that received alot of mixed amd low scores and straight away we get articles that that means doom for sony, now we get bloodborn, that is receiving very high scores we get articles saying critics got it wrong. Lol
Is this ever going to end when it comes to ps4 exclusives? I remember aswell articles on killzone and infamous for not being good enough. Any way for this, bloodborne, personaly is not a game that i would play, i like more to watch some streams like i did for dark souls, is getting praise from many critics cause its a good game and its being reviewed for what it is and not for what it isnt. When they say the game is not for everyone, that goes for every game out there, after all we all are different type of gamers and we have perferences of our own

ArchangelMike1208d ago

Read the article - it is asking if critics have overrated Bloodborne. The author anwers his own questin - 'no' they haven't. He acknowledges that 'games are not for everyone' and therefore encourages gamer to read review and oponion pieces.

The authors use of statistical data to prove his poisition in unecessary though.

Timesplitter141208d ago (Edited 1208d ago )

so basically it's just a clickbait?

nix1208d ago

"Bloodborne; Did The Critics Get it Wrong?"


That's the article in one word.

Thank me later.

nX1208d ago

Journalists are really poor beings, I wouldn't want to be paid for writing this kind of stuff.

ChronoJoe1208d ago


No it's not clickbait, the website in question is actually quite unique in that he uses stastistical comparisons to quantify answers to these questions. In this case he is comparing user scores, to critic scores (both present on metacritic), for statistical significance.

There is no statistical significance between them, therefore he makes the assertion that 'critics got it right'. It's an interesting approach and perspective in my opinion, although it neglects certain factors such as the often biased motivation of user scores.

Bloodborne has 10% negative scores, these reviewers rate the game, usually at 1 or 0. Now, do we think for a moment that these users made an attempt to review the game fairly? Some of them are clearly aren't genuine, while others intentionally do not use the rating scale correctly.

One user review for bloodborne writes "It's also a bit too easy for me. Not a 9/10, but a solid 6/10", then rates the game a 2? So it's a 6/10 yet you choose to rate it a 2? They rate not with intentions to provide an objective review but to influence the aggregate score in their direction as much as possible, thereby making their perspective and motivations as presented on metacritic, entirely distinct from an actual consumer and ultimately, entirely irrelevant when presented in this 1-10 numerical form.

Additionally, you get the low scores that merely exist because of the games platform exclusivity, some of the negative reviews are clearly posted by those who have not played the game. This makes the user reviews worth less and less. Heck, the star rating system on the Playstation store is technically more valid than metacritics open system. At least the storefront ensures that everyone that rates the game has actually played it.

LordMaim1208d ago

@Timesplitter14: Clickbait... from a scientist!

admiralvic1208d ago

@ ChronoJoe

No, I would still say it's click bate. While I agree with your overall point and find it sad the writer overlooked this information, there is no reason for games to be judged off their overall appeal. TV, movies, books and the like aren't judged that way, so who cares if Bloodborne appeals to a niche? It's still a good game in their eyes and ultimately accomplishes its goals, which makes it a good game.

kurruptor1208d ago

Clickbait to me.

No one was questioning the validity of the ratings. They're just looking for hits.

I also don't see the purpose in comparing critic reviews to user reviews, when user reviews are extremely biased.

XBLSkull1208d ago (Edited 1208d ago )

I had the same "complaint" or whatever you want to call it a few days ago. As you can see by the user score there are people who don't necessarily like the game. At this time the critics are 66 positive reviews and no mixed/negative. That to me just stands out that the people who reviewed this game for the most part are already fans of the souls series. There are people who won't like the game and it seems strange that not even one "critic" had an opinion other than positive.

The game is great, I would give it a positive review myself of 85/100, there are aspects of the game as this article points out that are repetitive with no good reason to be except to waste time. Overall though that metacritic score is slowly coming down to be more in line with what I think it should be. After all, an 8/10 score is still positive, and helps to balance out those nine perfect scores for a game that certainly isn't perfect.

MysticStrummer1208d ago

"Several very interesting articles have highlighted that despite the rave reviews Bloodborne is clearly not a game for everyone"

No game ever released is for everyone. Several very interesting articles were written by people who liked The Order, but those were laughed at here.

"...and therefore encourages gamer to read review and oponion pieces."

I read those things, but watching streams and chatting with the streamer is more informative in my opinion.

