Metacritic 5.6 on PC....

[Fast]

Yikes...what happened....All those 10/10 reviews from critics ...but users say it 5.6 i wonder why?

Could it be the absolute mediocrity this game exudes? I dunno...you tell me..

https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/starfield

[Mister Burkes]

Metacritic scores are always artificially low by 0.5, because you can rate 0 to 10, instead of 1 to 10 like most rating systems.

6.1/10 sounds about right to me.

[Fast]

Originally posted by Mister Burkes:

Metacritic scores are always artificially low by 0.5, because you can rate 0 to 10, instead of 1 to 10 like most rating systems.

6.1/10 sounds about right to me.

5.6 is more sound tbh...

[mav001au]

I wouldn't use metacritic as your valid source

[potato]

anybody can leave a "review" there as it's not required to actually play the game to submit it

[Fast]

Originally posted by mav001au:

I wouldn't use metacritic as your valid source

oh no, the guy who has some obscure site as his source for reviews except when it suits his agenda i bet you love metacritic.

[Spud]

5.6 sounds more than fair, especially when you factor in the levels of hype, the size of the studio and the price.

Personally I'd rate it about 4.5, you have to bear in mind that there will definitely be some paid for positive reviews, that's all part of the marketing budget, whereas nobody is paying for negative reviews, so the bigger the corporation the more skewed towards a positive outcome reviews tend to be.

Played much better much cheaper indie games.

[BladeofSharpness]

Just don't play the game and move on, if you find it mediocre. But then don't buy it later too, we don't need people complaining constantly about how bad the game is while staying like trolls in the forum.

[Fast]

Originally posted by Colonizor:

5.6 sounds more than fair, especially when you factor in the levels of hype, the size of the studio and the price.

Personally I'd rate it about 4.5, you have to bear in mind that there will definitely be some paid for positive reviews, that's all part of the marketing budget, whereas nobody is paying for negative reviews, so the bigger the corporation the more skewed towards a positive outcome reviews tend to be.

Played much better much cheaper indie games.

my friend who isnt really a gamer, i streamed about 2 hours for him, and his conclusion, it looks like a fallout 4 mod.

Hes a total normie who doenst game very often, just plays like fallout and some other older RPG games etc.

[Fast]

Originally posted by BladeofSharpness:

Just don't play the game and move on, if you find it mediocre. But then don't buy it later too, we don't need people complaining constantly about how bad the game is while staying like trolls in the forum.

why not? As a consumer with access to a public forum for people who purchased the game, why can they not air their grievances with the product.

Just because it upsets your ego, doesnt make it unreasonable or invalid.

[Spud]

Originally posted by Fast:

Originally posted by Colonizor:

5.6 sounds more than fair, especially when you factor in the levels of hype, the size of the studio and the price.

Personally I'd rate it about 4.5, you have to bear in mind that there will definitely be some paid for positive reviews, that's all part of the marketing budget, whereas nobody is paying for negative reviews, so the bigger the corporation the more skewed towards a positive outcome reviews tend to be.

Played much better much cheaper indie games.

my friend who isnt really a gamer, i streamed about 2 hours for him, and his conclusion, it looks like a fallout 4 mod.

Hes a total normie who doenst game very often, just plays like fallout and some other older RPG games etc.

It's definitely based on Fallout 4, it really is nothing more than a lazy reskin.

[Georgion]

Its quite sad how few reviewers had guts to tell us truth about Starfield. Im not saying ppl shouldnt enjoy the game. But the fact Bethesda made a bland game based on outdated engine and has put absolute minimum effort to make it good is not acceptable and for that, they should be punished with bad reviews.

[Mountain Man]

Originally posted by Fast:

Yikes...what happened....All those 10/10 reviews from critics ...but users say it 5.6 i wonder why?

Could it be the absolute mediocrity this game exudes? I dunno...you tell me..

https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/starfield

Look again, it has an 87% Metacritic average.

[Lef]

imagine using meta critic as a source when anyone can post a review even if they know nothing about the game

[Fast]

Originally posted by Georgion:

Its quite sad how few reviewers had guts to tell us truth about Starfield. Im not saying ppl shouldnt enjoy the game. But the fact Bethesda made a bland game based on outdated engine and has put absolute minimum effort to make it good is not acceptable and for that, they should be punished with bad reviews.

the review economy is so terrible for pre release. everyone is scared to say bad things cause they wont get access in the future.

[Boe Jiden]

Even that score is too high, maybe a 3... 4? if they patch the hell out of it.