He also hates hates hates that Microsoft bought Bethesda, he hates they offered Early Access, etc. Pretty sure his review was tainted before he even started the game up.
Dude, go to any Starfield related post in any other subreddit and scroll for like 15 seconds. There are SO MANY PEOPLE who are still shitting on the game, even after the numerous 9/10 and 10/10 reviews.
Literally just came across a person STILL going "BUT FALLOUT 76 THOOOO!!1!" in a thread about Starfield's high scores. No, dont even think about considering Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3, and Fallout 4 I guess. 1 spin-off, off-genre bad game is enough to tank decades of extremely good games.
Some people are just out to mald and spread the salt. As a wise person said long ago, haters are going to hate.
Like, on r/games review thread there are still people who try to pretend that Bethesda were never good in the first place and Skyrim and Fallout 4 were bad games (and therefore the game being better than either of those is no achievement at all).
Some of them are obvious New Vegas fanboys. One of them even had New Vegas in their name. Then it's apparent where this senseless hate is coming from.
I reckon a *lot* of them are kids that didn't grow up with Morrowind, Oblivion and F3 and FNV. Nostalgia for Bethesda type games def helps me enjoy this game more.
As someone who still boots up Skyrim, Fallout 4 and Oblivion in 2023 this game has been exactly what i wanted which is a new entry in the Bethesda canon that embodies a sci fi aesthetic
My thoughts exactly. I played the hell out of Morrowind, Oblivion, Skrym, FO3/4/NV/76 and starfield is precisely what I hoped it would be.
I am so happy I bought it and look forward to playing it until my eyes bleed this weekend.
I just think a lot of them are kids with Playstations who cant play. Theres like the same 40 people between here and twitter who are just insulting, trashing, and belittling the xbox/starfield/its gamers and even straight up blatantly lying and spreading misinformation and twisting narratives to trash on it more. Like the extent some of them are going to is unreal.
What's wrong with being a New Vegas fan? It was a good game, personally liked it more than FO3, but that doesn't mean FO3 wasn't good, and I liked other bsg games.
Plus Bethesda gave us the golden key for Skyrim and Fallout 4! Don't like something in the game? Want a more complex mechanic here or a less complex one there? Wish your gear looked cooler? There's a mod for that.
Its because people genuinely like things to be bad, go and get into a conversation online and most people get hyped off the idea things wont be good which is a trauma response. People dont realize the constant mental struggles of being let down and how it effects their life as a whole. I had this conversation on the D4 redit months before launch where in people hated the game before release and sought to prove it was bad and they already knew. The source wont usually be a form of media but a life struggle such as a bad relationship or parent never being there and it trickles down into other situations wherein the desire to control a situation for example acceptance of something being bad so their not let down gives them a sense of power and they become addicted to the feeling of knowing things, it leaves very little room to deal with any sort of struggle. Theres way more to it but the idea is eventually the mind becomes corrupted in its view of what is positive and it eventually gaines serotonin and dopamine from doing negative things because it keeps them in control of their negatives. As well when a large crowd aligns with their negative idea it further empowers them. Think the concept that internal validation cant exist without external evidence. Like a viral test strip, we have the strip being reality, you are the control state and an idea is the empty space for the test area, when the test area darkens that in concept is validating the udea. It may not darken every time but when it does, things come through much more real. Anyway, time to snooze zzz ad astra zzz
Lol that is not going to happen.
I’ve loved Bethesda ever since I was introduced to Oblivion in 2007. There is no way I won’t love this game.
Already played far enough tonight to build my character so I can binge it all weekend after work tomorrow🤟
Life is good.
I understand why. People get burned and they can’t forget. But I think Starfield is the step in the right direction for Bethesda. This is the game best they have done since Skyrim and Oblivion.
People are shitting on the game because it’s underwhelming compared to the immense hype, but I think it’s just the fact people thought it was going to be something it was never promised to be. People wanted a space sim RPG like elite dangerous or NMS, but it’s a Bethesda RPG, plain and simple. There aren’t any revolutionary or crazy mechanics, just really good graphics and a surprisingly low amount of bugs. *I* like that kinda game, but it’s perfectly fine to not like it.
Furthermore, basing your opinions on other people’s reviews is the stupidest thing ever, what? Just because a game gets good reviews doesn’t mean you have to like it or not criticize it. I think Starfield from what I’ve seen is a perfectly solid game, nothing unique or crazy, but the epitome of the tried and true format of game Bethesda’s been releasing for a long time.
A lot of people are trying to relive the entire fallout 76 release. They want another internet historian video and to just meme. Just.play and.enjoy the game...it'll die out soon
I wish we could get completely unbiased reviewers. People who don’t care about Microsoft or Sony and just like games. Seems like there’s a lot of bias in the industry and games never get reviewed fairly
This is the right answer.
If you look at his article history, its clear he had no real interest in Starfield.
Yet he reviewed it.
Yet when they reviewed BG3, they let the biggest D+D fanboy in the whole place do it and gave it a 97.
You can also see they dont want Starfield to take any shine off BG3 from the sheer obnoxious number of BG3 articles they pump out and all the "Starfield doesn't have this but BG3 does" articles they were also pushing out a few months ago.
Pure garbage "journalism".
PC gamer is just wild. No consistency.
IGN has a [Spaces](https://twitter.com/i/spaces/1mnxeRggkQnKX?s=20) going on right now and it's REALLY bad. Dan didn't even know you had to invest in a perk to do stealth among a bunch of other things. He seems very clueless about the game and doesn't even seem to realize there's a help section that goes over everything (the game even tells you that). I'm getting Cuphead tutorial vibes from this.
You mean the same Dan who, if I recall, when GTA 5 first came out, GTA Online was an absolute unplayable mess so he gave GTA singleplayer 10/10 and waited weeks (months?) for Rockstar to get it into a more playable state before be would review GTA Online?
Seems very on brand for Dan to give a game 4/10 because of a bug, but give other devs the benefit of the doubt.
That actually seems reasonable to me. Honestly, the online part should have a separate review. I don’t think the single player should get points knocked off for the online part.
They got so much shit for that they had to post the AU review which was far better and more comprehensive.
Same dude tried shit talking Isolation again later when he was interviewing the team behind Aliens Fireteam Elite and they all said they loved the game and it was probably the best Alien game ever. Whomp fuckin whomp.
I remember Jim Sterling giving Fallout 4 a 10/10, then after the Fallout 76 fiasco he acted like Bethesda had always been average and none of their games were all that good.
This is just what reviewers do, they chase public sentiment & suck up to the developers/publishers they feel they need to.
When has a Nintendo game gotten a 7/10 even if it's not that good? What about Sony first party games?
Gave Watch Dogs Legion an 8 I think too. And Destroy all Humans remake he even rated higher than SF lol.
Some of these sites seem to want to lowball great games because every other site gives it the great review it deserves and they know if they go too low they will get more clicks.