Choosing your entertainment based only on the best reviewed examples, whether it's books movies or games, is guaranteed to show you that lots of the "best" things are things you won't like, and you'll miss out on other things that the consensus didn't like but you would have.

CernaML1208d ago

@XBLSkull You are such a bad liar its not even funny. First you say its only worth an 85/100 and now you claim the score is slowly dropping to be more in line of what you think it should be? Its at a 92 after 70 critics. It wont be anywhere near what you think it should be, troll.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 1208d ago
fiveby91208d ago

I have to agree that there is some guerrilla marketing efforts at work here. As this is exclusive I imagine it serves the interests of another company to diminish a competing brand. So the theory goes if you can't prop up your own brand at least diminish that of your rival. Such is life in the business world but it smacks of contrived criticism.

Khajiit861208d ago

This is the too much HATE not enough APPRECIATE gen.

Antifan1208d ago

Funny that you mentioned that.
The guy who posted this article also posted the "The Order: 1886 Deserves Its Mediocre Review Scores" article.
Yeah, that pretty much exposed the hypocrisy and lack of credibility.

Kurt Russell1207d ago

He wrote an article stating that The Order 1886 deserves mediocre scores, and another stating that critics weren't wrong to review Bloodbourne highly (albeit clickbait title).

I am assuming you don't understand the definition of hypocrisy, and never went beyond reading the N4G headline.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1207d ago
Bennibop1208d ago

Hated souls series but I absolutely love Bloodborne Think it is because it plays quicker and you are more on the offence.

SilentNegotiator1208d ago

While I loved both, I can definitely see why someone could love Bloodborne but not Dark Souls. I mean, I hated all of the magic elements and how the roll button couldn't avoid the range of a karate chop from a midget.

nitus101208d ago

In the Souls series you did not have to use magic and against a player who is fairly good with shield and weapons in the game a magic user even at higher levels stands little or no chance. The exception were the Pyromancy hand flame and the Priest knock-back spell since they activate in less then a second however you have to be very close to your attacker.

Sure a hit with a powerful spell can be an one-hit kill but it takes time to release and in the interim a fighter can be up close and very personal.

Personally I found a combination of magic and weaponry with more of an emphasis on weaponry was the best way to play the game. Ranged spells while useful for weak slow moving enemies where no use in close combat. Poison arrows in Anor Londo were IMHO essential, charging was almost a sure way to die.

As for rolling I only found this useful if I was only lightly armoured and it is actually possible to do a back flip although back flipping off a cliff is embarrassing. Rolling with heavy armour is a sure way to drain your stamina leaving you wide open.

Malice-Flare1208d ago

i blame the writer for the click-bait title, but read the article. people may be missing the point here...

pivotplease1208d ago

That's usually how it goes. Journalists start by trying to prove something relatively arbitrary (especially at this point). In this case statistics are used, but there is still a lot wrong with metacritic's system. Then complete the nearly pointless observation article with a click-bait title which often implies the opposite of the article's message. Put a bow on it. Leave it at someone's doorstep on fire so that said person can step on it. Congratulations. You are now a journalist.

Scholarly articles do the exact same thing. So many crappy theses and conclusions that tend to be common sense and/or utterly useless.

nitus101208d ago

Bloodborne like the Souls series is Action/Adventure RPG with a "hack and slash" component. If a gamer does not like that genres then they will most likely not like that game. Even if a player does like that particular genres they may not like the unforgiving but fair difficulty preferring something more easier.

You definitely can't please everyone especially those who don't like a challenge in a particular genres. Still they are entitled to their opinion, however they look rather silly if they think that only their view matter.

SharnOfTheDEAD1208d ago

Luckily no they haven't got it wrong, but people that are used to being mothered in modern games might not enjoy it because to be frank they gone soft and expect the game to be played for them. This game literally kicks you out the door and says good luck, there's no great big glowing icons or hour long tutorials, this is a game you have to conquer yourself. Help comes from the community. If it wasn't for frame issues and co-op problems this game would be a solid 10, if they get fixed then it's nothing short of outstanding!

This whole thing about it being hard, yeah it is, but how is a death any different to 10 deaths in a game of COD or BF? People that are avoiding this because it's not got a very easy mode need to get a grip and give it a go, learn to play it because Bloodborne is bloody brilliant and is without a doubt the best game on new gen at the moment.

Show all comments (46)
The story is too old to be commented.