The game meets the baseline level of quality we might expect from a big-budgeted joint, yet it remains a tiresome, empty experience.
Slant Magazine should not be taken as a score on metacritic. They are always an outlier and never have good reviews. Why are they considered important?
Have you ever suggested this before?
Nothing but far left hacks
As usual, Slant Magazine with a lower than the review average score.
I did not see their review for crackdown 3? Metacritic should have some kind of algorithm if a website keeps giving low score for every game than the average then they should blacklist it
Or just handle it like some judged sporting events and drop the lowest and highest scores when calculating the average. If you ignore the top and bottom 10% then you will likely have eliminated most of the fanboys and trolls.
Or you could, ya know, actually read articles and form your own opinion on a game's merits, instead of needing an arbitrary number to do it for you.
Did you run-click to Metacritic to see their review for Crackdown 3?
Well you have CheatCC giving it a 9.6 when the next highest score is an 8.4. So you have some outliers both ways haha
Commence your Home Business right now. Hang out with your Family and Earn. Start bringing $75/hr just over a computer. Very easy way to choose your Life Happy and Earning continuously. Begin here....check further details by open the link and click on HOME TECH OR MEDIA. HERE?? https://bit.ly/2H4RzBH
That is absolutely true. These are individual opinions so there will always be variance. That's why I look at the metacritic score above individual sites. If I went solely by Slant magazine then I would say Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice is a really bad game as they gave it a 4/10. https://www.slantmagazine.c...
@Razzer Yup, just like any news or opinions you should always look at multiple sources so you're fully informed. Using only a single source for anything is foolish. Honestly, the game still looks good, I think it's just getting a harder time because we are coming off of Spider-Man and GoW which oozed creativity while Days Gone may lack a bit of that. Regardless, I have enjoyed PLENTY of 7's, it all depends on your taste.
So having an outlet that is actually critical isnt acceptable?
There is critical then there is out right negative exaggeration for attention. Look I think sea of thieves is a shallow piece of garbage but I can tell its not a 1/10 game.
Is this a broken game?
IGN mentioned lots of small bugs nothing game breaking but frequent enough to be annoying
Digital foundry said the opposite, a few small bugs and glitches here and there but nothing which distracts from a enjoyable game plus they mentioned day 1 patch was not installed. Edit: I know who I'll trust, hint its not IGN
Remember when they overlooked piles of shortcomings on boring ass games like red dead 2. Outlets pick and choose when they are going to actually be a critic.
I'm still going to play it. I'm going to plow through this thing. Judging by the trophies it's an easy platinum too.
Gotta admit, Slant are pretty crap the And shouldn’t be on Meta. They gave Sekiro a 4/10 and a few other highly praised games also got 2-4/10 scores for the clicks. All their input does is bring down the actual average of the games they decide to write about
They review 73% lower than the average critic over 533 reviews. Something is obviously wrong with this publication. They dont enjoy gaming. Or they dont realize movie ranges dont work in video game scores.
So they have to subscribe to the same opinion as everyone else to be credible? lol
No they just rate too low on the scale. A 2 out of 10 doesnt leave much room for a truly broken unplayable terrible game...which this isn't according to their words. The words are more like a 4 or 5. Doesnt matter in the end, the scores are dissapointing, but not atrocious.
Sekiro got a 4!!!??? That's blasphemy. What a great game.
Yeah this site shows how metacritic is broken, on both ends of the spectrum, some sites blindly will give any Sony, Nintendo or microsoft game a 10 depending on what camp they represent. Others review bomb for clicks no matter what, in fact they probably didnt even play the game.
This is why I dont buy a game based on reviews
If you buy games based on Slant Magazine reviews, you wouldn't be buying any games ever.
Agree, just watched 2 digital foundry YouTube videos and it all seems very positive tbh, a few bugs and glitches here and there but what game hasn't, plus thery mentioned they didn't have day 1 patch installed. I've noticed none of the reviews have pointed that out nobody has reviewed this with the day 1 patch? If it's repetitive then thats gonna be a shame but as for the story well that's just subjective.