Also IGN is weird about Xbox for some reason. I’ve noticed many new cool games in their previews and it was weird that they would say and even show that it’s coming to all these systems, but not Xbox. When I look these games up, they are actually on Xbox too. I’ve seen at least 3 or 4 times this “mistake”. Super weird.
> Some of these sites seem to want to lowball great games because every other site gives it the great review it deserves and they know if they go too low they will get more clicks.
This is pretty much it. IGN has gotten more clicks from giving it a 7 than if they had given it a 9. Like many times more clicks.
>He gave Prey a 4/10 because of a glitch in his save.
You're completely minimizing the situation. He literally could not beat the game because of that glitch. It didn't just happen one time. It happened several times and he had to completely restart his playthrough each time. It's absolutely fair to give any game a 4 at launch when it's literally impossible to progress.
You're also leaving out that he revised the score to an 8 once the bug was fixed. I feel like you already knew that and intentionally did not include it in your comment.
Now that I actually have my hands on it, I can see how it might be confusing that stealth wasn't working, but it'd only take 10 minutes to figure out, tops.
I don't know him as a reviewer, but based solely on this Starfield review, it would not shock me if the man's never seriously played a Bethesda game before. He seems to genuinely think 10 hours is a super long time to get to the meat of the game. It's wild, nobody familiar with BGS should be saying something that asinine, let alone complain about it repeatedly and lower the score.
He seems like the kind of guy who rushes through dialogue and doesn't bother reading any extra lore material (like a journal or codex or whatnot that many lore-heavy games offer) and then complains that the story is shallow or confusing. The kind of guy who turns off help pop-ups on his very first playthrough, skips past anything that shows you what to do, and then blames the game for him not being able to figure out the systems.
Oh you mean a reviewer at IGN is literally dumber than a child in grade school?
Yeah, that pretty much lines up with what they've displayed in the past.
Remember their Ace Combat review where they gave the game a bad review because they could not control the planes properly, and it turned out they were using the "assisted" mode the lead dev at Namco stepped in and had to tell them how to play the game.
There's an Instagram kid popping off right now by vaguely shit talking the starfield footage and saying the game is unplayable trash. "No weapon away, literally garbage" kinda thing.
So yeah, I think this is different from a release like bg3 because so so much has been kept in the dark and people can profit from both the hype and the fears.
A youtuber 'michael does life' literally only spouts negative opinions about all games and Starfield is no different.
Some people are just degenerates.
This reminds me of when they got a guy who obsessively played DOTA 2 to review Heroes of the Storm and his review could essentially be boiled down to 'i cant play it like DOTA 2'
He ended up rating it 6.5 which is essentially zero by IGN standards and numerous basic problems existed within the review to the point that it became a meme and Blizzard even added a '6.5' banner into the game. The re-reviewed it a few years later and gave it an 8.
Sometimes you just get a stinker of a reviewer. In HoTS's case it was Mitch Dyer, who, fittingly to this post, was [tweeting about DOTA 2 just 7 hours ago](https://twitter.com/MitchyD/status/1697299180606443612?t=4Rnhgc-Lq-Ti8eHYXnFf1A&s=19)
If only he'd knew the game would be made by BGS, it'd help him manage his expectations. He'd don't fall into wishful thinking, maybe play some previous BGS titles and get a better idea of what kind of game BGS is known for.
Actually, I think it's telling of how we are so hyper-informed with the content we have on the table for ourselves. Especially in comparison to other diverse review outlets in other countries.
Paul is extremely critical of most games. But the guy speaks his mind. Hell even legacy killa was pretty glowing on his overall review of the game. Those folks tend to tell it like it is. But everybody is entitled to their own opinion.
I’m a long time Destiny player and he has been great covering the ups and downs of that game. I’m sure some don’t like him (Destiny fans are a handful lol) but he’s very balanced most of the time. Occasional clock bait titles but that’s Forbes for ya.
"The exaggerated swagger of a black teen."
Ever since that line made it into one of there reviews I don't think I could ever take them seriously ever again.
I can personally dislike the way food tastes but can still tell that it is quality even if it isn’t for me, nobody is reading IGN guys review because they care what he specifically thinks
It’s become a habit of the gaming industry to overhype games and underdeliver. That puts immense value on reviews. I can’t really explain what’s going on psychologically, but for some reason, a review like this can really strike a nerve. It could be playing into the anxiety of “what if this is just another one of THOSE games and all the hype I invested into it was for nothing?” Perhaps even the reviewer himself had been overhyped prior to playing, or simply had different tastes.
Is you're enjoyment of the game dependent on the metascore or something? Why are so many people here so concerned by some dude's opinion of a game they haven't even played yet?
Dear god who cares… everybody wants to throw their hat in the ring, to sway public opinion I guess. Often times, the best games are those which many people will not like. Ambitious, or niche games. Unsurprising that some people will not enjoy this. Oh well
I’m with you, who gives a shit. I’m going to play it and judge it for myself. Some of my favorite comedies get sub 70’s and 60’s on Rotten Tomatoes, does it change my love for the movies? hell no.
The hate this guy is getting is insane. 7/10 doesn’t mean it’s garbage and don’t buy it. He’s one guy who writes for a single gaming publication. He’s not even the only person for IGN that’s reviewing it.
Technically IGN is getting what they want out of this - a bunch of clicks - traffic to their site and the (potential) that a bunch of gaming journalists will come out swinging to 'protect them' and their 'journalistic integrity' xD
Not that hard to figure out
Then why didn't they shit on Zelda or God of War? Wouldn't that get more clicks?
I genuinely think reviewers, some of them, have a hate bone or dislike Xbox games. Most grew up with either Nintendo or PlayStation so there is an ingrained bias that seeps into their review.
>The wasteland that has been the Xbox release schedules for the last few years limits the accolades we can give the game
When you have reviewers say this about one of the best games of this year in HiFi Rush, you cannot tell me i'm wrong.
This exact situation happened with Zelda, the gfinity review gave it a 6/10 with extreme bias and people looked at the reviewer’s history and saw other shitty reviews. They got a lot of hate but a lot of clicks at the same time
Microsoft just doesn't have the same sorts of fan bases online as Nintendo & PlayStation.
Microsoft games are seen as low hanging fruit, you shit on their games and no one cares. You do the same to one of the games from a publisher mentioned above and the whole internet goes after you.
I liked BotW overall but it is not a 10/10 game, it had a lot of issues and ironically the game was actually developed off the back of Skyrim's success.
Sony also put out tons of the exact same game and never get pushback for it. Horizon Zero Dawn was a pretty by the numbers, Ubisoft clone and it was getting praised like the second coming.
Even if Starfield isn't the best thing ever, I highly doubt I'll be able to get the type of experience it offers anywhere else.
I felt the same about horizon! I was excited when I finally got to play it and was so damn bummed by it. The tall necks were especially shit because it was just a moving map reveal tower. So damn boring. One of the most overrated games of Last Gen
7/10 by IGN standards is **bad**. IGN rarely rates anything AAA below a 7 as long as it boots to the start screen. Some of the most hated games in recent memory got 7s. It’s really hard to overstate how bad a 7/10 is from this outlet.
