-
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.
PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds PC 1.0 Reviews
- Thread starter Twin Tails
- Start date
Nah GTA IV is still the worst, sticks out like a sore thumb when you look at metacritic best games of all time list.
That said GTA V was amazing so i am not anti gta.
I'm still trying to figure out what's more shocking, that the games first review is a 10/10, or that the first review is from Polygon.
If this is something you can't discuss without getting heated, I recommend you refrain from posting in this thread.
I was talking about the other half of the message where everyone who disagrees with it being 10/10 are salty negative people.
Not the person you quoted, but I agree with him. Game is technically unfinished and still a bit of a mess on PC (and arguably unplayable on Xbox One).
Not about being bitter, it's about what I'd like to be able to expect as a videogame consumer. And I'd like to be able to expect optimized, finished games when I purchase them.
PUBG is fun, but it's not a perfect game. It's also not a great sign of things to come regarding "early access" and general multiplayer only titles.
The user was warned for this post. Don't bring up another user's baggage from other forums.
Oh yeah, it's cabbagehead! Constantly goes out of their way to slag off PUBG for being early access but loves star citizen lol it was boring on the old forum and it's boring now.
Glad it got a 10, the salt is delicious.
Real talk though, best multiplayer game me and my friends have played in years.
Glad it got a 10, the salt is delicious.
Real talk though, best multiplayer game me and my friends have played in years.
Reminds me of BOTW getting a 7.5 from Jim Sterling lol (I agree with him, btw).
That's why I think numerical scores are kinda pointless. I remember a tweet from Hideki Kamiya saying something like: don't rate games, like, love, hate, so-so, but no scores.
I'm not gonna play it at all until the issues are ironed out. If 1.0 ends up fixing up the entire game then that's great, but Blue Hole makes it hard for me to be confident that it will.
But I'm not getting heated...didn't even say a single bad word.
Perhaps you can find it in your heart to cut the sass and elaborate.
I did. Don't know what you're referring to that I missed. What is it?
The review and the game are a snapshot in the river of time. It is natural that tech advances and you always have to evaluate older games in their release time to understand why they were score the way they did. Still, you can achieve a close to perfect state in all aspects of a game during the time of release. It doesn't matter if tech advances as the time goes on. For the time of release it was the best of perfection you could achieve. Even if later games look better that does not detract from the earlier state.
You would not see a mountain of 9/10, rather maybe 1 10/10, a few 9/10 and more 8/10 + 7/10.
How are zero graphical issues so difficult? I understand smaller, difficult to find bugs that tank performance but glaring issues that you notice each time you play should be something you fix and get docked points for. There can be downtime in "fun" as well to promote the fun ahead in a sequence.
But I want reviewers to be objective and not subjectively say they like a certain game. Them using their subjective view does not help me to decide if the game is worth buying.
Probably. But I might be able to dismiss a few spelling mistakes, even though it looks careless. If you make spelling mistakes in other forms of tests they will reduce your points too as it is easy to fix in most cases.
I want a perfect score to be rare. My expectation would be that if 10 is really rare the 9 is more important thus the 8 as well. You get fewer 10 titles, a lot gather at 9 and 8 as well as the other scores. It all lowers itself a bit while highlighting the true masterpieces that deserve the praise.
Maybe I am looking to much for perfection, but I find it difficult to dismiss things that you can fix. =/
I want them to be as objective as possible. Make a subjective and objective section if you want too. Mixing your personal views carelessly in an objective assessment of a product will taint it in my opinion. I am not against the reviewers subjective experience, how much fun they had, etc. . But they should have high standards for other aspects of a game like technical details.
Does not mean I consider this game bad by the way. I hope people understand this, I just expect more if a game gets a 10/10.
Naw. It sold 25+ million copies from word of mouth, is the best MP game in years, and the 2017 game that will have the most industry impact by far. Dunno why that makes you so butthurt.
In my opinion, more focused games should mean higher expectations should be placed on the stuff that is there. A game like Super Meat Boy better have solid performance, great controls and very limited bugs. Where as a game like Skyrim I can forgive more performance issues and bugs because the scale of the game is so much larger.
I just don't buy the idea that because the game is smaller in scale, we should somehow be more forgiving of faults.
It's not. There are better games like Zelda, Mario and Horizon. Even Brendan agrees with me.
ihttp://www.ign.com/articles/2017/10/31/pubg-dev-i-dont-know-if-we-deserve-goty-award
IV was the easily the worst GTA I've ever played. And I think I've played them all except for IV's DLC.
