The Last Of Us Review Hate

[ninjaRiv]

That's a lot of idiots being idiots! On the internet! Where did you find this gem? It is so rare to see this! Why can't I turn of the sarcasm? Is something wrong with The Escapist's sarcasm filter...?

Yeah, you're right it's stupid that people can get so pissy over a game that hasn't come out yet but that's what they do. I saw one guy say his friend got a review copy. It's possible his friend got a review copy, but I think it's more likely that he sunk so low as to lie. It's sad that people have to run around shouting "this is my opinion and therefore it should be yours, too!!!"

 

[Korten12]

snip

I don't get the point of this post... So what were supposed to hate the game now because reviewers and one journalist like it and say some things over have?

I don't even... I guess both sides are just as bad.

Also love this part of your post:

"But don't forget to buy the separate difficulty Mode DLC."

Um, did you not even read your own image? Nothing even mentions difficulty. Or where you just saying that to try and further prove your own point?

Your like Jeffers, but while he defends Nintendo, you post like your the saving grace of the gaming industry.

 

[sethisjimmy]

It's pretty annoying. I can't help but notice these kinds of comments. I mean The Last of Us reviews came out early for fucks sake, people complaining are only complaining because whatever reviewer didn't give it exactly the same score as every other reviewer, not because the complainer has actually played the game and thinks it deserves better.

And for what? For fucking what? 8 out of 10? Jim brought up this topic a while ago in his "Hate out of 10 video". How is it possible that video game reviews are so inflated that an 8 out of 10 is considered slander? That's an A! A great game by all means! It shocks me to see people "defending" a game they've never even played with such vigor for something that isn't even an insult.

This isn't new though. Going on literally any IGN review, and people in the comments cannot stop crying about the score. Fuck the actual review, right? The words? Who listens to them? It's all about why this game deserves a 10 when they gave it a 9.5.

I think it's genuinely debatable which is responsible for this failed review score inflation, the reviewers (the larger of them are suspect of being "paid off" through advertising revenue and pressure) or the rabid fanboys, who instantly shit themselves if a game they like receives less than a perfect 10. This kind of behavior is only discouraging reviewers from sharing their actual opinions and experiences, and pushing them towards pandering and being influenced by other review scores.

And yes, anyone, literally anyone can point out score inconsistencies. "but why did X review site give this game an 8 when they gave that other game a 9?" I don't know, maybe opinion? Maybe it was a different reviewer entirely? Maybe they took into account different aspects, such as audience or developer?

Fanboys can't just block out every criticism. Criticism is healthy for a game and developer, especially one with this stupifying amount of hype. Sometimes you have to bring things back down to earth and realize while it might be a great game, even great games have flaws, or things you perceive as flaws. In the case of The Last of Us, most reviewers actually noted these flaws without taking points off, where some reviewers did. It's all about perception, and with a medium like video games people need to realize that there is never, ever, going to be a way to systematically, objectively review every game without problems.

 

[Toxic Sniper]

The funny thing is, the original infamous Citizen Kane comparison to Metroid Prime was not just empty praise; it actually compared how the two works used their medium and focused on that above story. Citizen Kane wasn't a generically good movie, it was a masterpiece of direction and cinematography. It's a lot like 2001 (Which was even more focused on looking amazing as opposed to telling a gripping story). Comparing a game with generic gameplay and a focus on story like Bioshock Infinite to Citizen Kane misses the entire point of why Citizen Kane is praised.

As for reviews, I know that 10 out of 10s aren't supposed to be perfect. The bigger problem is that there's no real variety in scores. If you look at movie reviews on an aggregate site like Metacritic and compare them to game reviews, you'll see many more negative reviews. Not just 7 out of 10 lowballs, I mean actual negative reviews. But because we're so used to a 4 point scale, pretty much every competently produced cinematic AAA title is going to get a 90-something. There's no way to really determine critical reception to these sorts of titles when it's almost all the same.

