Uncharted’s Metacritic Score Really Doesn’t Matter (Pressurecast One-Hundred-Thirty)

Disney Cancels Disney Infinity, Microsoft Shuts Down Project Spark, and Konami Makes a Ton of Cash! Plus Impressions of Doom and Uncharted 4!

[LuckyChamCham]

Meh, I doubt it'd reach a 95 now even though it was so close before. But it could probably reach 94 again once the rest of the reviews add up.

[Krangs_Uncle]

Yea, I don't think it would have ever gotten to 95 to be honest.. Kind of doubtful it will hit 94 too (although I believe it deserves it) - there's not many more reviews to come in now.

[Genuine-User]

It was a few entries away from 95. The washington post really hit the meta average quite hard.

The negative user reviews are a sight to behold. lol

http://i.cubeupload.com/Dqd...
http://i.cubeupload.com/trL...
http://i.cubeupload.com/y3j...
http://i.cubeupload.com/MqD...
http://i.cubeupload.com/VfK...

[rainslacker]

@Genuine

My favorite is the guy who gave it a zero for it not being on PC and he couldn't play it because he didn't have a PS4.

I mean, I'm not one for censoring negative scores, even if it's done with fan boy malice as many of these zeros are, but if you openly admit to not playing it, should that score be considered in the overall average?

In any case, how can any game except one that is not even a game, or completely broken upon boot be scored with a zero? I don't care how much one dislikes a game, there are very few games that exist which deserve a score that low, particularly in light of a game that does so much so well.

[krouse93]

I just don't understand the GTA V reviews to be honest, how can it consistently get 95's? Even as a remastered game. It really doesn't seem justified. In every way Uncharted 4 is a better game than GTA V & GTA V remastered.

[Krangs_Uncle]

It's because GTAV is multi-plat.. There are less people with bias to bring it down.

[Master-H]

Because the GTA games are usually overrated. Just look at GTA IV with that 98 score. Most bs score i've ever seen.

[Movefasta1993]

GTA4 was amazing.

[nix]

GTAIV was boring.

[WellyUK]

GTA V isn't much better either.

[jb227]

Yeah I tend to agree. That's probably because I like more focused & pointed experiences. All of the systems in Uncharted are vital, whereas something like GTA will have time devoted to stuff like Yoga that no one really cares about, it's just a feature to make the world feel more deep & engaging.

The core gameplay loop of open world games on the whole are just old hat to me. I will always enjoy a focused gameplay experience, but the open world model of fetch quests & one offs never really adds up to much for me beyond a decently fun way to waste a few hours. I've never really been impacted by anything in a GTA game aside from those rare moments of a great song coming up for the first time or a perfectly structured single mission. There's just too much padding in everything else to really highlight those moments.

[ccgr]

It's 93 on OpenCritic too

[Aloy-Boyfriend]

A damn shame that red number stained its score when it doesn't evem have a single yellow one, but nothing can be done. Still 93 is high and any dev would kill to reach that number.

Rants masqueraded as review shouldn't drag a metascore down. There was no explanation as to why he though the story was a "trainwreck." there was no info about the game of objective view on it, just hateful remarks. Opinions can be wrong and readers have all right to call shenanigans on shit like that. And if you have played the game, it's impossible not to facepalm at what he wrote.

[Rookie_Monster]

The only thing that matters really is the majority of reviews are positive and the person playing it.

From the 4/10 UC4 Washington Post review, to the 1/5 Halo 4 review by Quarter of Three, to a 85/100 for the Orders 1886 from Dualshockers, troll and "out-of-the-norm" reviews can sometime happens that is differ than the majority of the reviews. It shouldn't affect anything just like if a movie received a 99% fresh rate at rottentomatoes and a 1% rotten rate from a couple of opinions that is differ than the majority. Does that change anything, really?

We are putting to much into this topic already, we should just let it go. Let bygone be bygone.

[magiciandude]

"We are putting to much into this topic already, we should just let it go. Let bygone be bygone."

Exactly rookie. Well said! Fanboys are seriously upset over nothing at all. I never was this upset over then 1/5 scores MS exclusives get. They're just scores.

