Yeh but userscores can be manipulated which makes them useless (not saying that's what happened here).
This is one of the instances where being a closed platform should matter. I mean, Nintendo shouldn't allow for a game like this to be published as a $50 standalone release.
Make it a paid DLC update at most.
They should get nailed for releasing the same game over and over.sooo basically that metascore is just as useless as the userscore because it's literally the same game as last year, only that reviewers review-bombed it from 71 to 44 aggregate, lol
you can't release the same game as last year under a new title and expect the same scores. you're fooling some people into paying for a game they already have, and putting out a pointless product. they deserve much lower scores.sooo basically that metascore is just as useless as the userscore because it's literally the same game as last year, only that reviewers review-bombed it from 71 to 44 aggregate, lol
Yeh but userscores can be manipulated which makes them useless (not saying that's what happened here).
Why would us care about EA games if they don't give us EA games? FIFA 2020 is only a update of squads for almost the same price of a complete game.Switch users shooting themselves in the foot. No more EA games for users that don't like EA games.
Why would they? Why do people manipulate scores in the first place? And as I said, I'm not saying that's what's going on here. It's just to highlight how useless userscores on metacritic are.
It's not on the customers to support something that they find to be sub par or a rip off, that's on EA to make worthwhile games which they haven't for Nintendo systems for many years now besides sub par ports.Switch users shooting themselves in the foot. No more EA games for users that don't like EA games.
exactly. in a month where so many great games came out, EA just coming out with this lame excuse of a "new" release is just pathetic.Good - there is enough great content from great devs on Switch that users can spend money on...no need to waste time with EAs lackluster offerings.
They should get nailed for releasing the same game over and over.
you can't release the same game as last year under a new title and expect the same scores. you're fooling some people into paying for a game they already have, and putting out a pointless product. they deserve much lower scores.
Why would they? Why do people manipulate scores in the first place? And as I said, I'm not saying that's what's going on here. It's just to highlight how useless userscores on metacritic are.
Look at the userscores on the other versions of FIFA 20. They're all nearly as low as this, despite those versions being much much better.
do you think if CDprojekt re-released witcher 3 with very minimal changes as a new full price game and called it witcher 4, it would deserve the same high scores as 3 got?All I'm saying is that those "reviews" (at least as aggregates) appear to be as useless as the user scores because they barely even reflect the game part in their score anymore when reviewers resort to bombing the game for stagnation instead of idk copy pasting their review from last year or maybe not reviewing the game at all if they're gonna sacrifice their credibility over it. At least that's how it seems to me
what changes would that be, though? Squad updates are not minimal changes but more like the essential changes for considering playing the game for another year.do you think if CDprojekt re-released witcher 3 with very minimal changes as a new full price game and called it witcher 4, it would deserve the same high scores as 3 got?
this isn't about porting a game to a new system for the first time. this is the same game, on the same system.what changes would that be, though? Squad updates are not minimal changes but more like the essential changes for considering playing the game for another year.
If they added a few new characters and questlines, a new clothing option for Geralt, a remixed soundtrack, called it The Witcher 4 S and released it on Switch people would eat it up and ignore the stupid name ;)
People still don't realize it's Nintendo and they font matter to these publishers. I can't think of many games that are perfect fits for switch yet they are no where to be found.Out of all the EA titles that would be a disappointment this is the last one I expected. I would have thought if they were going to go ham on any title that they would save it for the big ones. If they are half assing their biggest titles there is no hope for anything else they make. The Switch is a large market you would think the Fifa would have had a good effort.
this isn't about porting a game to a new system for the first time. this is the same game, on the same system.
and it can be released, no one will stop EA. but users and critics are allowed to review bomb it for the scummy practice of re-releasing a year old product under a different title.this is also not about a story-driven game being sold under a different name with the same story.
this is a game that is purely about the enjoyment of the gameplay, be it alone or with other people in a certain synchronicity with the real world sport counterpart.
So I'm guessing they just got review bombed rather than a bunch of people doing this because of the Legacy Edition stuff.it has super low user scores on other platforms as well:
1.5 on ps4
1.1 on xbo
0.4 on pc
Sure, I agree it is a beyond shitty practice and I'm sure EA will get "feedback" and people will say "that was the last one I bought", when the squad update isn't enough for them, even when EA's yearly sports-game model was never to provide much more than what last years edition had. Yeah now it is the absolute minimum effort and there are probably people buying that game for a second year in a row and only then understanding, what EA is doing.
All I'm saying is that those "reviews" (at least as aggregates) appear to be as useless as the user scores because they barely even reflect the game part in their score anymore when reviewers resort to bombing the game for stagnation instead of idk copy pasting their review from last year or maybe not reviewing the game at all if they're gonna sacrifice their credibility over it. At least that's how it seems to me
Last week was NNK, this week Fifa. What will be the next half assed game UK Nintendo fans will buy anyway?
The rest of y'all better have bought Dragon Quest XI S
Websites need to start using te whole scale. The review makes it sound like the game is a piece of shit, so why not give it a 2 or 3? 6.5 can be actually decent ¬¬
It's just baffling how EA can't see the business opertunities they have on the Switch. It's like someone high uptop in EA got personally butthurt by the poor performance of Wii U, and basically decided "fuck Switch" before it was even released. And now theyre to "proud" and stubborn to correct course.
These sports game still continue to top the charts with zero effort from the devs so why change anything. People buy these games for $60 and then load up on shitty microtransactions for they can buy digital cards to get a sick my team.
It's not "review bombing" when you criticize a game for being literally identical to the previous game outside of a roster update. Reviews aren't objective measures of a game's quality, and context most certainly matters to their overall conclusions.Sure, I agree it is a beyond shitty practice and I'm sure EA will get "feedback" and people will say "that was the last one I bought", when the squad update isn't enough for them, even when EA's yearly sports-game model was never to provide much more than what last years edition had. Yeah now it is the absolute minimum effort and there are probably people buying that game for a second year in a row and only then understanding, what EA is doing.
All I'm saying is that those "reviews" (at least as aggregates) appear to be as useless as the user scores because they barely even reflect the game part in their score anymore when reviewers resort to bombing the game for stagnation instead of idk copy pasting their review from last year or maybe not reviewing the game at all if they're gonna sacrifice their credibility over it. At least that's how it seems to me
At 2 years late (I guess 1 year for the West) it gets bought at a discount. I would have rather played this game on its initial release last year than have it come in Sept with literally a dozen other games I want to play.
perhaps they're making the clear distinction that the game isn't 'a piece of shit'? It's a poor value for folks who already own fifa 19 on Switch, but as a stand-alone bit of software, it delivers a pretty good game of football.
most of EA's games run on Frostbite. Nintendo made the choice to release a relatively weak console, ensuring a Frostbite port would be no trivial task.
perhaps Nintendo should work with EA to help smoothen a Frostbite port to Switch