That's a fair point. I can understand how it's a bit more liberating not having your name out there attached to a score for people to attack on social media.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Edge 353 reviews - Assassin' Creed Valhalla, Yakuza: Like a Dragon, Spider-Man: Miles Morales and more
- Thread starter Deleted member 51789
- Start date
That's a fair point. I can understand how it's a bit more liberating not having your name out there attached to a score for people to attack on social media.
bugsnax is surprisingly good from what i played,
has a certain "tim schafer" type charm to it, with world building and writing.
dont sleep on it folks.
That kind of take would annoy me a lot less if what they classified as "the real games" wasn't just-as-focus-tested AAA garbage, but on the story-driven, cinematic side of things, instead of the long term engagement side.
If you're gonna call my bloated open world RPG a soulless product, I don't wanna hear any cinematic third person shooter as your example of high art. At least tell me about some novel design concept from some extremely niche game I've never heard of, not b tier storytelling coupled with uninspired game design.
Even more bizarre when the high art is basically Japan Assassin's Creed, but with Sony's logo at the start.
I would agree Spider-Man is the best thing they've done. But R&C is almost always fantastic. And I know that Spider-Man is a lot of people's favorite game of the generation. Which is no small thing.
eh, Ghosts is fun but I get that score. it's not a game I would replay. it reminded me of the old AC games but Jin was really boring. He's above Arno from Unity but that's not high praise
I honestly don't know what Astro could do to get a 7, even if that's still very good on Edge's ratings. Like, it's short but it's free? So even counting it's 3+ hour length, it's still amazing. If it was 8 hours and held up throughout it would in GOTY convos.
Nah, not when Bugsnax and Valhalla are getting 8's.
I really like Edge but they've got this one wrong.
I think part of the confusion is that some people seem to think of it as "every game starts with a 10, and then you give solid reasons to lower that score". I don't think it needs to "do" anything to get a 7, they just didn't like it as much as others, even though they still think it's good.
There are a lot of games that entered GOTY conversations throughout the years and won plenty of awards that I personally think are awful, let alone "pretty good, 7/10".
It also has to do with the general perception of what a 7/10 is in games reviewing, imo. Even if everyone says "7 is good for Edge", it's still hard to forget that 7/10 usually means the reviewer won't ever think about that game again in their lives starting two weeks from now. So you don't read 7/10 and think "yeah, it's a good game", you think "no way, it's a good game!"
True, and it's still a very high mark for Astro. Idk about others but it's certainly going to be the standard barrier for Dual Sense use for me for a while until someone tops it.
It's a 50 hour game. Not replaying it is not a bad thing for the game.
I replay almost everything I like including open world games especially if they have new game plus modes
Yeah being upset about Valhalla being scored higher than Ghost is strange. Outside the combat, it's essentially old AC in a samurai skin for mostly the worse.
Valhalla is a much better game imho. Though I'm feeling it is a bit too long.
Does this count as a form of the "Legend of Belda" argument?
I feel like it does as it's essentially saying Nintendo games get reviewed higher automatically.
This thread really has it all.
yes, there are some games that are revered here as high art when it's 3rd person games with tons of walking to be cinematic, loot, and stars a sad dad
What if... Valhalla isn't a "generic open world slog"? Maybe that would explain it?
Yeah, I think you can make a case for Ghost being more aesthetically pleasing and I guess there's less jank (which is not to say no jank), but it's a much more repetitive game than Valhalla overall and it runs out of steam after Act I, imo.
and honestly, ever since the PS2 games of the series, it felt like ratchet struggled finding out what to do with itself both story and gameplay wise
it went from biting satire with an optimistic message that unlikely heroes can prevail over greed until this generic, by the numbers chosen one story that needed tons of retcons to work
gameplay wise it's also stagnated since every game just adds more wacky weapons. there are some fun additions that aren't used nearly as much as they should like the sliding boots and the time travel that was amazing in the last levels of crack in time but barely used beforehand
it all culminated in the mediocre remake that was all the flaws of the series summed up with the butchering of the story of the amazing first game with tons of strafe and shooting gameplay
hopefully rift apart could do some new things with the gameplay and it uses the dimensional hopping a ton but the plot already looks meh from what we've seen
Edge Reviewers: if i rate a really hard game as good then ppl will think im a good gamer. Also, if I give kidz games a low score then that will prove to all gamers that we are legitimate
That doesn't stick at all. Look at this month's review of Bugsnax, it's right there. Unless I'm missing the joke?