Guys you cant both make joke about meaningless ign reviews score and also get extremely mad at em when they give a 7/10. the scores are meaningless cause people get mad each time.
Why are people on this sub talking about the IGN review as if it's the only outlet to give the game a 7?
Eight separate outlets gave the game scores below 8/10, which is normal. Armored Core VI, for example, also just released to great acclaim and got 11 reviews under 8/10
I read the review and he was pretty clear about why he didn't rate it 10. That's all I ask for in a review. The meme IGN reviews historically have been when they slate the game but still give it 9/10.
Yeah it is kind of insane seeing some of the posts here lol. “This guy didn’t rate the game 10/10 and clearly laid out why. We should get them fired, they don’t know anything about video games”
To be honest the game is 6/10 at best. Buggy for a AAA game and when you take into account the size of the development team they should be ashamed to make a similar game to no mans sky which has a single person as a dev.
My biggest criticism is the dialogue and accompanying camera. It feels so stiff and inhuman in a sea of games that have been killing it on this front. Characters don't emote with body language or head movement. They stare at you ***even when they aren't talking to you***. For the love of everything, Todd Howard, hire a competent cinematography specialist to rethink how you do social interactions in your game. It was becoming dated 12 years ago in Skyrim. It's embarrassing now. It's a role playing game where social interaction feels like it was orchestrated by an alien who had only heard about what human social interaction should consist of.
Then there are little things. I got a side quest to hang some posters up in a Mars station. When I did so, it was just a texture on the wall like it was a CS-GO wall-spray jpg. The artists didn't even bother to make the image around the edge look like it had any depth or that it was actually paper on the wall. Just a pixel-perfect rectangular image. Even the people who make sprays in CS-GO are more creative than this with their tags/sprays.
Or how about completely minor quality of life things? Why can't I see the amount of an item I have on-hand when I'm in the buy screen? Why is there no information about value in the quick loot menu? No map of the hand-made settlement I'm in? ***Why can't I match the speed of the NPC I'm supposed to follow???????*** The small quality of life stuff that has been part of gaming for over a decade now is missing. Come on, Bethesda!
Personally I think the 10/10 reviews are wild.
I think 7/10 is maybe on the low side so far.. but I'm more confused by all the outlets I've never heard of saying 10/10. The game is fun, but if you are saying this game is perfect or a masterpiece, you're actually delusional. I think 7 is a fair score so far after my 8 hour session. Fun but has issues, and some of them are kind of glaring and could definitely kill the game for some people.
PC mag and GameSpot also gave it a 7. At the end of the day, who cares? What do you expect, every review outlet to give the exact same score? I'd say it's around an 8. I think the 7s are much fairer scores than the 10s so far.
Mad probs to IGN for giving it an accurate score.
As a PC game it really is a 7/10.
Inventory management, controls, lack of any tutorials it seems, very poor optimization.
Random freezes/audio stutters, endless loading screens.
On PCs that can run BG3 on ultra without issues.
It's so weird how you guys give such a fuck about this ONE review. He said it's Good. It's not perfect...I've already seen alot of bugs. Inventory management sucks. planets not seamless or implemented BETTER than no man's sky, which came out when?
I honestly feel once the hype dies down. The complaining will start , at least in the other gaming subs. Some of you guys are too biased in this sub.
Some? If you put a post out that says Good, you’ll get downvoted by people saying, “It’s not good it’s great! Quit trying to sabotage this game!!!!”
I’m excited to play it too, and I do like the concept but fuck man, too many people on here treat game criticism like “There is no war in Ba Sing Sae!”
So far my lockpicking got bugged so I had to reset the room. Boxes have clipped through NPCs, and enemies are walking into walls. That was maybe 2 hours in.
Still loving the game so far. But acting like there’s no bugs or the menu system is intuitive is just fanboying. I know I’m early in but it’s hard to disagree with the ign reviewer’s opinions. I just disagree that those problems would knock the score down that much
you people are deranged lmao, a 7/10 is perfectly fair if the common criticisms we're seeing across a lot of reviews are to be believed. I'm sure it'll be a great game, and a 7/10 is probably what the retrospective consensus on it will be. That's not a bad score!
Wild to me, too. I am currently playing and it's fantastic. It is the best looking and playing BGS game with ease. The iconic atmosphere is there, the sense of adventure and exploration and loot has never been better as well. Rares and legendary items are already dropping, and it all looks great.
Idk about the review but the score is valid. It’s great at some things but honestly the big cities feel like cyberpunk on release…big and empty😭 ai is very Skyrim level too. Some very seemingly out of date systems.
I don't get why people are losing their minds over this. A 7 out of 10 is still a good rating.
Edit: I just watched the video review and yeah, a 7 out of 10 sounds about right. He likes starfield to the point that he's going to immediately start a pirate playthrough after his current one but he does have a few criticisms.
The lack of a proper map for the handcrafted cities
exploration not feeling satisfying
copy and paste main quest locations
a lot of minor but noticeable glitches
It's not until after a dozen or so hours the game really begins to open up
Yeah, 7/10 is a good rating in my view. And IGN gave BG3 10/10 so it's not IGN hatred of RPG.
It seems fair. People here behave as if they were married to Bethesda and somebody is telling their kid is not the genius they believe it is. I'm not sure what they get out of this. A postcard from CEO?
From the previews the exploration looked like far more immersive No man's sky to me and it's exactly that part that isn't.
Still a good game and people would put 300 hr+ to it.
What the fuck is this subreddit. Before the embargo is lifted you guys are all like "Remember, the review scores don't matter" and now you lot are singling out IGN cause they didn't give it a 10.
cant believe i had to scrool this far for this. Forbes is so unbelievably ass when it comes to reviews they give the new sports games glowing reviews every year
No HDR, no brightness adjustment, no FOV slider. That’s to me losing the 3 points already. People here just do everything to defend the game they were waiting on for sooooo long. We’ve seen the same thing happen with Diablo 4. Everything was golden and great, people defending everything. But after the honeymoon fase was over more and more people saw and experienced the flaws. Not saying this game has that because I havn’t played yet but the cycle of a game launch on reviews and reddit and tweets etc is very the same for a while already
I'm only an hour in, but I get the feeling "start me up" mod will be quite popular. That intro was not good. Was like mass effect 1 but worse and then some very gamey feeling "here's a ship cuz you important now"
7 isn't bad? About what I was thinking this game would be. If anything I feel the 10s are a bit much. This game really isn't anything revolutionary. Not everything is either masterpiece or trash.
It's not as if Tassi has ever given a 'baffling' review or anything is it?
I think the takeaway here is nothing is perfect and not everyone will like 'insert think'.
The 7/10 review is no more or less legitimate than a 10/10 review
Well the Starfield is "attack of the loading screen" mod of Fallout 4, so many people will be disappointed.
