It's not a masterpiece at all. The game play is bad mostly, or at least below average.
The story elevates the experience, and the story itself might be a masterpiece, but the game is not.
-
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.
RAGE 2 - Review Thread
- Thread starter vestan
- Start date
It's not a masterpiece at all. The game play is bad mostly, or at least below average.
The story elevates the experience, and the story itself might be a masterpiece, but the game is not.
I hate the 'have you played it' comment. No i dont have to actually play every shitty or mediocre game out there to know im not going to like it.
Thank you.
I have been playing video games for 30 years. It is extremely easy to watch some videos of a game and know how it plays and how the environment is interacted with.
Predicituonw
It's purely numbers.
Predictions are irrelevant for after a release of a game. When OT members, sales numbers and general word of mouth for a game is positive THEN there is definitely a disparity between the players and reviews. Reviewers are cut from the same cloth of Era members, some even users themselves, so seeing reviews bring over-critical, for lack of a better term, towards new releases isn't surprising. We Era users particularly complain about some of the most mundane details and issues sometimes, while the average gamer, casual or not doesn't care this much. Hence why they can look past the shit reviewers find unforgivable.
It's purely numbers.
Except... we usually do get it right. That's my point.
Claiming this happens more than a few cases out of all is what I'm talking about. That doesn't seem correct at all.
Of course there will be some games that amount to more than the sum of their parts and come together well, that doesn't mean they don't deserve lower scores. The fact they resonate despite their flaws doesn't make their flaws just disappear
7/10 for Rage 2 will be fair regardless of the numbers it sells.
Excited to pick up the game today and play it.
You made a thread about God of War being unimpressive and disappointing. A game many consider to be the best game of 2018
Doesn't sound to me like you're right all the time.
https://www.resetera.com/threads/i-found-god-of-war-unimpressive-and-disappointing.59222/
You made a thread about God of War being unimpressive and disappointing. A game many consider to be the best game of 2018
Doesn't sound to me like you're right all the time.
https://www.resetera.com/threads/i-found-god-of-war-unimpressive-and-disappointing.59222/
Well the odds are stacked in our favor when barely any of the review scale is used, it's easy to guess within 10% of a games meta score when most games that come out and are competent will score between 75-95
The reviews scale is used fine.
The fact is, many games just are 7/10. The industry average is just that high.
Of course some individual reviewers words don't always align with the score perfectly or whatever, examples could be found, but overall 7/10 games deserve that score.
Just because a game amounts to more than that sum, doesn't mean that sum was wrong. Flaws don't disappear just because you enjoy a thing despite them.
lol
I'm amused that someone would (a) take that statement seriously enough to bother trying to refute it and (b) bother holding a grudge over a someone not liking a game they liked a year ago.
It doesn't mean the sum is right either, games are not objectively good or bad, 7's or 9's, a score and a review are just an opinion. There is no "correct" score for a game
There can be a consensus, but there is no "this game is a 7.3 and had it done this it would be a 7.4"
Giving scores does end up with people framing scores and reviews as you're doing now, and while that's not a bad thing, it's not exactly a good thing either, as it leads to people skipping the content of reviews and just looking at the score
A 7/10 to you might be a 9/10 to me, and a 9/10 to you might be a 5/10 to me
Edit: To add to this, flaws can be overlooked, as not every flaw is a flaw to everyone. I don't mind save points, but to someone else, a game with no autosave might be a deal breaker. To them, it's a flaw in the game and prevents them from enjoying the game, to me, it's not even something I think about because I'm fine with save points. It's not a negative to me, it's just a part of the game
I don't mind dull open worlds if I can just shoot from mission to mission, to me, the dull open world isn't an issue or a flaw to me, maybe I'd see open world tickboxes as a flaw, whereas someone else would find that a huge mark against the game
Etc, etc
Last edited:
I couldn't care less that he didn't like god of war. Just annoys me when people coming into the review thread of a follow up to
I couldn't care less that he didn't like god of war. Its just annoying when people come into a review thread of a game on launch day just to shit on it when they haven't even played it yet.
When they make a ridiculous statement that they knew this game was bad and they're always right about right in predicting bad games I'm going to call them out.
An 8 year later follow up to a game that reviewed in the 70s made by a different development studio doesn't get an average metacritic above 90? Shocking!
I personally don't feel the review scale is great overall in the industry - the 60-70 range is a jumble of appropriately rated games and games that are just awful that are also lumped in there because it seems few outlets will score anything lower than a six. Example: Crackdown 3? Total 60, mediocre but still enjoyable and functional. Anthem? Also rated around 60 and it was a dumpster fire with just a couple of saving graces.
The scale isn't really used as well as it could be and it's why I'll always prefer a 1-5 scale since each part of the scale is more likely to be used.
It also doesn't help that there's this perception amongst more toxic internet peoples that if a game isn't 85+ it's garbage and deserving of all sorts of hyperbolic hate.
Yes it does.
