Josh Wise: "Reaching the credits, I sat back, exhausted and disappointed at where the series had ended up."
really ? 5/10 ?!
Some people are allowed to not like a game you know.
It's not about their opinion. They are dying for click bait article and for more visitors.
Sure, they are, but we can also retort their review sucks. Savvy?
Usually you’d know if you’d like a game before you play it
Yea, but this is Resident Evil we’re talking about here. RE games always seem to score big. Something doesn’t smell right here.
That doesn't mean you should score it bad. Reviews should be as objective as possible. As unbiased as possible. Sure there will be some bias and subjectivity but it should be contemplated and removed as much as possible from an official review.
Well said, I’d give resident evil 4 a 7 at best. An unpopular opinion sure, but it’s my opinion.
@meh I'm excited for this game but, if you read the review, his biggest gripe is a supposed lack of resource management, with a plentiful amount of resources had. Making it more an action game, in his opinion, than horror survival. Apparently he also enjoyed 7, so it wasn't purely out of the hate some have for the new direction of the series. 5 seems a bit harsh, but you have to remember five really is meant to be "meh", but people always consider anything less than seven a failure and garbage.
He's allowed to not like the game but he fails to explain how the game suffers from one of these criterias "5/10 - Average This game is equally good and bad. Maybe the combat has cool ideas and the setting is great, but the writing is just bad and the controls fight against you. Maybe it's a good game but marred by bugs and crashes that make it unplayable half the time. Maybe it's. Just. Fine. Think of it like a 7/10." https://www.videogamer.com/...
The problem with reviews is they're all opinion based and there is no consistency across the board on scoring. For some people, a 5/10 is the middle of the pack, whereas for some people a 7/10 just like school grading is average.
You sure about that? There was a game not long ago that was not allowed to be disliked. Because if you did you would be called a ist a phobe and accuse you of all sorts of things simply because you voiced your opinion.
Of course people are allowed an opinion but I don’t see how “where the series has ended” had anything to do with the quality of this current game. Sure we’re not still in a mansion fighting same zombies same characters. It’s called evolution times change things need improving, not played it yet so can’t really say but even if it’s not as they used to be I still can’t see it’ll being below a 7 going on the demo alone. 5/10 is a blatant agenda 🤷🏻♂️🤣
@MehmetAlperTR we shouldn’t just accuse every negative review to be clickbait. We need reviewers to actually be objective. Now if it reads like the author is full of it let him have it for that reason.
So they won't be looking for clicks of they have it a 10? Please grow up.. This is a review, and a review is never objective
And people are allowed to not like reviews of games.
@Mehmet, but it is their opinion. Your logic is flawed and childish. If it gets a higher enough score then you're OK. If the score is to your liking then it must be clickbait. Some high profile games are not 8, 9 or 10s. Get over it.
To the people defending this reviewers rights to an opinion, doesn't it seem a bit weird that they got their review out the SECOND the embargo was lifted... and it happens to be the most negative review after 40 reviews averaging 8.5/10? I can see why some might think it's fishy or there's an agenda/bad blood at play somewhere..
Since reviews are subjective, this is what you get; an opinion based on feelings with little to account for the actual mechanics and overall design of the game. This reviewer may not like this game, being more open or brighter, or more combat-oriented, etc... whatever... but a 5/10 should define a game on the verge of being broken or plain bad. This does not look like RE6 at all. It actually looks like RE expanded with some Castlevania: SOTN baked in but in the first person. Lots of secrets and twists and turns; plus a big story that expands on Winter's story. It may not be perfect but it looks like a lot of fun and another great game to play this spring.
You are reading 5/10 on the verge of being broken, for me it says is just mediocre
5/10 is literally average......
@cplus Except if we're going by how reviewing criteria typically goes in the real world when discussing quality in a lot of areas be it either a product or someone's grades a 5/10 and a 6/10 are failing scores.
Try actually reading the review. Look at the things he didn't like then see if that will have any impact on your own enjoyment. Not everyone has to like the thing you do.
Yeah like imagine giving tlou2 a 5/10
how dare you, tlou2 is a perfect game /s
man, imagine being down voted for having a logical comment.
The reviewer seems to be upset that there are no zombies like the old RE games. A poor 'review' which marks the game down for deviating from the zombie formula.
And would have marked it down for being too similar if it was in a mansion with zombies again. 🤷🏻♂️🤣 ✌🏻
Game doesn't just have to be functional these days, it has to stand out and this looks like boring same old same old. Some people expect a lot from Capcom's Resident Evil, clearly you are not one of them.
Looks can be deceptive but I wonder what you’ve even seen. The cover alone is not same old same old, where have they had werewolves in Resi? Chris is a returning character, couple of others pretty much brand new enemies/cast new areas 🤷🏻♂️🤣 hardly an assassins creed/fifa cut and paste job.
Imagine spending 3-5 years developing something you are passionate about, programming each and everything, making cinematics etc testing it and you think it's a solid product and you receive 5/10 because I did not like and doesn't feel like Resident Evil. It's called Resident Evil not Resident Zombies. I feel sorry for the devs to get such score which tanks overall meta and believe it or not meta does affect sales, we all know that. Off Topic: just watched IGN review and this game has so much enemy variety but it is heavily focused on combat/action. If I were to give it a very low score that would be 7 minimum as this game looks Solid. have to play and see for myself, big fan of RE4 and Silent Hills 1.
