IGN 7/10

[HeyApple]

https://youtu.be/jkUgN0pItoU
Yep not worth my time.

[PwnyHipster]

Metacritic Critics gave Pokemon Mystery Dungeon: Explorer of Sky a 54 and that is an extremely beloved game.

https://www.metacritic.com/game/ds/pokemon-mystery-dungeon-explorers-of-sky

[NBOX21]

Opprinnelig skrevet av HeyApple:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Chizu:

Why would you base an opinion on an IGN score...

Life's too short to try every game for yourself. Watch the review if the negatives outway the fun part do something else instead.

So then just try out the games you think will interest you, and ignore the rest.

For example, I do not enjoy fighting games in the slightest, so even with all the 8's and 9's some of the Mortal Kombat and Street Fighter games get, I will never play them as they do not and will not interest me in the slightest.

Meanwhile, there are games I've played that looked interesting to me just from screenshots and trailers alone, didn't read or watch a single review yet still had a good time with them in the end (one recent example for me was Frogun).

[Grand Captain Speedy Dash]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Orc Warrior:

really there is no video game thats worth anyones time but they are like an addicting drug and we feel as if we need to play them even though there is much better more fulfilling things we could be doing

The same can be said for any form of entertainment.

Edit: Though unlike many other forms of entertainment, video games has a sense of accomplishment that comes with completing the game.

[Quaiv]

Metacritic is the most accurate score.

[Grand Captain Speedy Dash]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Orc Warrior:

video games are designed to get you hooked and addicted so game companies can get rich off of your addiction but it doesn't actually benefit you in anyway

If you hate games so much why are you on a site made to sell them.

[Low Tier Beast Boy]

why you private your accunt?

[the shape is wedge-like]

Reviews are opinions; opinions are like ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥: everyone has one.

[NBOX21]

Opprinnelig skrevet av Orc Warrior:

video games are designed to get you hooked and addicted so game companies can get rich off of your addiction but it doesn't actually benefit you in anyway

So then why are there plenty of games out there that are addicting and fun yet still only require a one time purchase? Sonic Adventure 2 is one of those games.

I don't even need to bring up the micro-transactions and/or loot box systems modern games use nowadays to get players hooked and spend more money as a result; there are other ways to keep players hooked and addicted to a particular product... oh wait, they don't make them money, so companies don't bother with those methods anymore.

(meanwhile, in the PS2 days, games lasted for hours on end, were fun as heck and we only needed to spend money on them once)

[Flash stopper]

Opprinnelig skrevet av HeyApple:

Opprinnelig skrevet av Duckilous:

No thanks, I rather listen to other people who have more merit.
But also 7/10 is not a bad score at all.
What's even the point of a 10-scale rating system if 4/5 of the scale just means "bad".

I'm not telling people what to do. I was just explaining the logic behind the opinion.
Never said 7/10 is bad. It's just not worth my time. As you grow older time becomes more valuable. And i'd rather spend it doing something else than play a 7/10 game.

If game < 8:
Skip.
else:
Play.

yes your "valuable" time you use to explain to people on forums that if IGN of all things rates a game 7 or below that's enough to prevent you from playing it.

[Viper]

Although review scores are not an absolute rating of how good the game is. They are a good indicator of generally if it excellent good or nothing special. GOW and other games got 10s If a game is rated 7 and I buy it I find they are generally just okay. .I would say a 7 is kind of concerning. A reviewer is just a person just like us who has played a lot of games and rates it compared to the 100s of other games he or she has played.

[jlfrye63]

i new sonic forces and sonic frontiers is not a good game they should be in the crappy game wiki except sonic origins which it is a good classic game for awesome game wiki including sonic mania.

[NBOX21]

Opprinnelig skrevet av jlfrye63:

i new sonic forces and sonic frontiers is not a good game they should be in the crappy game wiki except sonic origins which it is a good classic game for awesome game wiki including sonic mania.

The reason Origins sucked was not because of the games themselves, but rather the way those particular versions were handled. They feature more bugs that older versions never had, several QoL features were removed and they were overpriced.

Not to mention they pulled a Rockstar move by de-listing the old versions so nobody can buy them anymore.

[Bobostal]

discussions tab is so cancer lmfao who tf cares

[jlfrye63]

Opprinnelig skrevet av NBOX21:

Opprinnelig skrevet av jlfrye63:

i new sonic forces and sonic frontiers is not a good game they should be in the crappy game wiki except sonic origins which it is a good classic game for awesome game wiki including sonic mania.

The reason Origins sucked was not because of the games themselves, but rather the way those particular versions were handled. They feature more bugs that older versions never had, several QoL features were removed and they were overpriced.

Not to mention they pulled a Rockstar move by de-listing the old versions so nobody can buy them anymore.

listen bub i know denuvo sucks but that is not the point thank you.

[NBOX21]

Opprinnelig skrevet av jlfrye63:

listen bub i know denuvo sucks but that is not the point thank you.

Since when did I mention Denuvo?
Out of all the things I said in my response, that was not even brought up once.