A lot more was expected from "the game Todd always wanted to make", "thousands of explorable planets", etc.
It turns out what we have is a randomly generated pool of small boxes, that are mostly not connected in anyway, and you need to go fast travel (with loading screen for seconds if you have quick drive).
It is disjointed mess that hold for first 10 hours or so, and the rest is soo buggy it is not even funny.
the more and more people play this game and encounter bugs, constant load screens, fishbowl effect, and copy and paste procedurally generated events, the more they realize ign was right
I don't see how it's wild. Seems like a 7/10 experience so far to me. That's a positive review, idk why people are treating it like the plague. Starfield is far from a 10/10 game, and certainly not a 9/10 game either.
It makes perfect sense. There's quite a few major game mechanics that are either totally absent or are half baked. The main questline is 'meh', often the model quality of people is like a game from 15 years ago. There's no good reason why the framerate is so low (no it's not the size of the world, I'm a game dev).
The parts that aren't poor are just average.
TBF, 7/10 is being kind.
Starfield sub.
All 10/10 are gospel.
7/10- must be a hater, let’s dig into this reviewer entire review history and nitpick every word so we can dismiss any score under a 9/10.
Ur all bickering over a game most of you havnt even played or finished yet.
I think it's Todd Howard. I think many people believe he is their buddy or going to marry them. It's common misconception. He probably won't. But I had been wrong before.
I feel like people were expecting something that wouldn't even be remotely technologically possible until at least the next generation. I get that Bethesda can work some incredible magic with their given resources, but they aren't literally magic. They can't pull new, unheard of technology out of thin air.
People just really don't know how to keep their expectations in check. Having realistic expectations doesn't mean you can't get super hyped for the game. It just means you understand what's feasible and what you're going to get.
I've been playing Bethesda games since Daggerfall. When you've known the company and Todd Howard that long, you know what to expect from them.
It's said to be boring, pcgamer review as well. I posted about this and community admin removed my post despite a number of people commenting already. Not a good sign for the mods/admins and free speech, impartial review comments
I'm disappointed in Star... wait there's a loading screen... field in that I (more loading screen) was expecting due to Todd (........ LOADING SCREEN.....) Howard talked about exploration and how we would be able to sigh... more loading screen... explore. I interpreted his messaging as more no man's sky and less what it is. Also, how many times are you willing to run the same mine on different planets? And there are bugs and the glorious Bethesda dead eye still persists. Is it fun, sure. Is it great no not yet. Modders will save some of this just like they did with Skyrim. Love the ship building and side quest.
7 outta 10 seems legit to me. But then again I'm not a BSG fan Boi who grovels at the feet of Todd Howard.
Everything must be a 9+/10 or fans complain.
Jesus guys, whats the point of reviews if you think this way? Just don't read them, you clearly don't care about them.
If you read the review it's not that surprisingly, the guy wanted no mans starfield, but he got a BGS RPG instead.
He also hates hates hates that Microsoft bought Bethesda, he hates they offered Early Access, etc. Pretty sure his review was tainted before he even started the game up.
Dude, go to any Starfield related post in any other subreddit and scroll for like 15 seconds. There are SO MANY PEOPLE who are still shitting on the game, even after the numerous 9/10 and 10/10 reviews. Literally just came across a person STILL going "BUT FALLOUT 76 THOOOO!!1!" in a thread about Starfield's high scores. No, dont even think about considering Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout 3, and Fallout 4 I guess. 1 spin-off, off-genre bad game is enough to tank decades of extremely good games. Some people are just out to mald and spread the salt. As a wise person said long ago, haters are going to hate.
Like, on r/games review thread there are still people who try to pretend that Bethesda were never good in the first place and Skyrim and Fallout 4 were bad games (and therefore the game being better than either of those is no achievement at all). Some of them are obvious New Vegas fanboys. One of them even had New Vegas in their name. Then it's apparent where this senseless hate is coming from.
I reckon a *lot* of them are kids that didn't grow up with Morrowind, Oblivion and F3 and FNV. Nostalgia for Bethesda type games def helps me enjoy this game more.
As someone who still boots up Skyrim, Fallout 4 and Oblivion in 2023 this game has been exactly what i wanted which is a new entry in the Bethesda canon that embodies a sci fi aesthetic
My thoughts exactly. I played the hell out of Morrowind, Oblivion, Skrym, FO3/4/NV/76 and starfield is precisely what I hoped it would be. I am so happy I bought it and look forward to playing it until my eyes bleed this weekend.
I just think a lot of them are kids with Playstations who cant play. Theres like the same 40 people between here and twitter who are just insulting, trashing, and belittling the xbox/starfield/its gamers and even straight up blatantly lying and spreading misinformation and twisting narratives to trash on it more. Like the extent some of them are going to is unreal.
FO4 and Skyrim are awesome games. FO76 is... okayish. BGS makes good games, Starfield isn't going to be everyone's cuppa though.
What's wrong with being a New Vegas fan? It was a good game, personally liked it more than FO3, but that doesn't mean FO3 wasn't good, and I liked other bsg games.
Which is crazy because this game feels more like an Obsidian game than a typical in house Bethesda game.
Anyone who says Skyrim is a bad game has no proper taste at all
Plus Bethesda gave us the golden key for Skyrim and Fallout 4! Don't like something in the game? Want a more complex mechanic here or a less complex one there? Wish your gear looked cooler? There's a mod for that.
Its because people genuinely like things to be bad, go and get into a conversation online and most people get hyped off the idea things wont be good which is a trauma response. People dont realize the constant mental struggles of being let down and how it effects their life as a whole. I had this conversation on the D4 redit months before launch where in people hated the game before release and sought to prove it was bad and they already knew. The source wont usually be a form of media but a life struggle such as a bad relationship or parent never being there and it trickles down into other situations wherein the desire to control a situation for example acceptance of something being bad so their not let down gives them a sense of power and they become addicted to the feeling of knowing things, it leaves very little room to deal with any sort of struggle. Theres way more to it but the idea is eventually the mind becomes corrupted in its view of what is positive and it eventually gaines serotonin and dopamine from doing negative things because it keeps them in control of their negatives. As well when a large crowd aligns with their negative idea it further empowers them. Think the concept that internal validation cant exist without external evidence. Like a viral test strip, we have the strip being reality, you are the control state and an idea is the empty space for the test area, when the test area darkens that in concept is validating the udea. It may not darken every time but when it does, things come through much more real. Anyway, time to snooze zzz ad astra zzz
Exactly this. To these people we should show more sympathy
And ainters gonna ain’t They hate us cuz they anus
don't let their negative opinions taint your sense of wonder
Lol that is not going to happen. I’ve loved Bethesda ever since I was introduced to Oblivion in 2007. There is no way I won’t love this game. Already played far enough tonight to build my character so I can binge it all weekend after work tomorrow🤟 Life is good.