This has to be a joke right? Sometimes it's so hard to tell..
For sure, just laughing at edge having no fun with little big planet. Feels like the food critic from ratatouille. Like the only pleasure you get is from an old game that's been remade? It's a great game, but come on haha. Live a little.
Also what's the shade on miles for? Bizarre. No fun allowed the issue if there ever was one.
Oh, another case of "how dare they give a low score to the games I enjoyed".
Why do I even bother lol
Come on.
Edge gave Little Big Planet a 10. Fewer than 25 games have gotten a 10 from them ever.
I'm only joking, of course it's their take. It's funny to me that the hardcore depressing game getting good reviews. Again, ratatouille critic lol
What? You're taking my comment out of context. I meant Insomniac wasn't taken seriously until Spider-Man, a "AAA" game, even though they made great games before Spider-Man. Has nothing to do with Nintendo's review scores.
OP
OP
Just going to ignore the fact that they have Bugsnax and Yakuza Like a Dragon (two incredibly non-serious games) 8s, huh?
And anyway, 7 isn't even a bad score in Edge especially when the reviews for MM and Astro Bot both say the games are still fun to play. Just because they didn't get on with Sackboy's Adventure as much as Demon's Souls doesn't mean that harder games with a more serious tone are the only pleasure they can get (we don't even know if the individual reviewers are the same for both games). What even is this take?
This thread is embarrassing. Read the reviews. The given grade makes sense in that context.
How we perceive games is different and instead of getting your knickers twisted over a Sony exclusive not getting the score you think it deserves, read the different perspective and engage with that instead of drive by commenting on the score.
How we perceive games is different and instead of getting your knickers twisted over a Sony exclusive not getting the score you think it deserves, read the different perspective and engage with that instead of drive by commenting on the score.
Ghost of Tsushima had a terrible camera, terrible stealth mechanics, uninteresting side quests outside of the mythic tales, generic open world outpost fights, and non-existent exploration considering animals led you to everything of importance (which was usually just boring platforming sections etc). The main story didn't event get interesting until the third act, and by then the game only has about 2 hours of content left. The entire game felt like it was from the early days of open world game design.
Discussing any of that around the time of its release was pretty much impossible to do on this forum without being instantly shouted down, so I understand why people are still so aggressive over the arbitrary review scores it received around here.
I don't play Ubisoft games, but I wouldn't be surprised if AC does a lot of things better than Tsushima.
Discussing any of that around the time of its release was pretty much impossible to do on this forum without being instantly shouted down, so I understand why people are still so aggressive over the arbitrary review scores it received around here.
I don't play Ubisoft games, but I wouldn't be surprised if AC does a lot of things better than Tsushima.
Yeah.. Review/score reactions will never, ever be different. Just like how this image will forever be relevant:
People still treat publications like they're a single reviewer who judges every game on the same scale. It's amazingly funny to see in every review thread.
Assassins Creed 2k21 is bloated, buggy, micro-transactions riddled trash with the real "b tier storytelling" but more like c tier.
Well it doesn't. And I disagree.
Assassins Creed and it's tacked on future time portal back to the past story arc is played out af and it's just to keep the name tied to their games. Everything you said about GoT applies to AssCreed x10. With the added bonus of bugs and micro transactions.
I play Ubisoft games and can't wait for Far Cry 6, but there should be no situation where you praise Assassins Creed and downplay GoT for some odd reason 🤔.