3/10 AngryJoe, 8/10 PCGamer

[eX!LE]

Pretty funny how "official" reviews differ from youtubers.

I can't judge it on my own tho. Tried 2 hours to get on a server with gamepass then crashed 5 times. I guess it was kinda fun.

[TK-421]

Messaggio originale di Hoboslayer:

Angry joe is biased and pcgamer is not.

Pc gamer reviewed the game for what it was while not regarding technical issues as much expecting they will be fixed.

Angry joe reviewed the game for what he expected it to be as a bf fan.

TBH, nothing Angry Joe says doesn't make sense. I agree with literally everything he says for like 1.5 hours. He's just hitting the nail on the head left and right.

[eX!LE]

I dont know if Alex and OtherJoe give the AJShow more credibility or not...Sadly worthabuy has a broken arm...would love to see his review

[vJIG SAW]

I would say angry joes review is more down to earth than pc gamers. 2042 is maybe a 5 imo def not a 8 lol. Why is everyone taking it personal as if they made the game?

[xX~PuRe_sKiLLz~Xx]

Messaggio originale di Edifier:

3 out 10 makes no sense.

It would imply everything is broken when it isn't.

I can play hours on end without any real bugs or rubberbanding.

Tbf most of the game is broken. From the overall performance, to the input delay, hit registration, completely borked weapon and vehicle balance, some attachments being completely useless or even downgrades in every way, some specialists being super useful while some are pretty much worthless, etc

The game was thrown together in 6 months, I swear.

[Ryan]

idk who would buy this and be surprised. like have you been in a coma for the past 15 years? it's either that, or this is the first game you've ever played. blows my mind what today's gamers expect from these AAA studios. is the sky blue???

[The Sid Man]

This game went woke and went broke(in all ways). Glad it got what it deserved. Hopefully this smacks EA/Dice in the face and lets them know not to mess with the fundamentals of what made this franchise shine.

The only people that suck this game off are social justice warriors and fortnite players. It really lost what Battlefield was at its core.

PS. Coming from a close friend source, IGN gets a BIG payday for giving good reviews, so don't trust them at all. Joe is definitely more transparent in that regard.

[xX~PuRe_sKiLLz~Xx]

Messaggio originale di The Sid Man:

This game went woke and went broke(in all ways). Glad it got what it deserved. Hopefully this smacks EA/Dice in the face and lets them know not to mess with the fundamentals of what made this franchise shine.

The only people that suck this game off are social justice warriors and fortnite players. It really lost what Battlefield was at its core.

PS. Coming from a close friend source, IGN gets a BIG payday for giving good reviews, so don't trust them at all. Joe is definitely more transparent in that regard.

What has bad performance and copying gaming trends like Warzone's specialists got to do with going "woke"?

[Shadow Lord]

pc gamer is trash, every game from battlefield that they rated is generally the same around 85% and yet this game doesn't have a singleplayer mode and has less content and game features like destructible structures etc and yet Launch was the buggest failure since Cyberbug 2020 and yet to Pc gamer THIS IS 80% aka 8/10 or 4/5 JUST 1 Step away from being PERFECT to them. only stupidly blind fan boys and cash sellout reviewers would give garbage such high praise.

[Blazing Storm]

Messaggio originale di The Sid Man:

This game went woke and went broke(in all ways). Glad it got what it deserved. Hopefully this smacks EA/Dice in the face and lets them know not to mess with the fundamentals of what made this franchise shine.

The only people that suck this game off are social justice warriors and fortnite players. It really lost what Battlefield was at its core.

PS. Coming from a close friend source, IGN gets a BIG payday for giving good reviews, so don't trust them at all. Joe is definitely more transparent in that regard.

Joe swings the other way. He will wait to see what the general community reaction is to the game and make his video based on that to get the maximum clicks.

While this game isn’t an 8/10 it’s definitely not a 3/10 as that would imply it’s a broken game where nothing works. It’s somewhere in between at around 5/10. An average game by battlefield standards.

[z__frog__z]

to be honest both pc gamer and AJ 're wrong
one side just put a 4/10 or 3/10 with only trash review , the other side put a 8/10 or 9/10 with only the 'hype" thing and the credo " the game'll be that on the futur" ..Oo.

its become rare to see pro press review with fair points on both aspect the good and the bads . remind a time when on PC :
- install program ( size file .;time ..) was important
- bug / performancz was important
- fun to play was important
...
mostly all of the time its like reading just some copy/paste of press kit from RP of the game
- the game get those features
- the game is about of ..

its a bit sad :(. that's why its easy to surf on bad buzz trend , with plenty vids only the "hot" trend/topc of the moment . they' dont focus on main problem .
i prefer one guy saying big map having issues may me here some suggestions than just crying loud ..EA is joke because of big map ..

[Grim@FU_BARRACUDA]

If you know how journalism works you understand it very well. Some streamers and youtubers have contracts with game publishers, other dont. Some game magazines get presents and exclusive interviews or other content from game developers and publishers, others dont.

The thing is, often they dont even need to talk about somethign to each other. Lets say a pc-gamer journalist was invited to a EA studio to sit their and play a test version of bf2042. They may where invited afterwards to a party, or just to an expansive dinner, what ever. Maybe they got a promis to be invited again or they got promised to get free copys and so on.

You know EA does not say to them "We give you something and you give our game a good rating". These journalists do that on their own, because they have in mind how well they were treated by EA and they want that in the future again. Thats why they say, ok come on, we give a bit higher rating and ignore some things.

You can research the former journalist "Udo Ulfkotte" (german journalist) one of the rare guys, who has spoken out about that openly. He has payed the price for it, hes dead by now, died with around 50 years. But yeah, gaming journalism does not differ much from real journalism when it comes to that ;-)

(Please keep in mind that all i said here about EA and pc-gamer was just a possible example and not the truth. i have no clue why they gave the rating they gave.)

[Smeagol with a Deagle]

Messaggio originale di Geargut:

I expect a youtuber to ride whichever train is the fullest.

edit: I expect a large game site to cater to advertisers.

This game is somewhere between the two.

^ The only correct answer.

[[FuFo] Mortucus]

for joe 3 out of 10 is a bad game 2 out of 10 is a broken game 1 out of 10 is hiway robbery.

this game is far from a 8/10

joe gave it a 4 untill he changed his mind based on 3 years dev time remember they took an extra year to make this game and how broken the game was and still is.

he also payed 110 $ and felt ripped.

[Corsica]

Messaggio originale di Edifier:

3 out 10 makes no sense.

It would imply everything is broken when it isn't.

I can play hours on end without any real bugs or rubberbanding.

lucky you. you are the minority.

[Bastila Shan]

Messaggio originale di FuFo Mortucus:

for joe 3 out of 10 is a bad game 2 out of 10 is a broken game 1 out of 10 is hiway robbery.

this game is far from a 8/10

joe gave it a 4 untill he changed his mind based on 3 years dev time remember they took an extra year to make this game and how broken the game was and still is.

he also payed 110 $ and felt ripped.

You didn’t watch his review because he gave each mode a score ranging from 3/10 to 4/10