I don't think the Last of Us will be a bad game; the gameplay I've seen looks really good, and while the talk of linear level design bothers me, at least the game seems to be trying to do survival horror right. I'm just bugged by the silly fan outrage to anything less than a 10. I remember back when everyone was laughing at Famitsu for its ridiculous number of perfect scores; now it looks like every gaming publication is going to either become Famitsu or suffer impotent outrage from fans who haven't even played the game.

 

[Ishigami]

Just look at average user score at metacritic. It is either 10 or 1. That's it. There's no longer 1 to 10 scale, where 1-4 is bad, 5-6 is average and forgetable, 7-9 is very good and worth buying, and 10 is amazing. It's now 10-good, 1-bad. That's fucking it.
<img src=http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b378/omarfw123/13151596601392.png>
On a related note, am I the only one who thinks that 10 is not supposed to mean perfect? For me 10 means that game is so freaking good, that you're willing to ignore most negative parts. At Destructoid both Persona 3: FES and Persona 3: Portable have 10/10 even though gameplay and content vise Portable is superior version. Same goes with Persona 4 and Persona 4: Golden. Persona 4: Golden being the ultimate version in terms of gameplay is still far from being perfect and there are many issues that are addressed in the review.

QFT!
Nice graph there point out what is wrong with people.
I'm so sick of people pretending that a max score means something is ?perfect". It is just retarded.
Usually you find some sort of ?rating philosophy? to a score system of a magazine. And guess what? - You won't find any serious magazine in which a max score means something like ?perfect?!
Check out The Escapist: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/7149-What-Our-Review-Scores-Mean

Five stars. This is as good as gaming currently gets, the crème de la crème. This doesn't imply perfection, merely that the experience you'll have will be exceptionally enjoyable.

They even put it right there for gods fucking sake!
Yet you always find some guy (sorry dude) that say stuff like this:

To me, a score of 10 implies absolute perfection in a video game

No it does not, never will and never has no matter how many times you or someone else says this stuff!

And yes peoples perception of scores and quality is also so fucking screwed up it is not funny any more. The chart is right. Everything below 8 is considered trash these days and games are either ?awesome? or ?shit?. There is nothing in between and is damn wrong.
But nevertheless it becomes quite obvious why every publisher tries to influence ratings. Consumer behaviour is the real culprit. We are to blame.

When was the last time you bought a video game rated ?average? or ?slightly above average? because despite the flaws you found something compelling about it?
I e.g. bought Remember Me despite knowing full well that it received this kind of reception because I still found it interesting.

 

[Bradmaster Flash]

When was the last time you bought a video game rated ?average? or ?slightly above average? because despite the flaws you found something compelling about it?
I e.g. bought Remember Me despite knowing full well that it received this kind of reception because I still found it interesting.

So many people stated that it was an objectively bad game, but I purchased Duke Nukem Forever and absolutely loved it. I haven't taken reviews seriously for a long time. If I'm interested in a game, I'll look at gameplay clips on YouTube and see for myself whether it's worth buying. I can't think of many particular reviewers in this day that I can actually trust for an unbiased view.

 

[chozo_hybrid]

For the record, I think for a lot of reviewers, a 10 is not a game is perfect. It's more of an opinion, that despite its flaws, it is an amazing experience etc.

Getting shitty at an 8 out of 10 like people are is just insane, that's for saying a game is great!

 

[MetalDooley]

The problem really started with this game:
Ocarina of Time is the highest rated game ever, and for good reason. It was way ahead of it's time and did things most had never seen before. Around five years later, games were coming out that were far better than Ocarina of Time; so reviewers started giving away perfect scores like candies at Halloween.Now we're at the point where trolls expect every AAA title to have a perfect score.

Blaming OoT is a bit harsh I think.I'd be more inclined to put it down to the rise of internet review sites.Back in the days when print magazines were your only source for reviews they didn't rely solely on ad revenue so I reckon they weren't afraid to mark games correctly.Internet reviewers are wholly dependant on publisher ad revenue though so there's an understandable reluctance to bite the hand that feeds.Thus average games get a higher score than they deserve which has ruined the scoring system.Back in the old days a average game would get a 5 and a good game an 8.Nowadays 7 is the average so good games have to get an inflated score so you end up with way more games getting 9 and 10 than they deserve.

