Most underrated games this gen

Johnny Novgorod

Bebop Man
Legacy
Apr 10, 2020
16,994
1,063
118
Country
Argentina
hanselthecaretaker said:
Given how the game is technically and artistically competent and at times excellent, it makes the current 69 Meta seem unjustified even when compared to other supposedly better games. Worst would probably be Jim Sterling's review, [http://www.thejimquisition.com/mad-max-review/] which further and definitively proves he has no clue how to assign numerical scoring in a cognitive, rational manner.
Jim must agree, he gave up numbered reviews some time ago. Gave up reviews too, now he just half-asses "Jimpressions" videos.
 

CaitSeith

Formely Gone Gonzo
Legacy
Apr 14, 2020
5,184
173
68
Commanderfantasy said:
Under-rated? Jeez that's a good fucking question man.

Let me think for a second here....Looking at the metacritic scores. I think I'd justfy in saying that Final Fantasy 15 was pretty underrated (being at a mid-70's score), I thought it was pretty fantastic, and it only got better with the royal edition release that improved the combat and added a lot more to the game overall. 15 is now easily in my top 3 FF games of all time and that's pretty fucking hard to do considering it had to kick 9 down to 4th overall.
I think Ignis DLC is underrated because it flew under the general public's radar. It has great music, a decent combat system, fun parkour and an alternative ending scenario.

Have you played the updated FFXV version? What do you think of the changes they did (specially in Chapter 13)?
 

hanselthecaretaker

My flask is half full
Legacy
Apr 5, 2020
4,500
1,890
118
Dalisclock said:
hanselthecaretaker said:
Given how the game is technically and artistically competent and at times excellent, it makes the current 69 Meta seem unjustified even when compared to other supposedly better games. Worst would probably be Jim Sterling's review, [http://www.thejimquisition.com/mad-max-review/] which further and definitively proves he has no clue how to assign numerical scoring in a cognitive, rational manner. I mean just read the headline:


When it comes to simply chewing through yet another open world game, Mad Max does suffice. It's a substandard but largely competent "AAA" game in a sea full of them, and those who do value the idea of content above all else will find more than their money's worth here...There's simply no reason to pick it up, however, if you've yet to try The Witcher 3, Shadow of Mordor or Batman: Arkham City. There are tons of better games that go for what Mad Max went for and do so in a superior manner.


Yup, that's a solid "4" sure. I'm also enjoying it more than The Wither 3 or Batman in terms of gameplay, and I paid for at least one of those (Mad Max and Arkham City were through monthly PSN+ deals). Never played SoM, but I did enjoy the LotR movies. Right now though, I'm inclined to say Mad Max is the best movie licensed game I've played since Goldeneye.
You realizes Jim used(because he doesn't do scored reviews anymore) the entire 10 point spectrum, right? Not just 7-10, where something had to be broken to rate lower then that for a lot of reviewers. 4 would make it okay to mediocre by that metric.

I personally dislike the idea of review scores for much this reason, but also because it feels fucking lazy. Is it too much to ask someone to read a 3-5 page game review to assess strengths and weaknesses before purchasing a potentially $60 title? At least scan the damn thing(some reviews include a TL;DR summery just for that reason)? Or do people really just want to see that stupid number, which apparently sends people into conniptions when it isn't high enough for their personal taste(8.8 syndrome)?
Even if the whole spectrum is used, a 4/10 or 40% would be largely considered a commercial failure by pretty much any standards. It was well below a failing grade all through school too for example. Good on him for ditching traditional scoring systems though, as he seemed to be an odd-one-out. The problem imo wasn?t that only 7-10 range was being used so much as a 7 or 8 was being interpreted as a ?bad? score in the first place.
 

BrawlMan

Lover of beat'em ups.
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
10,145
3,115
118
Detroit, Michigan
Country
United States of America
Gender
Male
Evil Within 2. It improved upon everything that the first game did. Sure, 2 didn't have as much enemy variety as the first game, but it did not have the bullshit difficulty where almost every boss had a one hit kill. The AI was a bit wonky for the Haunted, but all of 2's flaws are minor compared to the first EW and other horror games. The story, it's world, and the characters were amazingly improved upon. Ruvik is still a top tier villain though. That said, it's best to play EW1 to get a full appreciation of EW2. I think the reason why EW2 did not sell well was due to the reputation of the first game and it's problems. Glitchy gameplay that needed multiple patches and would still crash sometimes depending on the version (it's impossible to play the 360 version without the patch), it was made trying to please those who didn't buy next gen consoles yet, and it shows in the hardware and software, and the fucking letter boxing which was later patched out within a month. From what I heard, it won't stop Betheshda from funding Tango Games to make Evil Within 3. If and when the third game happen, I want Kidman to be the main focus since Sebastian's entire story and character arc is finished.