[gangsta_red]

Exactly Rookie, disagree with the review, disagree with the views but what you don't do is go wild with anger and start spinning conspiracies and blaming people for your own troubles and calling to get something banned or removed because you don't personally like it.

Something a lot of these fanboys just can't understand let alone fathom.

[rainslacker]

I hate to nitpick, but that 85 from dualshockers for The Order wasn't a troll review. I think he actually liked the game, because to this day, he still says he liked the game. It was higher than most, but he backed up his reasons for giving it that score.

Troll reviews are the ones that go out of their way to find things to criticize, up to and including things that have nothing to do with the game(like, it's not TLOU for instance). Troll reviews are made to incite emotions to garner hits....and TO review from DS was not trollish. It wasn't even that much of an anomaly, like a 4/10 for UC4, or a 1/5 for Halo, just slightly higher than many others.

Otherwise, in most cases, the outlayer scores aren't really that big of a deal. It caused a point to drop off the MS in this case, but 93 is still pretty darn good, and much more than most games get. If anyone were going to MC and used that one review to form a purchasing decision on the game, then that's them being stupid, same way if I didn't buy a product off amazon which had 5 one star reviews but had hundreds of 4 and 5 star reviews. Having the low score may make someone want to see what it says, but I do at least want to believe that people would read that review and be like, "WTF, this isn't a review".

[maniacmayhem]

So because he liked the game it's not a troll review? Even though more than half of the other sites all over the net thought it was shit?

You see Rainslacker, this is why labeling a review you personally don't like is wrong. Because now you have made up a definition for something that only fits your criteria and standard.

A troll review can easily go the other way as Rookie said. Giving praise and cheers to an obvious flawed and crappy game could be considered just as much as a troll as the one who goes out their way to trash it. The only difference is you won't see the flaws in a review that is praising the game or company you love.

Don't you think that this to could be used to garner hits and views also, especially if that game caters to a fanbase that will see it and then take that reviewer in as one of their own and then repeatedly go back because they trust that person? What's the saying, "More bees with honey".

[rainslacker]

No, it's not a troll review because he liked it, and gave his reasons for liking it in an objective manner. He may have been clouded by bias in forming his review, but that doesn't instantly indicate troll.

The review of TWP was a troll review, because he openly admitted to not liking the series, and used his personal bias to discredit the game, while barely talking about the game itself. He used the review to soapbox his own beliefs which he knew would be inflammatory. That's what makes it a troll review.

I can reasonably see why the DS review was a decent review, even if others disagree with it. One can not read TWP review without thinking that the reviewer either has an axe to grind, or has some sort of agenda, or he's only doing it to troll. Something which the author himself admits to being perfectly justified.

I labeled the review as a poor review based on it doing nothing to allow the reader to decide if the game would be something they'd enjoy. beyond that, I didn't ask for anything other than TWP to see if it fit within their review standards, which is on them, and that the meta be removed because no score was assigned on the publication itself.

As of yet, no one has been able to say why it's a good review based on objective criteria, but please, give your detailed analysis to show others why you think it's a good review. Walk away from the fan boy part of it, and review the review yourself, so at least we know if you think it's a fair and equitable review that holds some sort of editorial standard. I'd be curious on why you think it's a good review, and why it should be taken seriously, or is of acceptable enough quality to accept the author is qualified to write a review.

No one has a right to demand the review be removed entirely, but people had a right to act on principal on the MC score, despite it ending up being not what everyone believed.

Been a while since I read the DS review of TO, but don't recall it being trollish. I'm not going to look it up now, but given that it got an 85, and not a higher score, I'd imagine they at least found some things wrong with it that the author felt warranted a down vote.

Can positive reviews be used to garner hits? Sure. Was the DS one used in such a manner? I don't believe so. I liked the order, and would give it a 7-7.5. Many others would as well. It's not so out there for a score to be 1 point higher or lower than the score another person would give it, so if it was meant as a troll review, it didn't really try too hard to incite the community.

Unfortunately, I don't think the "more flies with honey" really works for reviews, or most news to be honest. People on the internet are more attracted to the negative. While there are poor reviewers out there who assign scores which would likely be seen as too high, I rarely see it in an attempt to troll or soap box an agenda. I sometimes see it as bias infecting objective analysis, which makes it a poor review, but not really trolling.