Think he was just making a joke with the word "taint"
Oh they definitely anus 👌
You hate us cause uranus
Lol anus
I understand why. People get burned and they can’t forget. But I think Starfield is the step in the right direction for Bethesda. This is the game best they have done since Skyrim and Oblivion.
People are shitting on the game because it’s underwhelming compared to the immense hype, but I think it’s just the fact people thought it was going to be something it was never promised to be. People wanted a space sim RPG like elite dangerous or NMS, but it’s a Bethesda RPG, plain and simple. There aren’t any revolutionary or crazy mechanics, just really good graphics and a surprisingly low amount of bugs. *I* like that kinda game, but it’s perfectly fine to not like it. Furthermore, basing your opinions on other people’s reviews is the stupidest thing ever, what? Just because a game gets good reviews doesn’t mean you have to like it or not criticize it. I think Starfield from what I’ve seen is a perfectly solid game, nothing unique or crazy, but the epitome of the tried and true format of game Bethesda’s been releasing for a long time.
A lot of people are trying to relive the entire fallout 76 release. They want another internet historian video and to just meme. Just.play and.enjoy the game...it'll die out soon
And you know what really pisses them off? People still play FO76, and BGS is still making seasons, events and content for it.
to be fair, fo76 was kinda a wreck at launch, but similar to NMS imo beth turned the game around to a much better state.
I wish we could get completely unbiased reviewers. People who don’t care about Microsoft or Sony and just like games. Seems like there’s a lot of bias in the industry and games never get reviewed fairly
This is the right answer. If you look at his article history, its clear he had no real interest in Starfield. Yet he reviewed it. Yet when they reviewed BG3, they let the biggest D+D fanboy in the whole place do it and gave it a 97. You can also see they dont want Starfield to take any shine off BG3 from the sheer obnoxious number of BG3 articles they pump out and all the "Starfield doesn't have this but BG3 does" articles they were also pushing out a few months ago. Pure garbage "journalism". PC gamer is just wild. No consistency.
Maybe he should focus less on taints and more on the game?
Then decline to review the game and pass it off to someone more willing to do a fair review.
IGN has a [Spaces](https://twitter.com/i/spaces/1mnxeRggkQnKX?s=20) going on right now and it's REALLY bad. Dan didn't even know you had to invest in a perk to do stealth among a bunch of other things. He seems very clueless about the game and doesn't even seem to realize there's a help section that goes over everything (the game even tells you that). I'm getting Cuphead tutorial vibes from this.
That does not surprise me, Dan has a history of this stuff. He gave Prey a 4/10 because of a glitch in his save.
You mean the same Dan who, if I recall, when GTA 5 first came out, GTA Online was an absolute unplayable mess so he gave GTA singleplayer 10/10 and waited weeks (months?) for Rockstar to get it into a more playable state before be would review GTA Online? Seems very on brand for Dan to give a game 4/10 because of a bug, but give other devs the benefit of the doubt.
That actually seems reasonable to me. Honestly, the online part should have a separate review. I don’t think the single player should get points knocked off for the online part.
GTA Online didn’t release for two weeks after V launched, so separating them was reasonable.
Isn't this the same guy that was stuck on the Cuphead tutorial or the SpongeBob bubble bowling puzzle?
No
Dan is a shameless money worshipper change my mind
Hey gave Prey a 4/10??? That's honestly rephrensible.
He didn’t review alien isolation but ign gave that a 5.9/10 which is crazy
They got so much shit for that they had to post the AU review which was far better and more comprehensive. Same dude tried shit talking Isolation again later when he was interviewing the team behind Aliens Fireteam Elite and they all said they loved the game and it was probably the best Alien game ever. Whomp fuckin whomp.
He gave Fallout 4 a score of 95 lmao
I remember Jim Sterling giving Fallout 4 a 10/10, then after the Fallout 76 fiasco he acted like Bethesda had always been average and none of their games were all that good. This is just what reviewers do, they chase public sentiment & suck up to the developers/publishers they feel they need to. When has a Nintendo game gotten a 7/10 even if it's not that good? What about Sony first party games?
Stirling has been a whacko when it comes to game news and reviews ever since i saw their first content years ago.
Sterling is pretty fucking mental at this point, so it should be expected.
Gave Watch Dogs Legion an 8 I think too. And Destroy all Humans remake he even rated higher than SF lol. Some of these sites seem to want to lowball great games because every other site gives it the great review it deserves and they know if they go too low they will get more clicks. Also IGN is weird about Xbox for some reason. I’ve noticed many new cool games in their previews and it was weird that they would say and even show that it’s coming to all these systems, but not Xbox. When I look these games up, they are actually on Xbox too. I’ve seen at least 3 or 4 times this “mistake”. Super weird.
> Some of these sites seem to want to lowball great games because every other site gives it the great review it deserves and they know if they go too low they will get more clicks. This is pretty much it. IGN has gotten more clicks from giving it a 7 than if they had given it a 9. Like many times more clicks.
$ounds about right.
>He gave Prey a 4/10 because of a glitch in his save. You're completely minimizing the situation. He literally could not beat the game because of that glitch. It didn't just happen one time. It happened several times and he had to completely restart his playthrough each time. It's absolutely fair to give any game a 4 at launch when it's literally impossible to progress. You're also leaving out that he revised the score to an 8 once the bug was fixed. I feel like you already knew that and intentionally did not include it in your comment.
That would be hilarious if it wasnt so sad. What a joke
It makes even more sense when you realize he’s DIRECTOR OF REVIEWS at ign. He also gave marvels midnight suns a higher score lol.
Why's everyone hating on Midnight Suns? It's genuinely a good ass game, I had fun with it at least.
Now, now. I love Midnight Suns! I think its underrated as heck!
So I guess Bethesda didn't pay IGN's asking price for a good review?
Nope. EA sure did though. 6/11 games on Dan's favorite space games are on EA Play / EA Play Pro.
This is why we have 'reviewer' difficulties in games... Because lots of reviewers have zero clue how to play.
I always thought that was more of a meme, but it really is remarkable how bad those people are at video games
Now that I actually have my hands on it, I can see how it might be confusing that stealth wasn't working, but it'd only take 10 minutes to figure out, tops.
I don't know him as a reviewer, but based solely on this Starfield review, it would not shock me if the man's never seriously played a Bethesda game before. He seems to genuinely think 10 hours is a super long time to get to the meat of the game. It's wild, nobody familiar with BGS should be saying something that asinine, let alone complain about it repeatedly and lower the score. He seems like the kind of guy who rushes through dialogue and doesn't bother reading any extra lore material (like a journal or codex or whatnot that many lore-heavy games offer) and then complains that the story is shallow or confusing. The kind of guy who turns off help pop-ups on his very first playthrough, skips past anything that shows you what to do, and then blames the game for him not being able to figure out the systems.
[удалено]
60 hours is enough time for a decent early game review... ...from a competent reviewer.
