Did Troy Baker Make A Mistake In Signing The 'Uncharted 4' Petition?

Shaz Mohsin writes: "On one hand, I completely understand his gut reaction to the review and instant need to go forth in doing whatever he can to spread that petition. I completely understand that when you’re invested so deeply in a project for years, you want so badly for it to succeed. And when something comes in the way of its full potential, you want to do everything to make things right. But at the same time, you have to judge your position and see how your actions look in the broad scheme of things."

Read Full Story >>
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
phoenix_dusk1282d ago

A criticism about a criticism over an unjust criticism.

I guess according to this blogger, if it doesn't hurt you then just shut up and deal with it.

Current journalism, there for you.

Maybay1282d ago

This is unbelievable. The Twilight Princess 8.8 review aftermath was bad, but this!? I'm appalled by how much of an issue this is to having an actor sign a petition to remove "a person's personal opinion" from metacritic.

naruga1282d ago (Edited 1282d ago )

seriously ....who the f.. takes seriously a metacritic score? me not..only if a game has been unanimously scored very low may create to me some doubts...also this thing with Troy makes him even more likable as mistake or not seems he truly likes his work

Aloy-Boyfriend1281d ago

The problem is not the personal opinion. The problem is Metacritic added a score that wasn't there

Sunny_D1281d ago


Tell me what score did the Washigton score give Uncharted 4 in the first place? I'll wait. Once you finally figure out the problem, then you can see why.

feraldrgn1281d ago

But that's the thing, it's not someone's personal opinion, the actual review... Has no score.
Literally no number is attached to the review, Metacritic put it there so the fault lies in them.

Basically the score is an error.

Dark_Knightmare21281d ago

It was more a rant than anything and almost nothing in the so called "review" was truly about 4 but the series has a whole. I don't think people want it taken down they just want it moved to the unscored section since the review has no score

r2oB1281d ago

It amazes me how oblivious some people are. Metacritic is a site that aggregates scores from other sites and weighs them for an average score. There is an absolute requirement when dealing with averages. Because the review they used lacked an actual score, it does not meet the requirement to be used. That is the only reason needed to have the review (whether good or bad) removed. They intentionally circumvented basic logic (logic being you cannot have an undefined measurement in an equation for averages) by adding their own score to someone else's scoreless review. Metacritic, a site that supposedly does not make reviews themselves, basically reviewed a review (someone decided to assess, form an opinion, and score the review; technically making that score a review itself), and used that.

No matter what angle you look from, it's wrong based on principle. Therefore it should be remedied. Even if they scored it a 10 and it increased the rating, it should be removed and put in the appropriate section for scoreless reviews, since the actual review had no score.

rainslacker1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

I really feel like this is a bad joke. All those jokes like, "how many of something does it take to screw in a light bulb".

Now the joke is, "How many times must you repeat what the actual issue is before other people will realize it".

I mean, I could understand it if it was someone who hasn't commented on the issue yet, or just came into it all. But you get others who keep making comments which have nothing to do with the issue, and instead prescribe the whole thing boils down to nothing more than fan boy crying, despite being told in quite simple terms, with all clarity in tact, what the actual issue is, and they don't do anything to actually discuss that issue. but then you see them in the next article calling out the fan boys again.

How can anyone not see this as a joke by now, or see where the real fan boy problem lies....and that's in people who willfully ignore issues to serve an agenda.

So, once again.

The issue is MetaCritic assigned a score to an unscored review.

Now...discuss your feelings on that, and forget the fan boy crap.

(aimed at everyone who believes this is about upset fans of the game, not just you maybay).

OB1Biker1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

I'm appalled by how the media arrogantly snap at readers for daring to give back feedback while they basically make a living out of their readers.
How giving your opinion on gaming journalism is a bad thing? Petitions are shameful? Maybe all comments should be removed if they say anything bad about gaming journalism? How about every comment should end with 'we love you big Brother'?

