@pc_rocks said:
@st_monica said:
@pc_rocks said:
Already addressed the CP2077 issue in the past. The only reason CP2077 didn't get a free pass is because of the negative sentiment around it 'after release'. Your usual 'journos' were lusting over it until release and were actively hyping it as the next best thing. Just look at the reviews and scores until it was available. None of them highlighted any problems about it before. If CP2077 was bug free, it would have swept away all the awards too.
FROM didn't suffer from that issue at all. The online sentiment pre and post release was positive, carried by the soulsborne fans.
Oh and as for your claim about quality games in GOTY awards and not on branding/hype is laughable at best. Several former devs that served on the juries has came out and admitted that there's no criteria on how some games are nominated in which categories. David Jaffe was the most recent one I remember that highlighted the same issue. The decisions are all but arbitrary. Not just that, we have more than a decade of evidence on how games are reviewed and awarded scores etc. from several prominent critics or should I say former critics. Go and watch Danny O'Dwyer's video on why he left GS. He was probably the last critic worth his salt at GS.
So yeah, scores and awards are largely just a farce. Steam Reviews is pretty much where it's at.
Well, thanks for backing up my point that quality matters more than branding and hype.
Also I find your latter claim rather laughable. Just because "several" people questioned the selection criteria of a few media outlets does not prove anything that all other media outlets are choosing their GOTYs based on branding/hype rather than quality. The claim that because some media outlets are corrupt, all the hundreds of others must be equally corrupt sounds like your typical sophistry, but it's still a pretty laughable stretch.
As for the Steam Reviews, ER literally received a "very positive" rating and won Steam's GOTY as voted by Steam users. But that only represents part of the audience for multi-platform games like ER. It is also a place where quite a few folks who use substandard PCs or don't even have the ability to update their drivers give extremely low ratings to games they can't play properly. It is just delusional to think that it represents the gaming community, haha.
No I didn't back up your point at all, if anything I was saying the complete opposite. The journos didn't care about quality at all until the gamers figured it out and they have to change course to get the clicks.
Oh and those 'several' people are some of the respected ones in the space. Their content speak for themselves and those 'several' people were on pretty much most juries and it's not like they didn't look at other publications or didn't know about their own industry. That's like saying I don't know what goes on in my field just because I work at one company. Oh and not to mention that same 'several' people specifically were also on TGA - the most prestigious game awards show. That's all there's to tell you about how it works. I mean it's not like it's any secret, anyone with two brain cells can see how TGA is just an ads show with more 'world premiers' and 'ads' than awards. Hell most awards aren't even part of the main show.
Oh and I ididn't say the outlets are corrupt. I just said they do what they have to do to survive: chase clicks and ad revenue. Their content and editors speak for themselves what they actually are. Not literally corrupt that they take money from certain company to give it to a high score or award, though even indirectly that also happened (ala Geff Grubb). I would say they are only ethically corrupt not technically.
Oh and I never made the claim that ER isn't a quality game or Steam was wrong or even the accolades it received were not deserved, just that the reason for those accolades were completely different than quality. Oh and Steam is pretty much the best there is if you need to see the actual sentiment. I don't give a sh*t about multiplatform games or what happens on other platforms. I know that only Steam has a somewhat good metric to judge a quality that other platforms don't provide. So yeah, that's a stick I go with and don't have to rely on garbage/PR based/ads chasing GOTY/Reviews by publications.
No, you are just pretending not to notice the contradiction in your assertion. It was those "journos", not the players, who first pointed out the poor quality of CP2077 in their reviews. It is unfortunate that you are even altering the objective timeline to hide your own inconsistencies, haha.
Again, no matter how "respected" those few are, it proves nothing that hundreds of other journalists generally pick GOTY based on brand, hype, and clicks, not quality. As for the TGA, since it is voted on by a panel of judges consisting of over 100 media and influencers, it is ridiculous to see any connection between the GOTYs decided there and the impact of the ad revenue there.
You also claim that those journalists are ethically corrupt for clicks and ad revenue, and indeed I see many articles that are aimed at them. But when it comes to game reviews, if they don't continue to rate them fairly, they will conversely lose the trust of their audience and they will lose clicks in the long run. It seems to me that with the exception of a few extreme ones, the major gaming media outlets in general understand this simple fact, which is why they don't usually give extremely unfair reviews.
I don't think the Steam reviews you apparently put your trust in are a coherent source overall. As you know, those Steam reviewers play games on quite different PC specs and skill levels, which makes them great for some and problematic for others in terms of performance and experience. And there are no obvious criteria as to which of their opinions should be trusted. Instead, I have several professional reviewers for each genre who I trust, each with a track record, and I've actually found their reviews much more informative than the reviews of random players.
Log in to comment