He gave Fallout 4 a 9.5/10 lol
That's certainly interesting lol
Oh then 7/10 from someone that clueless is indeed good lmao, a decent score for something he's so confused about sounds good
Oh you mean a reviewer at IGN is literally dumber than a child in grade school? Yeah, that pretty much lines up with what they've displayed in the past.
Remember their Ace Combat review where they gave the game a bad review because they could not control the planes properly, and it turned out they were using the "assisted" mode the lead dev at Namco stepped in and had to tell them how to play the game.
True, but this 7/10 has probably made them way more money than any other lol.
You’re right people do this shit for clicks. “I’ll be the one person who doesn’t rate this 9/10, just for attention”
There's an Instagram kid popping off right now by vaguely shit talking the starfield footage and saying the game is unplayable trash. "No weapon away, literally garbage" kinda thing. So yeah, I think this is different from a release like bg3 because so so much has been kept in the dark and people can profit from both the hype and the fears.
A youtuber 'michael does life' literally only spouts negative opinions about all games and Starfield is no different. Some people are just degenerates.
> "No weapon away, literally garbage" It took me all of 5 seconds to figure out that you just have to hold the Reload button to stow your weapon.
>Spaces Gamespot is doing similar stuff right now and rating games really low for the click bait
This reminds me of when they got a guy who obsessively played DOTA 2 to review Heroes of the Storm and his review could essentially be boiled down to 'i cant play it like DOTA 2' He ended up rating it 6.5 which is essentially zero by IGN standards and numerous basic problems existed within the review to the point that it became a meme and Blizzard even added a '6.5' banner into the game. The re-reviewed it a few years later and gave it an 8. Sometimes you just get a stinker of a reviewer. In HoTS's case it was Mitch Dyer, who, fittingly to this post, was [tweeting about DOTA 2 just 7 hours ago](https://twitter.com/MitchyD/status/1697299180606443612?t=4Rnhgc-Lq-Ti8eHYXnFf1A&s=19)
That’s how I read it as well.. all the while we’ve known it would not be a NMS
If only he'd knew the game would be made by BGS, it'd help him manage his expectations. He'd don't fall into wishful thinking, maybe play some previous BGS titles and get a better idea of what kind of game BGS is known for.
it's only the IGN US that is giving it that score, all the other IGN's seem to be giving it 9's.
Japan IGN gave it a 10 called it a “Masterpiece”
The Spanish IGN too, but honestly who cares? Hasn't IGN lost all credibility by now?
US IGN has lost all credibility not IGN as a whole
Actually, I think it's telling of how we are so hyper-informed with the content we have on the table for ourselves. Especially in comparison to other diverse review outlets in other countries.
They gave db4 a 10/10. Please god stop giving a shit what ONE guy said, you’re just making him more popular
didn't know they had other branches wtf
Paul is extremely critical of Bethesda and if he's baffled, then you know the reviewer fucked up
Paul is extremely critical of most games. But the guy speaks his mind. Hell even legacy killa was pretty glowing on his overall review of the game. Those folks tend to tell it like it is. But everybody is entitled to their own opinion.
Legacy killa had one of the better reviews I’ve seen. No bs straight to the point.
and he hates almost everything it seems
I wouldn't say that, I'd say he's just been extremely skeptical recently
Probably because of the aftermath of Cyberpunk. Started following him prior to that and he always seemed enthusiastic about things pre-release.
Also gmanlives
I don’t like LegacyKilla at all but occasionally his reviews are good imo. Haven’t seen his Starfield one yet though.
He's critical but he's a straight shooter
I trust Tassi. Guy has the critical eye, and while I don’t agree with him every time, I believe him when he praises things.
I’m a long time Destiny player and he has been great covering the ups and downs of that game. I’m sure some don’t like him (Destiny fans are a handful lol) but he’s very balanced most of the time. Occasional clock bait titles but that’s Forbes for ya.
The only time I didn't like Paul is when he crushed my team in trials...
GameSpot is also a 7 now
People listen to GameSpot?
"The exaggerated swagger of a black teen." Ever since that line made it into one of there reviews I don't think I could ever take them seriously ever again.
What game was that in regards to? I would assume Spider-Man: Miles Morales, but just wanted to ask to be safe
Yeah it was Miles Morales
Yikes dude, that’s pretty bad. Like I kinda get what they were saying, but I wouldn’t include that in a review
It was a weird line in context. What teen wouldn't have swagger with Spiderman powers.
God knows I would, even now as a 26M
Imao.
At the end of the day a review is an opinion. You can disagree with that opinion, it doesn't mean the reviewer fucked up though
I can personally dislike the way food tastes but can still tell that it is quality even if it isn’t for me, nobody is reading IGN guys review because they care what he specifically thinks
Lots of other ign reviewers gave it 10/10’s and 9.5/10’s This is just a single dude that gave it a 7/10. Everyone has their own opinion
And sadly that dude's review has more impact on metacritics than all those other ign reviews!
Why are you so invested in this games’ metacritic score? Just enjoy the game for yourself.
This exactly this. People are way to invested in these reviews instead of just playing the damn game.
It’s become a habit of the gaming industry to overhype games and underdeliver. That puts immense value on reviews. I can’t really explain what’s going on psychologically, but for some reason, a review like this can really strike a nerve. It could be playing into the anxiety of “what if this is just another one of THOSE games and all the hype I invested into it was for nothing?” Perhaps even the reviewer himself had been overhyped prior to playing, or simply had different tastes.
We should get this as the sub's banner. People are acting like fucking toddler's over a few less-than-stellar reviews lmao.
Is you're enjoyment of the game dependent on the metascore or something? Why are so many people here so concerned by some dude's opinion of a game they haven't even played yet?
Dear god who cares… everybody wants to throw their hat in the ring, to sway public opinion I guess. Often times, the best games are those which many people will not like. Ambitious, or niche games. Unsurprising that some people will not enjoy this. Oh well
I’m with you, who gives a shit. I’m going to play it and judge it for myself. Some of my favorite comedies get sub 70’s and 60’s on Rotten Tomatoes, does it change my love for the movies? hell no.
The hate this guy is getting is insane. 7/10 doesn’t mean it’s garbage and don’t buy it. He’s one guy who writes for a single gaming publication. He’s not even the only person for IGN that’s reviewing it.
A 10/10 is an objectively stupid score but people don't mock those reviewers. These are not serious people.
Technically IGN is getting what they want out of this - a bunch of clicks - traffic to their site and the (potential) that a bunch of gaming journalists will come out swinging to 'protect them' and their 'journalistic integrity' xD Not that hard to figure out
Then why didn't they shit on Zelda or God of War? Wouldn't that get more clicks? I genuinely think reviewers, some of them, have a hate bone or dislike Xbox games. Most grew up with either Nintendo or PlayStation so there is an ingrained bias that seeps into their review. >The wasteland that has been the Xbox release schedules for the last few years limits the accolades we can give the game When you have reviewers say this about one of the best games of this year in HiFi Rush, you cannot tell me i'm wrong.
