-
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.
Days Gone Review Thread (See Staff Post)
- Thread starter Neat
- Start date
As always, you will have to be your own judge, but when a collective whole averages out to the 70s, it's probably a 70s type of game. To me 60s and below can be considered as bad games more than likely. Score in the 70s probably mean mediocre. 80s is probably good and 90s are great. I think I may still get it. I have enjoyed some bad games in the past.
7/10 is average and doesnt include unscored reviews. the game does look very bad.
the problem with the post is the assertion that the devs should be ashamed. that poster can go fuck themselves for that comment.
I don't post a ton on here, but it seems like I've seen a lot of hate on this game since it was announced. I didn't really follow it as the reveal felt like an instant "this isn't for me" title, but I know how many place importance on journalist reviews. Upon seeing the scores, I figured they surpassed expectations.
But upon skimming this thread there's an overriding sense of disappointment? How? It seemed like no one expected anything from this game and 7/10 ain't bad. Is the grading scale of journalist reviews that broken? Is anything less than the highly polished, AAA "blockbuster" from an established franchise no longer acceptable?
I just don't understand. People like open world games. People like zombie games. People like games where they're a shoot-bang man and shoot-bang man has a motorcycle in this one. It seems like the homogenized experience so many clamor for. So is it really that big of a deal if it doesn't have the voice acting or technical polish of the others that are doing basically the same thing? Is that enough to separate a 7/10 game from a 9/10 game and, if so, why is a 7/10 looked upon so poorly?
But upon skimming this thread there's an overriding sense of disappointment? How? It seemed like no one expected anything from this game and 7/10 ain't bad. Is the grading scale of journalist reviews that broken? Is anything less than the highly polished, AAA "blockbuster" from an established franchise no longer acceptable?
I just don't understand. People like open world games. People like zombie games. People like games where they're a shoot-bang man and shoot-bang man has a motorcycle in this one. It seems like the homogenized experience so many clamor for. So is it really that big of a deal if it doesn't have the voice acting or technical polish of the others that are doing basically the same thing? Is that enough to separate a 7/10 game from a 9/10 game and, if so, why is a 7/10 looked upon so poorly?
And I don't really understand why. 7/10 is decent enough. Some people will like it, some people won't.
I sometimes feel video games can only be great or terrible on this website.
these reviews seem to be in line with what i was expecting when it was first shown off, disappointed to see these scores after it seemed to be getting pretty good previews. which again idk why this happens but previews sometimes are way too positive. Might pick this up when it goes on sale. is the platinum tedious?
I think that many reviewer has they own personal horse in the play, and don't give subjective score.
like IGN saying they preview video that it's bad that protagonist is white male, that is racism and very unprofessional to say.
I think that this game is going to be clut classic for sure, it will find it's audience.
like IGN saying they preview video that it's bad that protagonist is white male, that is racism and very unprofessional to say.
I think that this game is going to be clut classic for sure, it will find it's audience.
Last edited:
Digital Foundry uploaded some stunning HDR footage. Looks like an HDR showcase. Sadly the game is average. I'll pick it up on sale at least to enjoy some of the sights for a while.
RE2, DMC5, Sekiro, Apex, MK11 Yoshi... If you're disappointing with all that I'd ask what are you expecting?
I agree the game looks bad but 7/10 is not the game is a piece of shit by any measure, a 2/10 or a 4/10 is more that level.
But yes I was condeming the post as a whole.
Because fanboys. Many people (like most hyped AAA console exclusive games) have had their minds made up about this game already and likely weren't going to budge. The discourse around this game for months has been less about whether or not it would be good/great/middling/bad and more about who was going to get to serve crow to who.
People hated this game for whatever reason. And they having a field day now while pretending a 7 out of 10 game is bad. It is a pretty good game and if you like AAA open world games before, you will like this one too.
well said. that's what reviews are there for, 60 isn't a small price to pay day 1 for a game when you're not sure of its quality.
Last edited:
Over 6, actually and hearing all the reviews mention major technical issues, it looks like that development cycle will be extending via patches into the foreseeable future.
Wow, that's a lot lower than I was expecting. I figured it'd score rather well in the low to mid 80's, potentially even higher, considering Sony's recent AAA track record. Still, those aren't awful scores and I'd imagine the core audience will probably get a fair amount of enjoyment from it
Having read some of the reviews, this game attempts to adapt the Ubisoft formula and ends up being a vacuous time-sink with metres to fill. I never had hope over the story because it seemed to generic – morally complex character; contradictions between survival and conviction etc.