DragonKnight1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

Do people forget that there are publishers out there, and I'm not sure that Sony is one but that's not really relevant, who will base whether or not developers receive a bonus based on metacritic scores? Metacritic holds too much power over the financial success of development studios and needs to be reined in. The fact that they feel like they can just add a score to a review that doesn't have one is a marked level of arrogance and hubris that can't go unchecked. Troy Baker adding his support to this has to come not solely from pride from the game, as it is just one review among many that gave the game perfect scores, but from the knowledge that metacritic holds too much sway and this whole incident is proof of it.

When you can take a scoreless review and use it to make a game take a huge hit in its aggregate score, at the very least you make your site look biased and at the worst you make your site look like it's somehow superior and can do whatever it wants to mess with the lives of developers. That is wrong, and anyone who disagrees has some real issues.

**EDIT** The review was not satire. This has been confirmed already on the Washington Post by an editor.

trooper_1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

People like you still don't get its not about the freaking review.

Angeljuice1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

It wasn't a personal opinion, it was a joke article. A piece of satire that was only ever meant to be fun. Metacritic used the joke review in their overall score and assigned a score to it.
It is nobody's personal opinion at all.

1281d ago
UnHoly_One1281d ago

Wasn't it confirmed that:

1) This was not a satire review

2) They don't post a score with their reviews, but they send it in to Metacritic separately

Yes, here we go.

That score, although not displayed on their review, was legit, so everyone needs to quit freaking out about it.

Wallstreet371281d ago

This bothers you because what? lol You lose sleep over this. Stop with your drama queen hyperbole.

People are making it a big deal not because its a low score but because how it was handled and its obvious it was a troll score.

gangsta_red1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

So funny to see others tell the people who can't believe this is an issue to not make a big deal out of it when there is an actual petition out there to remove ONE bad score.

The review was not satire, why are certain folks refusing to believe this? It's extreme comedy now.

And again, TWP has always gave MC scores to post on their site from their reviews. Again why aren't people taking notice of this.

LuisAlmeida1281d ago


True! And more...the problem is metacritic count with an unprofessional review, hurting his reputation. And i think that review is a satirical one, not the true review!

+ Show (13) more repliesLast reply 1281d ago
AndrewLB1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

@Rainslacker @r2ob

How Metacritic computes Metascores:

"How do you compute METASCORES?
The basic concept is the same for each of the genres currently included in our site. Let's use a fictional movie--'Iron Chef vs. Godzilla'--as an example.

Our staffers will go through every publication on our Movies Publications list (see below) looking for reviews for Iron Chef vs. Godzilla. For each review found, we will take the score given by the critic and convert it to a 0-100 point scale. (For those critics who do not provide a score, we'll assign a score from 0-100 based on the general impression given by the review.). These individual critic scores are then averaged together to come up with an overall score.

This overall score, or METASCORE, is a weighted average of the individual critic scores. Why a weighted average? When selecting our source publications, we noticed that some critics consistently write better (more detailed, more insightful, more articulate) reviews than others. In addition, some critics and/or publications typically have more prestige and respect in their industry than others. To reflect these factors, we have assigned weights to each publication (and, in the case of movies and television, to individual critics as well), thus making some publications count more in the METASCORE calculations than others.

In addition, for our movie and music sections, all of the weighted averages are normalized before generating the METASCORE. To put it another way that should be familiar to anyone who has taken an exam in high school or college, all of our movies and albums are graded on a curve. Thus the METASCORE may be higher or lower than the true weighted average of the individual reviews, thanks to this normalization calculation. Normalization causes the scores to be spread out over a wider range, instead of being clumped together. Generally, higher scores are pushed higher, and lower scores are pushed lower. Unlike in high school, this is a good thing, since it provides more of a distinction between scores and allows you to better compare scores across movies (or albums).

The resulting METASCORE, then, is a good indication of how a particular movie/game/album/television show was reviewed. The better the reviews, the higher the score will be; the worse the reviews, the lower the score will be. Ideally, if reviews are completely divided between good and bad, the METASCORE should be close to 50."