The "reviewing practices" are broken and implausible. No game should get that many "perfect scores" no matter how "good" it is, it just diminishes any possible credibility in the reviewing process that might still be left and renders it meaningless as fuck: http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-3/the-last-of-us/critic-reviews?dist=positive

Not only that but someone somewhere uses empty phrases like "GAMING'S CITIZEN KANE" every month, which too lose all meaning upon their overuse.

It's all laughable really and loses all sense and purpose it might've had in the past if every AAAAA hyped game gets a bunch of "100/100" from everywhere, it also panders to exactly the people that can't see their latest precious being critized for its shortcomings (I don't care what game you take, there are always parts that are lacking or could be better).

I couldn't agree more.I look at the Metacritic page for The Last of Us and see 30 perfect scores and currently only 4 of the other 31 scores are under 90 and I don't think "Wow that game must be good".Intead what goes through my mind is "Bullshit no game is that good.Games reviews these days are nonsense"

 

[daveman247]

Meh expected. There has been an INSANE amount of hype behind this game. Every few comments on sites on other games seemed to be "Yeah, this is good. But Last of us will blow it out of the water."

 

[scorptatious]

Yeah, I can agree that the way scores are being treated now a days is a tad bit ridiculous. I'll admit though, I was sort of on that whole "8 out of 10?? What the fuck" train when I was younger, but I grew out of that.

I remember seeing this one guy's video getting tons of dislikes because he gave Skyward Sword a 7. It was a fair review to be honest, and I don't think the hate was at all warranted.

What I also hate about this kind of thing is that when the fanboys cry, the haters respond and point out every single little flaw in the game and call it "generic" among other things. Which I find equally if not more annoying. I mean seriously, one guy on here complained about how the texture on the fucking apples in Bioshock: Infinite were flat looking. If that isn't nitpicking I don't know what is. It's a vicious cycle that seems to be happening with a lot of major game releases as of late.

Anyway, here's hoping The Last of Us actually is at least somewhat as good as the reviewers say it is.

 

[MetalDooley]

I remember seeing this one guy's video getting tons of dislikes because he gave Skyward Sword a 7. It was a fair review to be honest, and I don't think the hate was at all warranted.

You think that's bad.Adam Sessler got a load of flak from Sony fanboys over his Killzone 2 review with people accusing him of bias towards Microsoft etc.The score he gave KZ2?5/5.That's right he gave the game a perfect score and people still hated on him.

Some people just look for any excuse to hate on a review/reviewer and if they can't find one they'll make stuff up

 

[scorptatious]

What I also hate about this kind of thing is that when the fanboys cry, the haters respond and point out every single little flaw in the game and call it "generic" among other things. Which I find equally if not more annoying. I mean seriously, one guy on here complained about how the texture on the fucking apples in Bioshock: Infinite were flat looking. If that isn't nitpicking I don't know what is. It's a vicious cycle that seems to be happening with a lot of major game releases as of late.

Yeah that was me, I also said it wouldn't have to look like that if it was a "Next Gen game": http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.405391-So-is-the-Bioshock-Infinite-Honeymoon-period-finally-over

Aside from that I also had another two dozen problems with the game and I just honestly thought it isn't that good, I've also kind of written exactly why and why I think that the first BioShock was actually a lot better. I guess that makes me a "hater".

By the way:

Maybe hater was a bit of a strong word. Sorry. I just personally didn't find the texture stuff to be that big a deal.

I'll admit, I also thought Bioshock 1 was a better game. But despite the game's flaws, I think Infinite did a few things right as well. I don't think it was a "generation defining" game as so many people place it as, but I personally don't think the game was bad either.

Again though, I do agree that this whole thing where people rage about a less than perfect score is ridiculous.

It's funny, after watching a bit of that video, I realized that a few of my favorite games happened to have been given a score in the 8 range by GameSpot. Shadow of the Colossus, ICO, Final Fantasy IX, Valkyria Chronicles ect. Just something I noticed.

