Bad Reviews? What they on about?

[Jams]

I was looking at some of the reviews of Payday 2, on site like Metacritic, and was surprised by some of the more negative ones out there. "The Ai is terrible, just shooting through waves of fodder, but I hate how fast you go down and the specials that just cannot be killed" was quite common. I can see where that comes from, but to me this just sounds like someone who is very impatient and tbh, bad at the game, or at least misunderstands it. It is worth noting the reviews are from only a few weeks ago at the very least. Also the theme "The developers are lazy and do not care or listen to the community" really shocked me, apparently all almir does is "cry on forums and nothing else". This just seems ungrateful and misguided, personally I think Overkill and their teams has done an awesome Job of interacting with the community and keeping the game fresh with plenty of, in my opinion, good valued dlc and free content, the dlc being varied and very enjoyable. But one thing that was very common, that caused people who liked the game to give it as low as a 2/10, is how the lobby and online system works. They complain that the can be kicked before earning anything and that the host can leave, wasting all your time and "effort". What do you think about that? Personally I think in all games, trolls who like to ruin peoples experience without cheating will always be found, but that is hardly the Devs fault, not by a long shot, and it is hard to counter them without angering another portion of the community. For example, they removed the ability to kick but that meant people could no longer kick cheaters and trolls from their own lobbys. Overall I think that their points were either somewhat misguided or plain unfair and dumb. I invite you to look some up and see for yourself what people find makes the game "awful and hateble", probably just a bunch of console users, although they only account for a tiny perentage of the community.

[Laerin]

While criticts can be subjective, this game does have a lot of problems. The netcode, for instanse, and the problem with kicking are all pretty much Overkill's fault. Weapons have no balance, and those

good valued dlc

of yours make the balance even worse.

About Overkill not listening to the community, it is also partially true. While they do interact more than most companies, but there are some issues that were brought up constantly over the whole lifespan of the game, and they were never truly adressed. Not sure if they actually read forums and such. I can say for certain that they don't really read SPUF, and I haven't seen a lot of dev posts on reddit. Maybe here they are more active, I don't really read these forums.

So yeah, while those reviewers are probably just bad players, they do have a point. This game has a lot of problems, and Overkill doesn't really adress them.

[Neo Genesis]

Metacritic is a joke and a cancer to the gaming industry, best to stay away from crappy sites like that.

[Silberfuchs]

Overkill used to interact with the community a lot, but in the past few months their attitude seemed to have become more and more... well, I don't know.

- They lowered the amount of free content updates substantially
- They barely post in any forum at all
- The DLCs start to lack quality
- They made a few really bad PR decisions lately

Don't get me wrong, I'm still standing behind Overkill and will keep supporting them, but it looks like the success starts to have an impact on them. I don't know what's going on behind the courtains, but what I see is not as awesome any more as it once used to by.

[Thermal Lance]

From what I understand ill try to un-noobify some of it. Broken specials: Clipping cloaker (if it never happened to you get ready to s- in your pants when it happens. Tazers that gets you 50 yards (exageration) away through a small gap denying any possibility to defend. Ai and stuff, except for the cloacker and sometime shields, we kinda got to agree this is very standard but at the same time they are basicly cannon fodder for the most part. Also there is issue with syncing (dont draw the ♥♥♥♥♥♥ connection card. Even my girlfriend sometime desync and shes 2 meters away.) The way DLCs are handled (Even thought this is HIGHLY suggestive).
But Id still rate it 8/10. Because it is definatly worth it. But I have to removes some point due to some bugs that were never fixed. Also most maps are bit small to allow real creativity in how a heist is done.

[Sirius]

Автор сообщения: Neo Genesis

Metacritic is a joke and a cancer to the gaming industry, best to stay away from crappy sites like that.

^This^

[Thermal Lance]

Got to admit thought. On one side we got angry people rating it. And on the other side an average from various corrupt as ♥♥♥♥ videogames websites. This has to be the best way to evaluate a game! Personally I tend on looking on GameFaqs first. Theres usually less ♥♥♥♥ reviews, most users are quite honest for the most part. I hardly trust any official reviewer cuz many of those 'journalist' are in the end paid by the industry thus quite beating their credibility to a pulp. IMHO.

Автор сообщения: |x|Sirius|x|

Автор сообщения: Neo Genesis

Metacritic is a joke and a cancer to the gaming industry, best to stay away from crappy sites like that.

^This^

[Routa]

When I decide if I want to buy a game, I look up gameplay videos. First 5-10 mins can tell what the game offers.

[Sirius]

Yeah, i've noticed that Metacritics is pretty bad at being "Objective" mostly.

Usually, I use demos where available or watch some vids.
After all, not every game can be viewed objectively by all sorts of player's preferances.

I myself have found that I never, ever, fully agreed with any rating for any game on Metacritics. Mostly not even close.

I take those other site's reviews as rough guidelines, nothing more. At the end of the day, they might totally tear apart a game I am more than satisfied with.