Uncharted 4 wasn't the first game/movie/album/show where a review had a score assigned to it based on what was said in the review, and it wont be the last. In fact, two scores that were included in the metascore for ROTR were from articles where they didn't give a numerical score yet nobody said a word about it. Even though I don't agree with the review of Uncharted 4 that everyone has gotten unhinged over, if I were to have given it a numerical score based on what the author wrote, it would probably have been in the 40-50 range as well.

rainslacker1281d ago

Thanks for this.

I remember reading something along those lines before for their site, but it was a while ago. I couldn't remember how they get their scores into their database, and even if they were the one's doing it themselves or done by the sites.

This is in direct contradiction to their twitter comment that TWP assigned the score and put it into their system. Maybe it's different for games though, since this quote only refers to movies. TWP guy in the comments section of the review wasn't sure how the score got assigned.

So, when maniac comes to attack me in the comments in this thread, maybe he'll understand why there is confusion on my, and many others part on the topic.

Otherwise, yes, given the text of the review, I would agree, 40-50 would seem like the appropriate score to assign to the review...if not lower. Until all this happened, I wasn't aware MC, or anyone really, assigned a score to an unscored review, because MC itself has a place to list those reviews. IMO, it's not a good practice, because it allows for bias to be introduced by a 3rd party.

Anyhow, I just wanted to say thanks, because this is a nice reasoned comment which helps people understand better. Something I'd like to see more of, but think I"m going to move away from commenting around here. There is too little of this kind of comments on this sites threads....but couldn't leave without showing some appreciation. Cheers. Have fun, because that's what gaming is about.:)

maniacmayhem1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

But Rainslacker, there was no confusion by you. I have already read countless posts where you explicitly said that MC themselves put the score up. No where in any of your recent comments were you confused or not sure until you actually saw a tweet from MC themselves then all of a sudden you vaguely remembered something of the sort.

It still doesn't explain why you never did any research or gathered information or even looked up this quote here, something you berated Ace on. I've been trying to ask you that but funny enough I'm getting no replies from you, strange since you chastise others for the same thing. That's the thing Rainslacker you have been playing the bully and talking down on so many people who are questioning the crazed fanbase, calling them names, telling them their idiots, that no one will take them serious, constantly attacking them, but now, poor Rainslaker was confused and didn't really know what was going on and how things worked. My how quick that confidence from just a couple of hours ago disappeared.

***because this is a nice reasoned comment which helps people understand better. Something I'd like to see more of,***

Maybe you should practice what you preach you hypocrite. Before you belittle people who asked you about become a designer.

***There is too little of this kind of comments on this sites threads***

Kind, all he did was show you what everyone else was trying to tell you. But you are so busy looking at it through sony fanboy lenses that you didn't want to listen. Love the poor me, victim act you have going on, fits a person like you perfectly.

So now that all the information has been presented to Mr. Slacker and I have asked him to discuss this new evidence, instead of discussing the issues that he so fondly and routinely leaves in every comment, he has decided to leave N4G because of all the bickering. Oh the convenience of it all.

never4get1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

#FreeSpeech #Liberty > Anti-Free Speech Fanboys.

Wallstreet371281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

Thats the stupidest thing i ever heard. So let me get this straight the score they gave was not based on on the review of the game but off of a review of a review with no numerical value of the game lol hahahaha So if a reviewer is lazy and one day says &uck it i wont post a numerical review just right some bs to get paid they as in metacritic will then give it a numerical review not based off solely the review of a game but off of how good the review was written?

"When selecting our source publications, we noticed that some critics consistently write better (more detailed, more insightful, more articulate)" So if he was more articulate, less trollish the score and weight would have been higher lol fohhhhh

If ppl dont see something wrong with this than idk what to say. Their system is very flawed and not transparent at all on what magazines or reviewers get weighted higher. If you have a problem with reviewers reviews dont count them at all!!!! that weighted system is reall dumb.