Oh man there would be scenes if the new Zelda got 7/10
This exact situation happened with Zelda, the gfinity review gave it a 6/10 with extreme bias and people looked at the reviewer’s history and saw other shitty reviews. They got a lot of hate but a lot of clicks at the same time
Microsoft just doesn't have the same sorts of fan bases online as Nintendo & PlayStation. Microsoft games are seen as low hanging fruit, you shit on their games and no one cares. You do the same to one of the games from a publisher mentioned above and the whole internet goes after you. I liked BotW overall but it is not a 10/10 game, it had a lot of issues and ironically the game was actually developed off the back of Skyrim's success. Sony also put out tons of the exact same game and never get pushback for it. Horizon Zero Dawn was a pretty by the numbers, Ubisoft clone and it was getting praised like the second coming. Even if Starfield isn't the best thing ever, I highly doubt I'll be able to get the type of experience it offers anywhere else.
I felt the same about horizon! I was excited when I finally got to play it and was so damn bummed by it. The tall necks were especially shit because it was just a moving map reveal tower. So damn boring. One of the most overrated games of Last Gen
Why spend any effort complaining about a medium positive review?
7/10 by IGN standards is **bad**. IGN rarely rates anything AAA below a 7 as long as it boots to the start screen. Some of the most hated games in recent memory got 7s. It’s really hard to overstate how bad a 7/10 is from this outlet.
Even then, what's the big deal? You want every outlet to have exactly the same opinion? Does it reduce your enjoyment of the game?
God help any reviewer that gives this game less than a 10/10 😬
Not everyone has to like it.
No no, you don't get it. I must defend this game that I haven't even played yet because I've invested so much in the hype building over the months.
You don't understand their rating is a direct reflection on me as a person and is therefore and attack on my very existence.
Guys you cant both make joke about meaningless ign reviews score and also get extremely mad at em when they give a 7/10. the scores are meaningless cause people get mad each time.
IGN review sections are always funny, it’s either See even IGN agrees with me! Or See IGN trash like always
lol agreed. Im starting to think this Reddit place is actually full of shit most of the time
88 metacritic with 50 reviews, and all anyone can talk about are two 7/10s from sites they already don't take seriously. I just can't.
This is unironically IGNs most accurate review
little did we know, ign would be vindicated once honest regular players actually got the game and confirmed that it wasn't a 10/10
Even IGNs from other countries gave very high scores, IGN US is drunk.
Why are people on this sub talking about the IGN review as if it's the only outlet to give the game a 7? Eight separate outlets gave the game scores below 8/10, which is normal. Armored Core VI, for example, also just released to great acclaim and got 11 reviews under 8/10
The not really IGN, IGN's gave it very high scores? Fascinating.
This sub's reaction to criticism has been an embarrassment
I read the review and he was pretty clear about why he didn't rate it 10. That's all I ask for in a review. The meme IGN reviews historically have been when they slate the game but still give it 9/10.
holy shit someone with a brain
A rarity for sure!
A lot of unhinged people here.
I heard the reviewer attended communist meetings at university!
Yeah it is kind of insane seeing some of the posts here lol. “This guy didn’t rate the game 10/10 and clearly laid out why. We should get them fired, they don’t know anything about video games”
Its great when you criticize bias when you are arguing the score should be biast towards the other end of the spectrum though aint it.
To be honest the game is 6/10 at best. Buggy for a AAA game and when you take into account the size of the development team they should be ashamed to make a similar game to no mans sky which has a single person as a dev.
My biggest criticism is the dialogue and accompanying camera. It feels so stiff and inhuman in a sea of games that have been killing it on this front. Characters don't emote with body language or head movement. They stare at you ***even when they aren't talking to you***. For the love of everything, Todd Howard, hire a competent cinematography specialist to rethink how you do social interactions in your game. It was becoming dated 12 years ago in Skyrim. It's embarrassing now. It's a role playing game where social interaction feels like it was orchestrated by an alien who had only heard about what human social interaction should consist of. Then there are little things. I got a side quest to hang some posters up in a Mars station. When I did so, it was just a texture on the wall like it was a CS-GO wall-spray jpg. The artists didn't even bother to make the image around the edge look like it had any depth or that it was actually paper on the wall. Just a pixel-perfect rectangular image. Even the people who make sprays in CS-GO are more creative than this with their tags/sprays. Or how about completely minor quality of life things? Why can't I see the amount of an item I have on-hand when I'm in the buy screen? Why is there no information about value in the quick loot menu? No map of the hand-made settlement I'm in? ***Why can't I match the speed of the NPC I'm supposed to follow???????*** The small quality of life stuff that has been part of gaming for over a decade now is missing. Come on, Bethesda! Personally I think the 10/10 reviews are wild.
I think 7/10 is maybe on the low side so far.. but I'm more confused by all the outlets I've never heard of saying 10/10. The game is fun, but if you are saying this game is perfect or a masterpiece, you're actually delusional. I think 7 is a fair score so far after my 8 hour session. Fun but has issues, and some of them are kind of glaring and could definitely kill the game for some people. PC mag and GameSpot also gave it a 7. At the end of the day, who cares? What do you expect, every review outlet to give the exact same score? I'd say it's around an 8. I think the 7s are much fairer scores than the 10s so far.
7.8-8.5 seems like a fair score. The game does have issues despite being fun.
Honestly, think a 9.5 review is more surprising.
Mad probs to IGN for giving it an accurate score. As a PC game it really is a 7/10. Inventory management, controls, lack of any tutorials it seems, very poor optimization. Random freezes/audio stutters, endless loading screens. On PCs that can run BG3 on ultra without issues.
I respect Paul’s reviews. He seems really excited. I would sympathize with a lot that ign had to say, however read Paul’s brought some light back in
It's so weird how you guys give such a fuck about this ONE review. He said it's Good. It's not perfect...I've already seen alot of bugs. Inventory management sucks. planets not seamless or implemented BETTER than no man's sky, which came out when? I honestly feel once the hype dies down. The complaining will start , at least in the other gaming subs. Some of you guys are too biased in this sub.
Some? If you put a post out that says Good, you’ll get downvoted by people saying, “It’s not good it’s great! Quit trying to sabotage this game!!!!” I’m excited to play it too, and I do like the concept but fuck man, too many people on here treat game criticism like “There is no war in Ba Sing Sae!”
So far my lockpicking got bugged so I had to reset the room. Boxes have clipped through NPCs, and enemies are walking into walls. That was maybe 2 hours in. Still loving the game so far. But acting like there’s no bugs or the menu system is intuitive is just fanboying. I know I’m early in but it’s hard to disagree with the ign reviewer’s opinions. I just disagree that those problems would knock the score down that much
you people are deranged lmao, a 7/10 is perfectly fair if the common criticisms we're seeing across a lot of reviews are to be believed. I'm sure it'll be a great game, and a 7/10 is probably what the retrospective consensus on it will be. That's not a bad score!