 

[Korten12]

Maybe hater was a bit of a strong word. Sorry. I just personally didn't find the texture stuff to be that big a deal.

Hm... Not so sure. Honestly Dexter seems to come off 99% of the time as: "I am right, you're wrong. Fact."

And worst part about it? He doesn't even really use his own words. If you look at most of his posts, they're mostly just other peoples words and links.

Honestly, it just got to the point where I am getting annoyed... Probably shouldn't be, but it happens.

 

[OldDirtyCrusty]

A few kids get mad over reviewscores? That`s not a big deal and happens with other games too. If the reviewer messed it up a bit because he wasn`t able to get that clickers are suposed to be blind it`s just embarassing for GS. An 8 is still a good score and there are enough other reviews for the Last of Us. Some sites are acting like it`s the second comming of christ and i doubt it. I expect a good or great game nothing more and i don`t need review scores for my opinion.

 

[AnthrSolidSnake]

I'm incredibly excited for the game and even I don't think it's worth a perfect 10/10 score. I have no doubt the game will be great, but not perfect. It certainly seems to improve on elements from third person shooters and survival horror games, but it doesn't bring anything new.

 

[Tom_green_day]

Before jumping on the bandwagon of the popular opinion, was the review sub-10 for a good reason or just because of something trivial, like its exclusivity or bad menus or something? If that is the case, then I think complaining about the reviews is justified, and not done by the abominable 'fanboys'.

 

[Woodsey]

The leading issue is this: people are morons. I mean, real stone-cold idiots.

Reviewers are paid because they can express their opinion well in a written form, not because they have a divine mandate to reinforce the popular opinion.

Moreover, review scores are stupid. A 7 in one publication is not the same as a 7 in another, and for fuck's sake don't start making conversion charts and begin trying to explain how a 3/5 is really only a 6/10 and blah blah blah. Publications define what those numbers mean within the context of their own reviewers - which people always ignore anyway - and even then you're dealing with different people within a publication.

And just to reinforce it: reviews are opinions. That's it. Objectivity only factors in to the extent of someone not taking a bribe to give a good score, or not being friends with someone who's worked on the game. The rest is just what people think, and no publication mandates stuff like, "a game must get a minimum of Score X if it has only 3 bugs". If someone hates The Last of Us then they're well within their rights to give it a fucking zero. This is not a difficult concept, this is what you learn when you're 6 and it becomes apparent that not everyone thinks the same way as you do.

Of course, all of this would be solved if reviewers simply gave a sentence-long, spoiler-free summary of their thoughts on any given game at the end of their review instead of using numbers, but then that'd be way too easy.

 

[DioWallachia]

The problem really started with this game:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-cG55gr-Fbmg/TinBohWoBHI/AAAAAAAAAE0/z8jnfVOa-o8/s1600/OcarinaofTime.jpg

Ocarina of Time is the highest rated game ever, and for good reason. It was way ahead of it's time and did things most had never seen before. Around five years later, games were coming out that were far better than Ocarina of Time; so reviewers started giving away perfect scores like candies at Halloween. Now we're at the point where trolls expect every AAA title to have a perfect score.

Or, you know, it could be this:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2012/03/22/mass-effect-3-gears-of-war-3-and-why-reviewers-fail/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2012/03/22/mass-effect-3-gears-of-war-3-and-why-reviewers-fail/2/

 

[jetriot]

Meh, seems like its good enough. If it was on PC i'd buy it. It doesn't look THAT great though. Just another run down a corridor playing with the different features we implemented in this game. I tend to prefer a bit more freedom in my games which tends to push me away from FPS/Action-Adventure games.

 

[Frotality]

well i suppose with a lot of sub-par yearly release franchises getting wholly undeserved 9s and 10s, some people think genuinely good games crafted with love should get the same treatment. on the same scale that gives blops a 9 the last of us probably deserves something higher (though i dont know why these idiots make that claim before fucking playing it themselves), but on a normal scale that actually uses more than the last 4 numbers, where blops probably has a 5 or 6, 8 is a perfectly great score.