The sum is usually right because those flaws are present, but many people can see beyond those flaws to the sum that is greater than they amount to on paper.
Rage 2 DOES have a dated and laggy UI.
rage 2 DOES have a bland open world that hasn't heeded design updates from the last 10 years.
Rage 2 DOES have you driving through empty environments between small bursts of engagement
Etc..
That makes the 7/10 valid.
If it's a personally 9/10 to you because those flaws don't bother you, fine, but they are real. Enjoying something that's more than the sum is fine, but it doesn't make the issues it has disappear.
Also, there is a problem as big as the one you propose, and that's fans going off and hyping things up too much. We see that just as often as issues you raise, so how do we know just how many of the people saying "this 7/10 is actually a 9 or 10/10" are not part of this?
It's not as clear cut as you're making it, and, imo, the 7/10 scores are usually very justified.
just because a rare game will amount to more than that sum because a few aspects are just so damn good doesn't mean reviewers are out of touch.
As I aid, you could find a few examples, but overall it is used well imo and the case that it isn't doesn't have much weight when we consider everything.
And your last point is just a vocal minority being loud, so don't put stock in it. It's certainly NOT evidence of anything more than this.
See the edit to my previous post
So to you, with your objective outlook on games, a Shmup with a meta of 88 is objectively a better game than an open world AAA game with a meta of 74, and everyone who prefers the open world game is doing so knowing the open world game is inferior to the Shmup, but they just prefer it
It's not that reviews are subjective, it's than the Shmup is just the better video game?
Hahahaha.
Ok Monsieur Callout. I see. You're salty because a game you were looking forward to is getting shit on and you're squealing at me about it because I'm accessible.
I didn't make the game mediocre and I didn't write any of the reviews calling it mediocre. Your resentment is amusing but misdirected.
Go write a 10/10 user review on metacritic and rant about how the critics are wrong and out of touch like a normal person.
I've been playing since the late eighties and while I agree with you that I have confidence I can tell a game I'll enjoy from one I won't I also do my best to remember that some of my most favorite games were clunky, quirky, & outside of my typical genre. I have been surprised often by games I thought would be trash.
Not always, and I made this very clear.
I can see, in the vast, vast majority of 7/10 cases why the game got that score, for example. Even if I personally love the game and had a 9/10 experience with it, I can see why it got the score it did.
As I said, sometimes the game amounts to more than the sum of its parts, that doesn't make the score invalid.
The issue is with the undue focus put on arbitrary cut off points.
How is a 79 game that much worse than a 83 game? This is when we listen too much to the vocal minority gamers making a huge fuss saying 80+ is good and below is crap, etc...
Really, a 7/10 game isn't THAT far off an 8/10 game, or even a 9. The 7/10 might have wonderful minute to minute but bad menus, some pacing issues, sub-par visuals in places etc... but the experience overall might be even more enjoyable than the 9/10 to many.
That doesn't mean it deserves a 9/10, as when we review and rate things we do so based on all the parts adding up.
Personal experience doesn't follow that rule. For some the -20-30% docking of score won't even phase them because the issues that brought it down don't bother them personally, but they should be able to acknowledge they exist. Game design is technical, there are things that stand out as objective;y good and bad elements of design as much as there are subjective. You enjoying a laggy menu doesn't mean that laggy menu is a subjective thing, for example, it means your tolerance for it is higher, or that the rest of the game just charms you so much you can ignore it.
This is the problem people have, they put too much stock in one or the other.
Not sure what the purpose of this comment was:
other than provocation. You're getting what you wanted, no?
I don't care for game scores personally but the amount of hand-wringing over 7/10 games this year has been pretty weird.
7/10 has always meant a good game and always will.
If good isn't good enough for some then that's fine,there are lots of games around these days and I can see why it would be easy for many to ignore a game that is not anything special.
If a game interests me I'll get it because I know what I like and Rage 2 has been on my radar since being announced because I really enjoy post apocalypse games.The big barren open world is actually what I want out of a game like this,same as Mad Max which I also enjoyed a lot.
7/10 has always meant a good game and always will.
If good isn't good enough for some then that's fine,there are lots of games around these days and I can see why it would be easy for many to ignore a game that is not anything special.
If a game interests me I'll get it because I know what I like and Rage 2 has been on my radar since being announced because I really enjoy post apocalypse games.The big barren open world is actually what I want out of a game like this,same as Mad Max which I also enjoyed a lot.
No, not really? I didn't want anything in particular.
I posted and moved on. Had completely forgotten about it until I saw the quote alert.
I feel like we more or less agree, with the difference being framing. I'm not saying any score is not valid, and if anything marking down flaws is the problem with reviewing games. Without a score you can just explain the game and your experience with it. If you see the game has something you love or enjoy but something you think a lot of people will dislike, then you have to take points of the score to reflect that
Pretty much yes.
Overall: people should strop worrying that their favourite game only got a 7/10, and people should stop acting like a 7/10 game means bad.