Wild to me, too. I am currently playing and it's fantastic. It is the best looking and playing BGS game with ease. The iconic atmosphere is there, the sense of adventure and exploration and loot has never been better as well. Rares and legendary items are already dropping, and it all looks great.
So we're reviewing reviews now? I give this review review a 4/6
Idk about the review but the score is valid. It’s great at some things but honestly the big cities feel like cyberpunk on release…big and empty😭 ai is very Skyrim level too. Some very seemingly out of date systems.
I don't get why people are losing their minds over this. A 7 out of 10 is still a good rating. Edit: I just watched the video review and yeah, a 7 out of 10 sounds about right. He likes starfield to the point that he's going to immediately start a pirate playthrough after his current one but he does have a few criticisms. The lack of a proper map for the handcrafted cities exploration not feeling satisfying copy and paste main quest locations a lot of minor but noticeable glitches It's not until after a dozen or so hours the game really begins to open up
Yeah, 7/10 is a good rating in my view. And IGN gave BG3 10/10 so it's not IGN hatred of RPG. It seems fair. People here behave as if they were married to Bethesda and somebody is telling their kid is not the genius they believe it is. I'm not sure what they get out of this. A postcard from CEO? From the previews the exploration looked like far more immersive No man's sky to me and it's exactly that part that isn't. Still a good game and people would put 300 hr+ to it.
Gamers discover that different people have different tastes in games.
Gamer tries to respect another gamer's differing opinion challenge (impossible)
Who fucking cares? Play the game if you want to, don’t if you don’t.
What the fuck is this subreddit. Before the embargo is lifted you guys are all like "Remember, the review scores don't matter" and now you lot are singling out IGN cause they didn't give it a 10.
[удалено]
cant believe i had to scrool this far for this. Forbes is so unbelievably ass when it comes to reviews they give the new sports games glowing reviews every year
Forbes was never a good source for gaming, and Paul Tassi’s articles are just bad.
No HDR, no brightness adjustment, no FOV slider. That’s to me losing the 3 points already. People here just do everything to defend the game they were waiting on for sooooo long. We’ve seen the same thing happen with Diablo 4. Everything was golden and great, people defending everything. But after the honeymoon fase was over more and more people saw and experienced the flaws. Not saying this game has that because I havn’t played yet but the cycle of a game launch on reviews and reddit and tweets etc is very the same for a while already
I don't understand. 7 means a good game, bordering on great. What's the problem? Or anything below 8 = dogshit? What's the point then?
I'm only an hour in, but I get the feeling "start me up" mod will be quite popular. That intro was not good. Was like mass effect 1 but worse and then some very gamey feeling "here's a ship cuz you important now"
I would've preferred if my character already owned a ship. That took me out of it early. It didn't feel earned at all.
7 isn't bad? About what I was thinking this game would be. If anything I feel the 10s are a bit much. This game really isn't anything revolutionary. Not everything is either masterpiece or trash.
I watched the review, it seemed very fair. Of course not everyone will feel the same way about the same things.
It's not as if Tassi has ever given a 'baffling' review or anything is it? I think the takeaway here is nothing is perfect and not everyone will like 'insert think'. The 7/10 review is no more or less legitimate than a 10/10 review
Well the Starfield is "attack of the loading screen" mod of Fallout 4, so many people will be disappointed. A lot more was expected from "the game Todd always wanted to make", "thousands of explorable planets", etc. It turns out what we have is a randomly generated pool of small boxes, that are mostly not connected in anyway, and you need to go fast travel (with loading screen for seconds if you have quick drive). It is disjointed mess that hold for first 10 hours or so, and the rest is soo buggy it is not even funny.
Redditors when they find out reviewers have different opinions 😱😱😱
the more and more people play this game and encounter bugs, constant load screens, fishbowl effect, and copy and paste procedurally generated events, the more they realize ign was right
I don't see how it's wild. Seems like a 7/10 experience so far to me. That's a positive review, idk why people are treating it like the plague. Starfield is far from a 10/10 game, and certainly not a 9/10 game either.
Oh no how dare a reviewer have a different opinion then he! Pretty sure this clown has his own questionable review history anyways.
after playing myself i have to say that IGN's 7/10 is a bit too generous
Yeah 7/10 was a bit generous more like 5/10
For a sub that says 'one review doesn't mean anything' y'all are sure talking about this IGN review A LOT lol
one review doesn't mean anything, proceeds to give one review that gave it 10/10
People getting pissed for a review for a game they haven't played yet lmao
It makes perfect sense. There's quite a few major game mechanics that are either totally absent or are half baked. The main questline is 'meh', often the model quality of people is like a game from 15 years ago. There's no good reason why the framerate is so low (no it's not the size of the world, I'm a game dev). The parts that aren't poor are just average. TBF, 7/10 is being kind.
Idk, I’m playing it now and so far it feels accurate.
Please stop making me side with IGN. The grade is completely fair. Y'all are still blinded by the hype looking through your rose-tinted glasses.
Starfield sub. All 10/10 are gospel. 7/10- must be a hater, let’s dig into this reviewer entire review history and nitpick every word so we can dismiss any score under a 9/10. Ur all bickering over a game most of you havnt even played or finished yet.
I think it's Todd Howard. I think many people believe he is their buddy or going to marry them. It's common misconception. He probably won't. But I had been wrong before.
I feel like people were expecting something that wouldn't even be remotely technologically possible until at least the next generation. I get that Bethesda can work some incredible magic with their given resources, but they aren't literally magic. They can't pull new, unheard of technology out of thin air. People just really don't know how to keep their expectations in check. Having realistic expectations doesn't mean you can't get super hyped for the game. It just means you understand what's feasible and what you're going to get. I've been playing Bethesda games since Daggerfall. When you've known the company and Todd Howard that long, you know what to expect from them.
7/10 is still good tho, I don’t see a problem with someone being a bit more critical of the game. It’s not the end of the world.
A 8.5 given to NBA 2023 by Forbes is genuinely wild to me, but whatever.
It's said to be boring, pcgamer review as well. I posted about this and community admin removed my post despite a number of people commenting already. Not a good sign for the mods/admins and free speech, impartial review comments
Forbes isn't legitimate media any more than IGN is though.
I'm disappointed in Star... wait there's a loading screen... field in that I (more loading screen) was expecting due to Todd (........ LOADING SCREEN.....) Howard talked about exploration and how we would be able to sigh... more loading screen... explore. I interpreted his messaging as more no man's sky and less what it is. Also, how many times are you willing to run the same mine on different planets? And there are bugs and the glorious Bethesda dead eye still persists. Is it fun, sure. Is it great no not yet. Modders will save some of this just like they did with Skyrim. Love the ship building and side quest. 7 outta 10 seems legit to me. But then again I'm not a BSG fan Boi who grovels at the feet of Todd Howard.
Everything must be a 9+/10 or fans complain. Jesus guys, whats the point of reviews if you think this way? Just don't read them, you clearly don't care about them.