1.0 is both optimized and finished, the game had a ridiculously good update development and was never abandoned. I wish all early access games were like this.
ie "bought ads".
i have bad news for you about whatever game site you consider more credible.
what about 5/5? what about 3/3?
i'm sure you see the limitation of this position.
Skyrim has one player connected to a game running on their hard drive. PUBG has 100 people connected to one server.
Skyrim is also an iteration on a game the company has made multiple times before. It also does little to progress it's own genre.
PUBG for many people changed the way they think about and play games. Just like Dark Souls, it changed the way people think about multiplayer.
The comparison is not only valid, but I would argue that PUBG actually does more things right in terms of design than does Skyrim.
It just makes you seem like you can't handle other peoples responses is all. It's as immature as asking someone their age.
I think this is a deserved 10. I have not had this fun playing multiplayer since Halo 2. I've been texting/IMing friends to see who wants to play PUBG in the evening which is not something I have done in a long time.
Not a single one of these games is better, no. Why would I care about what Brendan thinks about what game is the best, exactly?
It's not finished. They have two maps and have already advertised a third. Finished (IMO) would be all three advertised maps.
I will give you that with vaulting and the recent optimization tweaks it feels much more like a 1.0 game.
Objective reviews would be completely terrible and meaningless, and would make deciding whether a game is worth buying a thousand times harder.
That's like saying Overwatch wasn't finished until Sombra was released. Multiplayer games regularly release with a roadmap or announced DLC in the future.
This. For real. I remember when GFW Radio was talking about this ages ago. It is embarrassing how we are still back on this bullshit.
A game that is so bad on a technical level should not get a 10, no matter how good the idea and the general concept behind it is.
No I bring it up because review whining was a thing that derailed threads with 100s of pages of arguing that wouldn't go anywhere until mods had to step in.
Yes, they are better imo and I think the creator of PUBGs opinion should be taken into consideration, since he is the creator of the game.
What makes PUBG better than Mario Odyssey?
I wouldn't give pubg a 10, but, then again, I wouldn't give botw a 10 either.
You know, botw, the other game that at least around the time of launch had areas with slide show framerates and crippling bugs.
It's their opinion and they're welcome to it. It's definitely a fun game.
You know, botw, the other game that at least around the time of launch had areas with slide show framerates and crippling bugs.
It's their opinion and they're welcome to it. It's definitely a fun game.
If that's what you think it's "unfinished", then never buy a single worthwhile multiplayer game, because by your standards they are all "unfinished" as they constantly get new content.
No, it shouldn't.
It gives me the chills.
The future is blink, if these "early access games" are the future of online multiplayer tites. That studios and publishers will now continue to target.
Though, i do want a finished Battle Royale game...hopefully one day.
Well, imo, you are wrong.
What makes PUBG better than Mario Odyssey? Or BOTW? Or Persona 5?
By your standard a game like World of Wacraft or Overwatch is never finished because they keep adding new content. That's not the reality of GaaS. By that standard, even Zelda BOTW isn't finished because it continues to get new DLC
The point of a service game is that it's never finished and there's always content on the horizon.
Which is why drawing lines in the sand about early access is also kind of silly.
Test server has been mostly peachy for me and my 3 year old laptop.
People angry it got a 10. Jesus Christ folks, get a grip.
It's just the reviewers experience and he can score it how it wants. I can easily see why it would get a 10. The sheer fun and enjoyment.
Fuck, I would give the unfinished, buggy Xbox version an 8 right now just due to the fact I'm enjoying it so much.
It's just the reviewers experience and he can score it how it wants. I can easily see why it would get a 10. The sheer fun and enjoyment.
Fuck, I would give the unfinished, buggy Xbox version an 8 right now just due to the fact I'm enjoying it so much.
Interesting, I've had fun with this game during the year. It's my most played game of the year. Great fun with friends.. I've grown a bit tired of it though... major bugs, performance issues and the cheating has taken it's tool.
For me, it's probably an 8 or so. Good game, but very flawed.
Will have to see how version 1.0 works for me.
For me, it's probably an 8 or so. Good game, but very flawed.
Will have to see how version 1.0 works for me.
I enjoyed em all except IV it's so different compared to the more "goofy" and "arcade" like GTA's. I did however enjoy the dlc episodes those were quite good i admit.
GTA V, Vice City and San Andreas are my favs in the series.
I really don't get this argument, but okay. It's like if Overwatch was in beta for a year and had one map, then teased two coming maps, released one, and came out of beta with 2/3 of the advertised maps released.
Whatever, this is obviously a phenomenon that didn't grab me and wasn't made for me, so I'll bow out.