So, yeah, just to expand on my "This".
Felt that was appropriate.

edited because stupid typos

[Thermal Lance]

Best example of why I dont trust them (video games websites). Jeuxvideo.com a french website. Now read carefully.
There was a game that got a sequel (Sadly i dont remember the name of it.) and they rated 14/20 with the main critic being the lack of real improvement.
On the same site every single release (or almost) of call of duty got a nearly flawless score.Am I the only one to see whats wrong there? Certainly not the single player since it never been important in CoD. Not that CoD is a bad game but it lacks any true improvement since modern warfare 2. They just use a recipe that works and thats all. Just saying. :D

Автор сообщения: |x|Sirius|x|

Yeah, i've noticd that metacrtics is pretty bad at being "Objective" mostly.

Usually, I use demos where available or watch some vids.
After all, not every game can be viewed objectively by al sorts of player's preferances.

I myself have found that I never, ever, fully agreed with any rating for any game on Metacritics. Mostly not even close.

I take those other site's reviews at rough guidelines, nothing mor. At the end of the day, they might totally tear apart a game I am more than satisied with.

So, yeah, just to expand on my "This".
Felt that was appropriate.

[Kilobytes]

Most of those critics are probably console players, Xbox 360 has no updates and is stuck on beta (I see so many bad reviews from them) and PS3 has the first 3 DLC (better than Xbox though, but they still give bad reviews).

[c4ndlejack]

Автор сообщения: Robot Revolution!

Автор сообщения: Neo Genesis

Metacritic is a joke and a cancer to the gaming industry, best to stay away from crappy sites like that.

I would not be suprised if you say that just because you don't agree with scores critics and players give games in that site

I'd say it because companies are paying (or not paying) developers based on a metacritic score. One that after the initial review, can't even be changed or updated. It's also based on a pretty ♥♥♥♥♥♥ system where any score is converted into x/100.

[c4ndlejack]

Автор сообщения: Robot Revolution!

Автор сообщения: candlejack

I'd say it because companies are paying (or not paying) developers based on a metacritic score. One that after the initial review, can't even be changed or updated. It's also based on a pretty ♥♥♥♥♥♥ system where any score is converted into x/100.

And none of that is metacritics fault.It's not metacriting who is reviewing the games.
And how the ♥♥♥♥ are you supposed to find out the overall critic score if some reviewers give it fours stars or 8/10 without conversting to x/100

It doesn't matter who's at fault. Metacritic is not good for video games. Neither is 'game journalism'.

[Thermal Lance]

Dude. There is not too much conspiracy. That is actually true. A lot of 'journalist' are really corrupt. I aint saying all... but there is so much I just stopped caring for those ♥♥♥♥ sites. Not the fault of metacritics but they still perfectly know what their source are making it no better. Why you think theres a lot of ads and link to store where to buy games in many of those sites?They are actually paid to have these ads. Are you paying for that website man? No those ads paids from the BIGGER GAME STUDIOS does it for you so you can view the site for free. Rince and repeat.

Автор сообщения: Robot Revolution!

Автор сообщения: Cacodemon(NewPlayersWelcome)

Got to admit thought. On one side we got angry people rating it. And on the other side an average from various corrupt as ♥♥♥♥ videogames websites. This has to be the best way to evaluate a game! Personally I tend on looking on GameFaqs first. Theres usually less ♥♥♥♥ reviews, most users are quite honest for the most part. I hardly trust any official reviewer cuz many of those 'journalist' are in the end paid by the industry thus quite beating their credibility to a pulp. IMHO.

Way too much consipracy here.Imagine that you are game reviewer.You tested the game and you don't like it,you want to give it 4/10 when other revievers are giving it 9/10.You know that giving a score that almost no one will agree is a death sentence.Solution?You give the game 7/10 and keep saying how game has small problems or problems that can be fixed by patch,buts it's still great.Same for opposite situation.Also,reviewers have limited time to review the game (yes,even if they get the game early) and don't know all goods and bads yet.Another thing is that they review a game and not how different it is from last game or how much it costs this why games like COD that get good scores
As for person reviews bad things have way more effect on overall scrore than good ones (bad controls will make more people hate the game more than perfect controls will make people praise the game).With player reviews it's simple- if players give it a bad score you probably will not enjoy the game.

[im_two_cats]

Автор сообщения: candlejack

Автор сообщения: Robot Revolution!

And none of that is metacritics fault.It's not metacriting who is reviewing the games.
And how the ♥♥♥♥ are you supposed to find out the overall critic score if some reviewers give it fours stars or 8/10 without conversting to x/100

It doesn't matter who's at fault. Metacritic is not good for video games. Neither is 'game journalism'.

Game journalism is perfectly fine for video games. The problem comes from websites like Kotaku and RockPaperShotgun who take bribes for reviews and have no sense of professionlism or morals. There are still plenty of good game journalists out there that are beneficial to the industry.

[Neo Genesis]

Автор сообщения: Robot Revolution!

Автор сообщения: Neo Genesis

Metacritic is a joke and a cancer to the gaming industry, best to stay away from crappy sites like that.

I would not be suprised if you say that just because you don't agree with scores critics and players give games in that site

You must be joking right?

No, I say it because their scoring system is fundamentally flawed.

A propper review doesn't associate a number to how good or bad a game is. They tell you WHY something is good or bad in their opinion and then leaves the decision in the readers hands because reviews are mostly subjective. Something that is a negitive for one person might not be so for another.

The best thing you can do is do research, watch gameplay and decide for yourself whether or not the game is going to be enjoyable for you.

Only stupid and lazy people look at numbers to determine whether a game is good.