Steam 설치
로그인
|
언어
简体中文(중국어 간체)
繁體中文(중국어 번체)
日本語(일본어)
ไทย(태국어)
Български(불가리아어)
Čeština(체코어)
Dansk(덴마크어)
Deutsch(독일어)
English(영어)
Español - España(스페인어 - 스페인)
Español - Latinoamérica(스페인어 - 중남미)
Ελληνικά(그리스어)
Français(프랑스어)
Italiano(이탈리아어)
Bahasa Indonesia(인도네시아어)
Magyar(헝가리어)
Nederlands(네덜란드어)
Norsk(노르웨이어)
Polski(폴란드어)
Português(포르투갈어 - 포르투갈)
Português - Brasil(포르투갈어 - 브라질)
Română(루마니아어)
Русский(러시아어)
Suomi(핀란드어)
Svenska(스웨덴어)
Türkçe(튀르키예어)
Tiếng Việt(베트남어)
Українська(우크라이나어)
번역 관련 문제 보고
Plus is it just me, or are all of the recent "jornalists" openly liberel? Seriously, is all they think about when they wake, and eat, and go to work, and eat again, and go to sleep, and.....breathe, is sodding politics?
It's no wonder, that most of these people are bats**t insane. Politics this, and t*ts in a japanese game that. Take a breather (a real one) for a few minutes, enjoy the wind on your face, and have a nice hot brew. Ahhhh, thats better isn't it, yes good. Right now.......STOP TURNING A WEBSITE ABOUT GAMES, INTO A POLITICAL RALLY. Thank you:)
Look at me with my original jokes.
Jk I still love me.
NOPE
* it is a bigger game?
* in a comparison between Celeste and Minecraft, Celeste deserves a better score?
* it deserves more sales than Minecraft?
Please provide a link to the Celeste review and highlight/quote the relevant passages.
I've never cared about them anyway.
To answer your question, I need to ask you a question:
Is 9/10 a bigger number than 10/10?
I mentioned it, because a small and unoriginal indie game got a perfect score, while ambitious and industry changing game got 9/10.
It makes Markus Persson's achievment in game development feels lesser than Celeste's achievment.
It rewards mediocrity and underestimating originality.
4. What are the ratings supposed to mean anyway? Are they rating on how much they like the game? Are they rating on originality/novelty? Are they rating on execution and polish? Are the rating on how influential a game is?
This is important, because you seem to think that the rating is a measure of things like ambition and industry influence and originality. If that's the case, wouldn't this mean that Super Mario Bros., the original Doom, and Final Fantasy VII would have to be rated like 20/10? because they're some of the most influential games of all time. Furthermore, wouldn't this mean that you'd be rating poorly-designed but innovative games higher than more-polished games that use older mechanics?
So it's important to ask what exactly the rating is supposed to mean.
That's why when you interested in any game read few reviews on different sites, than read steam review than watch some YouTube movie maybe to see gameplay for yourself
Danon
I don't understand you guys. Its like saying that every game is 10/10 on their own standards.
If your standards prioritize originality, then yeah, a game that isn't as polished but does something stunningly innovative and ground-breakingly influential in the industry is going to get rated better than something that just sticks to a formula but tries to perfect it in subtle ways, and if this is what IGN means to use as their standard, then yeah, their ratings are wrong.
Note: I have not played Minecraft or Celeste. Though I've seen more of Minecraft and know almost nothing about Celeste, but what little I've seen of it makes me think that I'll prefer Celeste over Minecraft.
Also they have some ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ in their reviews that I really hate.