I knew it, this game looks bad especially ai
Wow people either love this game or they hate it. I will judge it for myself. The Order was recieved poorly by the critics but I love that game, I have a feeling Days Gone wont be any different.
I remember playing "prison break" on ps3, it scored 2s and 3s out of 10 yet it played and looked identical to a PC cult classic "riddick" which scored 9/10. Prison break also didn't need a day 1 patch, no screen tearing etc just a solid game. I aways said to my friends I bet gaming sites only played it for 3 hrs and made the rest up, sadly the UK studio closed after poor sales which was a shame a gem of a game which I thoroughly enjoyed. Edit: I also really enjoyed the order 1886, same with "contrast" great indie title
And just like that, this game is actually pretty good. There is no way that Slant isn't trolling. I expected this game to be around 80-83 on metacritic and have said as much, but I swear, those fools just like to be contrarian. I am about 98% certain of that. They give good feedback to questionable media and horrible feedback to good things CONSISTENTLY. I think the only time they don't abide by that rule is when they are indefensible (e.g., giving a broken game high praise. There's always one. The lack of integrity at Slant is amazing. And no, I didn't read the review and no, I'm not going to.
They give a lot of negative reviews to any sort of media.
I didn't say that wasn't true. I'm also saying they've given a pass to bad media before as well. I think they just like to be largely oppositional unless it will cause considerable damage to their brand.
I personally like how a couple Xbox fan boy trolls so far are saying the game is bad because of these reviews, even citing the meta, ignoring that they've been talking up much worse reviewed games for the past few years, and at the same time, implying that if it does have a higher meta score, that all those times they rode Sony exclusives in the past, they are now saying they were pretty good....because of the score apparently. I'm glad they at least now have a "win" to try and fight the good fight. They needed it. They can do that while others are playing this game I guess. And yeah, Slant is a terrible site. They don't do troll fan boy reviews, they just suck all around, and this particular reviewer seems to think that any game that isn't an existential meaningful experience, is not worth a good review, and he doesn't really find much that meets that criteria. Just reading through the synopsis of some of his other reviews, I wonder why he's even playing games, and his TV/Movie reviews seem just as lame. He's quite literally one of those reviewers who tries to be too cool for anything.
Pffft jiminy cricket. Since the dysmal previews years back I saw it coming
@Frinker Precisely. Sloppy design back in the first preview and that never got fixed.
I am playing it now played the first hour and I am loving it.. Graphics are beautiful and the gunplay is nice and satisfying and the loot system like the last of us is very well done. Don't listen to these reviews if you like the setting and open world survival games then it's a must buy
Slant are just bashing and being negative all the time. Most of their scores are just a joke.
Well, they explained why it got the score it did quite well. But hey, why actually read the article right?
The author is so creative at saying a lot of words without saying anything at all. No mention of Story elements, gameplay, no mention even of glitches. But for what he did talk about it narrated a 7/10 game. Maybe a 6. This does not explain a 3.
To me, 1.5 is unplayable garbage. I doubt that this is that bad. Harsh score. Game looks like a 70, which is still good
1.5 is a bit harsh... that means it’s quite a below average game...
Ouch. Yeah, said earlier that I'd love to have been wrong when I said this game was doomed a year ago but it seems it was. That 8.7/10 had me excited but it runs against every other review I've seen. A shame.
You guys act like it got one or two bad reviews, I have seen 5 bad reviews. Including IGN.
From the guys who gave sekiro a 4/10. 😂 🤣😂
Seems like a purely clickbait score
There’s something funny going on over at slant magazine
At least the name of the site is accurate as their opinions are clearly, um...slanted.
I love to see Sony fans go hard to change other people mind to get this game so it don’t sell bad
Knew this game would end up mediocre
Oh cmon a 1/10 should be reserved for unplayable broken, glitch fest, microtransaction filled trash. Maybe this reviewer just started gaming.
we just had boring and tiresome with red dead redemption 2. the open world portion of the great spiderman was also just tedious compared to the main campaign. this whole open world shtick is beyond dead.
Don't know why anyone cares about any reviews if you like the look get it if you don't dont buy simple in this day and age anyone into gaming keeps in with all the information on new games anyway you know what they say you can not please everyone
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.