I'll play this a few months down the line when it's heavily discounted and has a few updates but I have to say, I'm very disappointed Sony decided to publish a game that from the looks of it, looks so vacuous and full of cookie-cutter content.
I'll play this a few months down the line when it's heavily discounted and has a few updates but I have to say, I'm very disappointed Sony decided to publish a game that from the looks of it, looks so vacuous and full of cookie-cutter content.
Peo
But TLoU's success is probably the reason why this got green lit in the first place.
But TLoU's success is probably the reason why this got green lit in the first place.
Damn didn't think the game would get shitted on this bad by reviewers, glad i got the physical copy since i usually go digital on Sony exclusives since i still had that air of doubt about the game due to Bend not being anywhere near as proven as the likes of ND, GG, Insomniac etc. I'll give it a shot still but definitely have no qualms trading it in if it turns out to be a dud. Still see the game selling a shit ton and hopefully like the original Assassin's Creed which was also mediocre comes out with a vastly superior sequel down the line.
But is annoying. I'm going to wait what he has to said about moral complex stories like The Last if Us. He also wasn't happy because GoW and the lack of women.
But why?
Yes. But you have to make them in their domain. Don't treat a open world videogame, with tons of previews were you can actually see their shallow premise to be a piece of narrative work.
But Patrick make emphasis on the morals of the game or the lack of. The two authors that I quote are masters of moral complexity. If he wants that kind of consistency he is not looking at the right place.
Exactly. So why the fuzz? Every game now has to make an statement? Or have something to said? Help me God the day that people start asking for Mario games a moral stand and a meaningful plot.
People have been grossly overestimating it this whole time and are now quiet/otherwise trying to play it off as if 7 is not a huge disappointment. It's actually kind of funny to watch.
Y'all gotta keep in mind that review scores base of US grading scales. A 70 is not good. Thats a D most places.
I don't think the quality of the game is the discussion here, more like people getting tired of games that have nothing more to offer then 'an open world'. The bar has been raised by devs like Rockstar, CD Project RED and UbiSoft in that regard. I think I can applaud the critics for actually being critical about the games' design and I hope it moves us past this phase of games with 100 hours of 'content' as thin as a sheet of paper.
If Days Gone had actually interesting and unique gameplay to offer than noone would've tripped over things like 'story flaws', bugs or other tiny details.
Maybe stop looking at the average number and actually read the reviews.
Depending on what you are looking for in game, this one may be considered a piece of shit
Well, I guess my hunch was pretty much spot on. Still hope it sells well for the devs, but it just never looked like a game that I would ever want to put time into.
Don't get me wrong. There are GREAT games this year. But lets face it, Fallout 76, Anthem, (in to a much lesser degree) Days Gone were victims of just poor development in one way or another.
These games landed with a THUD (again ignore Days Gone since it is too early to tell) in an industry and from developers that poured a lot of money into these games. I feel like there is something that really needs to be said to avoid these stories in the future. I'd also like to point out the growing pains in 2 of your examples in MK11 (6400$ in skins and the progression system) and Apex (This is more Fortnite's crunch problem than anything else but people are expecting more from Apex as a result). It is REALLY concerning.
I'm not really sticking up for this game, but I'm so sick of people pushing false narratives. A review that ends with 6/10 or 7/10 is not "scathing"!
If it's not up to your standard, that's fine. Money and time are very precious commodities for all of us.
I'm only in this thread because this is a Sony game. I don't even own PS4, but I always anticipate the reception of their exclusives as an event.
If it's not up to your standard, that's fine. Money and time are very precious commodities for all of us.
I'm only in this thread because this is a Sony game. I don't even own PS4, but I always anticipate the reception of their exclusives as an event.
Especially given the price these games cost. I'm sure the devs tried very hard to make this game - that doesn't mean we should support them. I'll be giving this a hard pass.
Slant magazine. 1.5/5
https://www.slantmagazine.com/games...nds-your-submission-to-the-content-treadmill/
https://www.slantmagazine.com/games...nds-your-submission-to-the-content-treadmill/
It's interesting to see that both Bend and Ready at Dawn studios who have very critically and commercially successful handheld titles in their portfolios have not been able to carry it forward to the same degree with new IPs on home consoles.
It comes off like scope and management related issues.
It comes off like scope and management related issues.