Add to that the fact that you have some games with only a handful of reviews aggregated into it thus having higher metas and the whole system is flawed. A good example is you have Ocarina of time Zelda with a very high meta but its only that high because they only counted like 20 reviews lol yet you have a game like Uncharted 2 with over 100 reviews added to it still with mid 90's score now which game in reality has a higher meta? Uncharted 2 of course because we all know the more reviews aggregated into a score the higher the probability it will be lowered. Not saying the game isnt good but having games with alot less reviews in its aggregate and comparing them to games with tons of reviews is not fair at all.

rainslacker1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )


Actually, Andrew's quote from MC contradicts the tweet sent out by MC. MC is saying in the quote that they themselves go through the sites to get the score, and assign a score where one wasn't assigned. Plain as day. It's in the 2nd paragraph of Andrews post since I'm sure you skipped it to find what you could attack me over. That I don't recall reading in the past, but do recall reading something like the rest above before but couldn't remember the details of it all, which is why I wondered if TWP submitted the score. TWP guy claimed he didn't know how they got the score they did. The tweet made me think I was wrong, but now I think the tweet was not telling the truth.

I know you get a hard on the second I make a mistake, and go to great effort to try and discredit me and my entire comment history, in fact you can't discuss an issue with me without trying to do so, but maybe you can at least keep it a little on subject. Unlike you, I'm willing to own my mistakes, and take information and reform an opinion. Right now, your assuming the tweet is accurate despite it being contradictory to MC own policy, and calling me out for assuming what everyone else is, but to me, it seems to be reasonable to see why everyone is so confused over who did what, because no one is taking responsibility for the actual assignment of the score.

Even still, with all your effort to try and discredit me, you still seem to not have given your thoughts on if scores should be assigned by a third party to reviews that had none given to begin with. That's a more important issue than if I was wrong. Maybe not to you, but to the vast majority, because the vast majority don't care what I have to say. There, I discussed the new evidence provided by Andrew, gave my thoughts on the evidence provided by both TWP comments from it's staff in the review itself and MC tweet. We should be covered, so discuss the actual issue, because the issue of the assignment of the score hasn't changed since the beginning.

gangsta_red1281d ago


Always deflecting the issue or changing the subject. You asked about why Metacritic assigned the score, you were told they had no hand in that. Now how about you discuss and give us your thoughts on what Maniac, I and others have brought up to you countless times.

TWP has always sent MC numbered scores and the evidence is right there on their site for past reviews which have in turn have numbered scores on Metacritic, why the concern for Uncharted now?

Don't you think it was a knee jerk reaction to try and blame Metacritic? That the petition was overblown and taken out of context especially now that you know the full story?

Don't you also believe it's petty that fanboys have taken issue with one negative review when all others have been more than stellar, that the game has sold tremendously, that it is currently sitting at a 93?

Now Rainslacker, how about we discuss this instead?

DigitalRaptor1280d ago (Edited 1280d ago )

@ gangsta_red

Just like you're always cherry-picking only on the parts of somebody's comment that you want to capitalise on and ignoring the majority parts that serve to correct. Carry on.

freshslicepizza1279d ago

"Just like you're always cherry-picking only on the parts of somebody's comment that you want to capitalise on and ignoring the majority parts that serve to correct. Carry on. "

off-topic once again. how about you try and refute what others say and keep things on topic? gangsta wants to keep on topic and actually discuss this, you want to talk about him yet get upset when people do this to you. stop being a hypocrite.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1279d ago
bigjim581282d ago (Edited 1282d ago )

He realized he acted in haste and made a mistake.

Aloy-Boyfriend1281d ago

Nah. He wouldn't have done this if there wasn't something fishy going on.

The mistake is on Metacritic

rainslacker1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

The only mistake was that given his part in the game, he should have remained disconnected from the controversy. That's just typically expected for his position.

