Death Stranding Review - Stevivor

Death Stranding is overly self-indulgent, featuring monotonous and frustrating gameplay.

[Xnx_gaming]

How can people take review scores like this seriously? If the game is super glitchy and buggy, its understandable, but if it's playable, logically that's at least worth 5/10.

[JackBNimble]

So call it a 5

[Sophisticated_Chap]

This is one of the few low scores that Metacritic has included in the average score. With all of the poor reviews showing up on N4G, it's clear that metacritic is cherry picking the more positive reviews. If this game didn't have kojima's name on it, none of the high scores on metacritic would exist.

[Ghostbob]

fool

[IRetrouk]

So metacritic work for sony now? Or kojima? Please...

[GTgamer]

Cherry picking these nuts barely see bad reviews I see wayyyyyyyy more positive ones.

[Krangs_Uncle]

Funny when MS reviews are actually bloated to high heaven by MS sites... You my friend are deluded.

It's the same meta as MS's pride and joy Gears.

Not bad a new IP with a divisive premise.

How do you like them apples?

[rob-GP]

I guess you don't understand how Metacritic works? It doesn't choose what reviews it shows - if your site is approved to be on the system (reviewing a certain amount of games and having a certain number of followers/visitors), then every review you do will automatically be assigned to the relevant game and the review score is counted towards the total.

There's no cherry-picking or manually adding reviews.

[generic-user-name]

Can I borrow your tinfoil hat?

[MasterCornholio]

That's a silly thing to say.

[rainslacker]

It's up to websites to decide if they're included in Meta. Meta isn't cherry picking anything, and likely, not all scores have been submitted to Meta yet. Some of the low scores I've seen aren't ever represented on meta for any game.

That's on Metacritic and the websites, and has nothing to do with meta trying to cherry pick anything. never have they not put up or removed a score that was posted by one of the sites they track.

There aren't that many poor reviews showing up on N4G. In fact, I see a higher percentage of the poorer scores showing up on N4G, as opposed to a lower percentage of the higher scores showing up.

Or are you just going to assume that all those higher or average scores are not valid because they don't line up with what you want them to be? Did you try that with Days Gone, and ignore the more prolific average or good scores that existed?

Also, isn't this review site commonly giving low scores to high profile games? I recognize their name, and the only reason i'd do that is if they are a big site, or if they are controversial with their review scores. They aren't a big site, so that only leaves one other option.

[Sophisticated_Chap]

It's tough to say.

[rainslacker]

No, it's not. Meta isn't cherry picking anything. There is no conspiracy, and being the first day of reviews, not all reviews are going to be posted there yet.

[Juusterey]

"bad scores on this one site is proof of metacritic cherry picking"
logic

[rivaldoo777]

Actually I might try this game out and get second hand feeling of Fed ex delivery man

[TGGJustin]

The guy is welcome to his opinion but I can't help but feel like he has some agenda with this score. His comments on Twitter come across as very unprofessional too. He sounds like a POS.

[windblowsagain]

I sent my dog to get death stranding.

It hasn't returned.

With all that stuff I put on it's back. Maybe I overdid it.?

[Gordoncordon]

no, just no.
3/10 is reserved for steam indie s**t, not marvelous games like this

[ElementX]

Are you saying indie games are crap? That's a bold blanket statement

[ShinjukuSon]

They are. They're overhyped crap, which everyone makes seem like the next best thing.

[Gordoncordon]

well, i'm talking about "digital homicide" kind of games, not of games like showel knight or celeste, i thought it was obvious?

[ElementX]

It could be taken both ways.

[XxSPIDEYxX]

It's weird to see so many people flock to the negative reviews than the positive ones. Can't wait to play this one of a kind game.

[Elda]

That's what they live for.

[Sm00thNinja]

Seems like this didnt get the Kojima pass MGSV did. Still excited nonetheless.

[P_Bomb]

Gameplay was arguably the strongest aspect of MGSV but seems to be the weakest link here. Even amongst the higher scores.

I don’t see myself sprinting, diving, prone rolling or POW extracting with 100lb of fragile strapped to my back and a penalty checklist. I can just see myself fumbling at the goal line of a banana peel factory lol :o :p

[Juusterey]

"i didn't like it, that means other people like it for the wrong reasons and are flawed"

[Gunstar75]

This score is probably too low, bit all the perfect 10's are just as out of kilter. It's probably somewhere in the middle

[King_Noctis]

I really don’t think this game deserves this low score, at least from what I have seen of Death Stranding. This damn reviews pull the Metacritic score of the game down with it.

[Noskypeno]

Its one of those love it or hate it kinda games. Haven't read any reviews cause i dont want to spoil it.

It seems to atleast have a decent concept, so its worth a Redbox rental.

[AAWELLS09]

I think this is another one of the sites being DDOS over the review score. I can't get the site to load at all. I heard somewhere else that some sites are being DDOS'd but I dont know if its true or not all I know is this site wont load.

[Ratchet75]

I can you take a review seriously when they give such a score to a top notch polished game with no bugs or broken mecanics???

[Exvalos]

It's one thing to have an opinion it's another to trash a game to a point of being unprofessional. Author sounds like a 12 year old. And I notice in his review history all Nintendo games are rated positive in theupper 80s and 90s and everything else.gets low to mid reviews. His review percentage average is 55% lower scores then everybody else. Why Kojima allowed him a review copy is beyond my understanding.

[F0XH0UND922]

A 3.5 score means it's virtually unplayable, broken, buggy etc. DS does not even come close to any of those criteria. I miss the days when reviewers gave scores on the actual merits of the game itself. Things like level design, graphics, sound, story, fun factor etc. Each category was given a score and then averaged together. Not everyone has to like DS but to give a game with this much level of detail, polish, and scope a 3.5 is absolutely ludicrous. Terrible review from a terrible no-name site that's desperate for clicks. I'm not saying everyone needs to have the same opinion but these extreme outlier scores need to be a thing of the past and certainly not count towards a game's meta rating.

[LoveSpuds]

You only have to look at his Bloodborne review to know this site is rubbish..... Nothing but clickbait!

[shammgod]

sounds like this dude needs to get back to playing fortnite

[MetalGearAlex]

Ur dumb.

[Knightofelemia]

The best person to review the game is the person who bought it and played it for a while. Great ways to see how a game is just watch Twitch that's how I base a game if I like it or I avoid it. Anybody who can get early access to a game and play it for a few hours and also owns a laptop is pretty much a videogame reviewer by today's standards. I never trust videogame reviewers some of them are biased some of them just power through a game for a bit and call it good. So for this game I am going to watch a few streams ask questions about the game and then decide if I like it or not.