84 on Metacritic

[Steve Harrington]

Wow, i expected less, given the opinion of the players about the battles, maybe the game is not so bad?

[Toblm]

Perhaps we can now consider that player's whining does not make a game bad.

[Lokieys ★]

Originally posted by Toblm:

Perhaps we can now consider that player's whining does not make a game bad.

We’ll see tomorrow.

[Traslo]

Wow the critics gave it an 8.4/10 on average? Wow the fans must be wrong then, critics have never shown strong disconnect from fans in videogames, especially when they're known for giving overly generous reviews to big companies.

[SuperSix]

I'll wait for the playerbase to speak.

[AlienWired]

Better to expect less so that way you're not as disappointed when it ends up being such.

But let's face it, this game looks polished and what ain't polished will be in the future.

I think a lot of people expect an EU type game in which DLC will be brought in by the boat loads.

I am noticing as of late though that they are cutting back on DLC and simply calling games "Done", Broken or not.

[Bastard Ferret]

Originally posted by Toblm:

Perhaps we can now consider that player's whining does not make a game bad.

Well, a review score does not reflect the quality, fun, or playability of a game, and certainly does not always predict how history will perceive it's value.

I haven't played it for myself, and will likely wait until they iron out whatever kinks are present. It often takes them a year to turn something "good" into "great." By then it's much cheaper. God bless the early adopters. I usually end up with a better game thanks to all the people that help Paradox iron out bugs before I get there.

Don't hate on people's complaints, they may very well be getting us all a better game in the end.

[Damedius]

All the sponsored youtuber's loved the game.
Must be a 10/10.

[Steve Harrington]

I agree with you, but still, the favor of the critics gives good sales, at least at the initial stage, and will be able to attract new players to the project.

[Toblm]

Originally posted by Bastard Ferret:

Originally posted by Toblm:

Perhaps we can now consider that player's whining does not make a game bad.

Well, a review score does not reflect the quality, fun, or playability of a game, and certainly does not always predict how history will perceive it's value.

That is exactly what a review score is for...

[FredDie]

CK3 got 90 on release and as somebody wrote, reviewers play it for 10-20 hours. I thought CK3 is great after 10 hours, after 25 I shelfed it for 2 years and it still isnt that great tbh, only regions that got DLC already are worth playing.

[ANDS!]

Originally posted by Traslogan:

Wow the critics gave it an 8.4/10 on average? Wow the fans must be wrong then, critics have never shown strong disconnect from fans in videogames, especially when they're known for giving overly generous reviews to big companies.

Yes, that MASSIVE company that is Paradox. That juggernaut of gaming that can snap its fingers and have entire journalism careers ended.

. . .seriously, the crinkling of that tinfoil hat has got to get annoying.

[Karpatenhund]

Originally posted by Damedius:

All the sponsored youtuber's loved the game.
Must be a 10/10.

metacritic has no sponsered youtuber in the score. U know nothing about reviews right?

[Iskaka]

I think its gonna release a littly buggy with a war system that more often than not feels stale, however after a few months, maybe a year it will be golden there too. before then excellent mechanics elsewhere will have to do

[[FvN] Var]

Imagine still trusting in reviewer scores on metacritic

[Jhea]

everyone who has paid attention to the game for about 3 seconds knows, that this game is not about the battles...