He has every right to believe that it's not equitable for MC to do what they did, and he shouldn't be criticized for believing that ethical standards should be in place in journalism. He has more at stake in the ethics of all this than we do, but again, it's typical to stay disconnected from the controversy...which is why he said he made a mistake, not because he thought the review was justified...or at least that a score was assigned to the review.

maniacmayhem1281d ago

He should be criticized because now he's apart of the madness and overreaction that fanboys have spawned.

That is why he made a mistake, because after his knee jerk reaction he sat back and thought to himself. Why the f*** should I care, not only did i get paid but the game is getting praise from every corner of the hemisphere.

He made a mistake because he lowered himself to a toxic fanbase that can't seem to be satisfied with having a game that stands at an excellent score of 93.

Ricegum1281d ago


People like you really are failing to see what's going on here, you think it's just fan boy rubbish don't you.

Try to see the bigger picture, and not with fan boy goggles.

maniacmayhem1281d ago


The complete irony is astounding.

Let me guess, that Metacritic assigned a score to a review that never had a score, am I right?

Utalkin2me1281d ago


It's fairly obvious that this really annoys you. And i find it funny that it bothers you so much. All the while missing the whole point of what is actually going on.

OrangePowerz1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

Frankly I think that "people involved should stay disconnected and shut up" is complete and utter BS. Those are the people that spend years making those games, have insane working hours, don't see their families for longer times and go through high amounts of stress and then some idiotic rant comes along and craps on their game and MC makes up a score that downgrades their score and they should just shut up and take it? Also 1 point in score could make quite a difference in bonus payments for the people that worked their asses off.

Honestly I think the industry should speak out a lot more about the games "media" because it's rotten to it's core. The Washington Post article wasn't a proffesional review, it was laughable. If there is no score there is no score and you can't just make something up.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1281d ago
1281d ago
BrandanT1282d ago

So much for free speech. If you hear of something you don't like, you get mad and throw a tantrum for the words to be removed.

phoenix_dusk1281d ago

You are doing the same, dude. Trying to shut down people who did not like someone saying something that was an obvious pile of fecal matter.

BrandanT1281d ago

And now you're doing the same to me.
See the problem?

Bimkoblerutso1281d ago

Disagreeing with an opinion and asking for it to be stricken from the record are two completely different things. One is a disagreement, and the other is a little thing we call censorship.

Kenshin_BATT0USAI1281d ago

Sounds to me he's just criticizing the reaction not silencing it. That said wasn't the review suppose to be satire?

RufustheKing1281d ago

While i understand people trying to right an injustice it can be a slippy slope(a lesser one)towards social justice warriors. They too want to stop the injustice of sexism, racism and sexual orientionism and look what they have become: sexist, racist and sexual orientionist.

DragonKnight1281d ago

Removing a metascore is not censorship as the original review is still freely available on the Washington Post site proper. The issue is with metacritic, not the actual critic themselves. So many people don't know a thing about Free Speech and yet talk so comfortably about it.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1281d ago
Sunny_D1281d ago

Too much free speech huh? Cause being in a fascist society would be so much better right? Jesus, the irony.

1281d ago
Aloy-Boyfriend1281d ago

Well maybe that gives you the right to throw a shoe to the president...

Free speech also has its limits

iceman061281d ago

Freedom of speech indeed has limits AND doesn't come with it freedom from reaction or consequence.

rainslacker1281d ago

That's freedom of the press. They have different standards in Iraq.

DragonKnight1281d ago

A) Throwing a shoe is not free speech, it's free expression.

B) Freedom of Speech does not, or at least should not, have limits. It should have consequences, but not limits. When you place limits then you're saying that feelings are more important than ideas, and that stunts progress.

TheOneWhoIsTornApart1281d ago

@BrandanT: Dude this is not the same thing as having his article deleted from the internet or anything like that to silence him. All this is is taking his fake review off of Metacritic because it is causing a negaitve impact on the score of Uncharted 4. This is not censorship for fu** sake.

AndrewLB1281d ago

If you actually go to the website and read the comments section, you'd know that the review was not fake, it was not satire, and was an actual review.