Well, almost every AAA game these days demands similar effort from their developers... Should reviewers give them a free 8 just for trying?
@Fluttershy77 I never said give them free 8 but 5/10 means a broken mess like Cyberpunk. A reviewer should tell about mechanics of the game and how it plays etc rather just because I liked old RE games this is not my style. Rather tell the audience that why you should play or not. these are my humble opinions
5/10 is a broken mess. lol since when? Your treating everyone’s scale as if they’re the same.
The series is actually called "Biohazard" but it doesn't really matter at this point. The reviewer seems to be late to the party, the series stopped being "Resident Evil" in quite some time.
Yeah I like zombies but man they had their day need a bit of a break, like WW2 games during ps2 days zombies are the go to, what can we do to change this game. Chuck some Zombies in 🥱🤣✌🏻
How long a game takes to make isn't an excuse to simply give it a high score. Many games have been through development hell and got worse scores. Reviews are subjective, which seems to go over so many diehard fanboys. "Oh my gawd, a 5/10. Reeeeeeeeee". Many gamers crap on IGN, but as soon as they give review scores that align with their personal opinions they're good until another game they review doesn't. Let's face it, gamers these days don't care about opinions let alone reviews that they might find devise especially if it doesn't align with their opinions. Then they go on to call mediocre or bad reviews clickbait. If you like the game then go and enjoy it, why do you care what other people think about it?
So, did the author feel like this is actually a bad game? The gist I get from the review is that they feel this just shouldn't be a Resident Evil game.
The main takeaways from the review are that he thought Ethan's performance was weak, it wasn't very scary and the random assortment of monsters make it not feel like an RE game. A 5 isn't a bad score it's just a "meh".
"Good job on that 5, here's your metacritic bonus!" Totally not a bad score, not at all
"A five isn't a bad score." I love how some people talk about game scores as they are supposedly defined rather than in the way that they know everyone understands them. Maybe a site says a 5 is "okay" or "average," but everyone knows that in games a five=trash. There are games with major bugs, broken launches, serious performance issues, etc that get better than 5s. However, giving a game with a big name a 5 is a good way to bring attention to your site.
***"Good job on that 5, here's your metacritic bonus!" Totally not a bad score, not at all*** That's an issue with developers and publishers prioritizing reviews over other metrics. It only makes the system less objective in focus, IMHO. But, it's not the fault of individual reviewers that this is how developers and publishers reward those for their work.
@JEECE Oh ok it's a big game therefore it's not allowed an average score, gottcha.
Author isn't into big woman lol
opinions are like butt holes, everyone has one
So opinions are also stinky?
And most of them stink
After reading through this review i sense that the reviewer isn't particulary fond of the "anything that isn't a zombie" aspect of resident evil as a whole.
That was my take away. Re7 didn't have zombies either and it was such a fresh idea for resident evil...my favourite in a long time
This one stuck out. But eye of the beholder I guess.
This site is full of sad little cry babies. I love it.
Literally crying over a score someone gave a game that they haven't even played yet, it's baffling.
Believe me, this post is tame compared to others
Living in the past. Games are meant to evolve and mature.
They did. Re2 remake was the future then they quit halfway through re3 and fans are pissed. Hopefully Code Ver. Remake will continue where re2 left off.
those are remakes of old games man
Absurd score. It's the reviewer's own playing style that is at issue
So…average? I guess I should expect lots of 7’s from other outlets? Edit: Well, turns out everyone liked it except this dude…why do we celebrate the outliers when we should just throw them out?
Given what I have played so far with the demo, and loving every other RE game since the beginning, there is no way Village is a 5 for me so I will just disregard that as I get ready for release on Friday which I took off for and continue playing Returnal. Absolutely loving what Capcom has done rotating the RE remakes remasters in off years with new RE games in other years.
That’s why all the games are so short now, they have pumped them out in quick succession. There’s a trophy for finishing Village in 3 hours. Resi 3 remake was even shorter.
I just play the games. They don't have to be that long as my tastes go. After games like Assassin Creed Valhalla that I have 180 hours into I am fine with shorter games.
I beat original RE2 in 2 hours. So what? EVERY main entry of the Resident Evil series has speed run unlockables. Where you been? Has nothing to do with current development schedule. Original RE3 was extremely short too. They should've remade Code Veronica too and bundled them together.
CB at least the original Resident Evil had 2 characters to go through and multiple endings, same with 2. Even 3 had different choices that changed the game. You must be a new fan.
Do you consider videogamer a site that is constantly pushing clickbait? Or do you simply not like the review score? This is one of the few titles I'm buying at launch, but I read the review and understand where his personal take on the game, thus the score, is coming from.
Videogamer is dying for click bait article and for more visitors.
@2080 I've written for a number of smaller sites in the past. Hell, I'm legitimately the reason WCCFtech has a proper gaming division. There's no money to be had in online gaming "journalism"; and that's going by a time ad revenue was actually better than it is now. Nobody writing on the low tier sites are doing anything more than trying to cover costs of hosting the site, and create a portfolio. They do it because they enjoy games, and writing about them is basically a hobby and they enjoy having a platform to be heard. If he gave it a five, it's because he felt it a 5. I read the review, and it felt like the score it's actually supposed to represent; a "meh".
If you knew Videogamer at all you'd know it's not a clickbaity site but go off claiming clickbait because you don't like a review for a game you havent even played yet.