I want to apologize, Dphex. I gave you shit for your reviews of games but I can honestly see where you're coming from. I think it's a bit unfair for people who love a specific game to give a person shit who spends time with a game they enjoy despite the flaws but wants to actively discuss the flaws.
Pretty much.
When I see 7/10 I think "okay, so what exactly docked that 30?".
Then I read the reviews. If I see the reasons for the 7/10 being things that I know will actively impede my enjoyment, it goes int the "sale" list. If I see the reviews list a bunch of technical flaws that I could look past and list the gameplay as great, I will probably buy. For example.
7/10 means good, but it has flaws. Same as 8/10 means that, same as 9/10 means that. They've all had % amounts docked for flaws or they'd be 10/10.
And even 10/10 can't be perfect completely, 10/10 usually just means "the game is so good we'll give it the best score we can", but that still doesn't mean its flawless.
Now, of course this isn't always perfect, but it is usually a good guideline. We then need to look a little deeper to understand just what caused the score and to see if those things will mean as much to us personally as they do to others.
I dont subscribe that games/media/art starts at 10/10 and then you start deducting points. If anything, its the opposite. I go in expecting nothing, knowing nothing, and then the media will impress upon me and my subjective perspective.
I didn't say it starts at 10 and then points are deducted.
Flaws are deducted as a reviewer plays in that they list all the flaws they find and when they tally their score, the flaws are -points and the positive are +points.
That's pretty much semantics though, as ultimately it's the same outcome.
I wonder we'll reach Days Gone review thread page numbers...
Nothing wrong with a game scoring between 7/8 but for some folks (myself included) I'd rather spend my time playing better games. Rage 2 seems to be another divisive one, I've watched streams on Twitch and I agree with a lot of negative comments from the critics
Nothing wrong with a game scoring between 7/8 but for some folks (myself included) I'd rather spend my time playing better games. Rage 2 seems to be another divisive one, I've watched streams on Twitch and I agree with a lot of negative comments from the critics
is rage 2 and days gone considered divisive games? In my mind those games are ok, theyre fine , serviceable . First nier i would say is divisive , deadly premonition is divisive maybe GTA 4 is divisive? IDK
It happens for a good amount of games, especially ones that have massive biases going into release. This can also be positive and negative biases, it purely isn't a negative issue.
What you might consider a 7 I might consider an 8, or a 9, the flaws can still exist but people look past that. Most gamers aren't as critical and aren't as vocal about minor issues as perpetuated by reddit and Era collectives.
What I really am saying is a game can be adored more than what reviewers have deemed "mediocre", just look at the constant votes for The Evil Within 2 for GOTY for Era, the game was critically given a 76 yet had people from gaming outlets like EasyAllies give it a 9, and have Michael Huber have it as nearly his favorite game of the year.
You forgot about a post you had made within the 8 minutes it took to be quoted? You seem to be trying extra hard to appear like you don't care. It's easier to just admit that your intention was to highlight the schadenfreude you're receiving from reading this thread.
You just reworded what I wrote ITT...
7/10 is not mediocre unless you give more weight to a hyperbolic minority online. Just don't do that, and it works.
It's just as far off from a 9/10 as it is a 5/10. Just as close to a 4/10 as it is a 10/10. Yes, a 1/10 game is a perfect game with a ton of flaws.
These threads. It's insane the mental hoops people will jump through to tell themselves that some game that is getting mediocre review scores is actually really good.
Yes. That's right.
It wasn't exactly a painstakingly crafted high-effort post.
Those things aren't mutually exclusive.
And I was getting vindication, not schadenfreude.
Vindication implies people cared about your take in the first place.
People were irritated with it because it was literally designed to irritate. Even if they're not affected by the post itself, the design is something that's annoying to see.
But, you're right, ultimately the post was worthless and did what it was designed to do.
Buddy, no.
That's... not what the word vindication means.
Good lord.
(*scurries off to look up "vindication", just in case*)
Watched a bunch of footage of this game today and my impression is basically that it takes the best bits of Mad Max and Doom (2016) and doesn't do them as well as those games.
So I'm out.
So I'm out.
shooting is 5 stars
driving is 2 stars
story is 2 stars
Menus/UI 2 stars
amount of stuff to do is 4 stars
the world map feels very far cry like but not way overwhelming and the gunplay and abilities are very fun so i actually want to do everything.
I was not expecting the driving in Borderlands to be better than this game. but the best update they could give this game is making the menus a lot faster and snappier.
I'm playing on PS4 Pro.
driving is 2 stars
story is 2 stars
Menus/UI 2 stars
amount of stuff to do is 4 stars
the world map feels very far cry like but not way overwhelming and the gunplay and abilities are very fun so i actually want to do everything.
I was not expecting the driving in Borderlands to be better than this game. but the best update they could give this game is making the menus a lot faster and snappier.
I'm playing on PS4 Pro.