Dark_Knightmare21281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

Lol you're doing the same thing. I'm so tired of this free speech excuse yeah he freely expressed his opinion in the click bait rant he wrote and people are free to criticize him on it. It goes both ways not just one way or the other and the free speech thing was never created to give your free reign to say whatever you won't with no repercussions or backlash it was to give everyone a right to express themselves and to have a voice.

AndrewLB1281d ago

Nobody is saying people don't have the right to criticize him. What people are saying is even though you might not agree with his opinion, he has every right to have it.

WelkinCole1281d ago

I am not sure if you guys are just ignorant or pretending to be ignorant.

This is not about the review itself or free speech. This is about ethics. This is about Meta giving a score for a review with no score which is highly unethical any way you put it.

When someone reviews and give a score they put their name to it which is the ethical thing to do. If you are going to be scathing and give a low score then you put your name to it. In this case the reviewer didn't give a score but someone else whom we don't know gave that score which is highly unethical.

But go on pretend that fans are blowing this out of proportion.

BrandanT1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

It takes intelligence to feign ignorance. I know exactly what I'm doing. I'm pretty sure people realized that an argument such as this goes both ways.

DLConspiracy1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

Personally, I am pretty disappointed with MetaCritic. I'm using my free speech to start a petition to have all scores below 10 (for Uncharted 4) removed from their site. I'm not alone. If we all sign it. We can make a difference.

AndrewLB1281d ago


He isn't trying to shut down anyone. He's pointing out this all too common trend in recent years where certain groups (usually social justice warriors) through mob tactics attempt to shut down and silence anyone whom they disagree with. This new liberal fascism is a product of the "safe spaces" crap on college campuses and is in direct opposition to the concept of open thought and freedom of speech. Advocates for free speech when faced with speech they disagree will opt for MORE speech. Debate, dialogue, and rational expression are their responses to opinions they disagree with. Not silencing the speaker.

TheOneWhoIsTornApart1281d ago

I agree with you about the sjw's trying to shut down or censor anything they disagree with but this is not one of those cases dude. I don't know how you can even compare the 2. This is a satire review so yes it should be removed from Metacritic because it is taking points off UC4's score. Some game developers hire people based on the Metacritic scores of games they work on so yes this should be fixed. This does not remove the review from the internet just the one site.

rainslacker1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

And he makes a valid point, because that is happening way too often, and we've all complained about it, but that's not the issue here. Unfortunately, some people are trying to say that's what's happening here, when in fact it's just people trying to say some unethical behavior is going on, and it's not acceptable.

When you look at the comments on this particular topic which are trying to discredit the petition, it's all about how fan boys are upset and trying to silence opinions contrary to their own. They aren't discussing if it's ethical for a 3rd party to assign a score, even when directly asked if they're OK with the practice. People keep saying that's what the issue is, but it goes ignored for what I can only assume is people wanting to make this into a fan boy back and forth.

I'll concede that the fervor for all this getting so much attention is due to the game it was assigned to, and likely would have gone unnoticed otherwise, as apparently, it's gone unnoticed in the past, but at the same time there is an issue here worth discussing, because at some point, this is likely to happen again to other games regardless of one's console or game preference. When the shoe's on the other foot, the people trying to say Sony fan boys are over reacting or using this to call out hypocrisy on a grand scale are going to have the same reaction, and when the Sony fan boys come and say, "you didn't have a problem with it for UC4", it will just end up with more hostility. If the issue goes away due to console wars making it impossible to address, then the issue never gets remedied with a satisfactory conclusion, and we'll just be right back here when it happens again, and likely, people will start looking for it more, particularly for the bigger exclusive releases.

To me, and to be on subject, I think Troy Baker had every reason to want to address the issue at hand. It's not like he's never been in a game that has scored low, and went on to contest it. Seems odd he would do so now for a singular low score among many great ones. So I can only assume he wasn't too pleased with it being assigned a score from a 3rd party, or that another scored review was not taken into account. I don't think he should have been criticized for having an opinion on the subject, he's very passionate about his work, and I"d prefer he keep that passion. However, I do think given his position, it's wouldn't be customary for him to take part in the discussion. It's rare you see actors or people involved in a production give credence or their opinions on low scores, and that's true across most entertainment mediums. He didn't have to apologize IMO, and no one really had the right to call him out on it, regardless of their reasons for doing so, because as Brandon said, it is a small group of people who prefer to silence dissent.

OrangePowerz1281d ago (Edited 1280d ago )

There was no score in the "review". These "words" (numbers) had been made up and added by Metacritic.

1281d ago
+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 1281d ago
smashman981281d ago

Isn't the same Washington post review in question a satirical one??? Of course it shouldn't affect the metacritic score

Fin_The_Human1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

Yeah but Troy Baker is bigger than this...he should be signing give Africa clean water petitions and not this waste of human time review score.

phoenix_dusk1281d ago

Why don't you tell the writer of this opinion piece to do the same?
Why don't you preach what you're teaching then?

You are basically telling people to go to war because you're wasting time playing videogames when it's not their job to do that.

81BX1281d ago

That is so far off base from what he said... no one said anything about going to war.... not even "basically". Here is a novel idea. Sack up and accept not everyone likes uncharted.

GameBoyColor1281d ago

As a human, if i was in his place i'd do the same. It's your work that's basically being slandered and having an affect on a scoring site that many gamers look at as a research source. FeelsBadMan

Fin_The_Human1281d ago

Phoenix where did I say that anyone must go to war.

I don't agree with the Meta Score and the review and love UC4 but I won't lose any sleep over this Washington Post review becuse I have far more important important things to do with my life.

Seriously do you know how much better this world would be if these people who started this petition would put the same effort into real life problems.

Sharky2311281d ago

Fin please tell me you didn't leave that post! I don't think it's a mistake or anything other than someone believing in what they do! How do you know he didn't sign an African water petition right after he signed this petition?

Fin_The_Human1281d ago

Gameboy color are you serious?

Uncharted 4 has a very high score all around and has been praised by big name gaming websites and non gaming websites.

Why should one bad score matter to him or anyone apart from fanboys.

This does not affect his work on UC 4 in any way or are just peoples opinions and should just be left at that because not everyone likes that same games.

Fin_The_Human1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

Sharky if he did sign the give Africa clean water petition then good for him.

I am just saying that he should be beyond this and leave this for the fanboys who care about one bad review score.

Naughty Dog the creators of the game aren't even worried about this one bad review score so why should he.

Sunny_D1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

@fin the human
The hypocrisy of your post is hilarious. With that logic, then we should all get off this VIDEOGAME website that discusses VIDEOGAMES and go sign clean water petitions... I mean in the end why are YOU wasting time commenting about this and other game related content when you should be going out there and talking about war and poverty?

Fin_The_Human1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

Sunny why do you people keep trying to twist my words.

I am not saying that we should stop gaming and join PETA or some humanitarian group, I am saying that pointless things like this petition is not worth anyones time since it has nothing to do with gaming apart from healing some fanboys feelings because a game they love got a bad score.

Its a pointless petition, hell if we are going to petition something for the sake if it why not petition Capcom selling people a 30 % complete game for full price or MS cancelling Fable Legend....still pointless but more gaming related if you ask me.

rainslacker1281d ago (Edited 1281d ago )

You could go tell him that on Twitter. I'm sure he's interested in your opinion on what he should care about.

This man's passion for his work is what makes him so good at his work, and gives him the ability to deliver some of the most amazing performances we see in games. I for one would never want to suggest to him that he should not care about his own work.

Typically, a man in his position would remain disconnected from a controversy such as this, but today, it seems he felt strongly enough to do something about it, because he believed in the cause. It didn't take so much of his time that he can't go and do other things. We probably waste more time on here bickering about this topic than he did with the signing and the followup apology. Should we just forget all this stuff and worry about other things? I mean, you say this petition is a waste of time. Isn't this whole conversation also a waste of time then? Yet here you are.