@jump I've tried rating games in the past and doing it on a 1-100 scale is absolutely awful. Only way to make that particular system work even marginally well is if that score is an average. I find myself using a 1-5 scale a lot in my life, and that seems to work much better than the traditional video game 1-10 scale.
@Matt_Barber I do the same, strangely. I never thought it was a normal thing to do but I'm glad you do as well, it allows for fascinating points of view. I watch reviews of games I've already beaten but I do look at Metacritic and actively look for criticism. Death Stranding is such a polarising game and I watched and read many reviews for it. I came to the consensus that these reviewers didn't play the entire game, in fact they probably played through less than 20%. It highlights the shortcomings of game journalism.
I don't use it much as a platform to convince myself whether I should get a game or not. Having said that there aren't many games I've had to be truly sold on lately, because of how many ports, sequels remakes, and remasters there are nowadays. Last one I had to extensively research, was, you guessed it, Death Stranding.
@Anti-Matter You aren't the first to dislike Breath of the Wild; Jim Sterling gave it a seven out of ten. Just how bad is that game for you? And... doesn't you giving some games scores over 100 defeat the purpose of a 1-100 scale?
@TheJGG
I neglected my BOTW for 4 years due to being clueless in open world, easily get killed by Bokoblin, breakable weapons, etc. I was still at the beginning part, after get out from the cave.
I realized BOTW wasn't the right game for me since i tend to play casual games.
I still keep the game despite i don't play it anymore.
Btw, if Dance Dance Revolution A20+ get ported to Nintendo Switch with all songs from Arcade including the previous version or Animal Crossing in Dragon Quest Builders 2 style, it will be instant more than 100 score. (200/100)😍😍😍
Percentages in theory give you a greater flexibility to rank the scores of similar games but invariably everything ends up compressed in the 60-90 range with only a very small number of outliers.
Also, if you're going to go down that route, why not just maintain a ranked list of every game you've ever played so people can see where it slots in?
All this talk on reviews, I guess I side with this unpopular opinion about game reviews too. I can't count how many times a critic hated a game, and I ended up pretty much loving it in the end. I stopped really looking at reviews years ago because I didn't find them useful as actually playing games for myself.
Nowadays, I will peek at a review's text if there's particular information I need, but I don't use it as the overall "truth" (for lack of a better phrase) about whether a game is good or not, I leave that up to me if I find it good or not.
Always consider this unpopular because I still see people go to reviews to prove whether a game is good or not, most of the time it's usually people who haven't played said game.
I think scores are meant to be a visual shorthand for summarizing one's experience with a game, and less about categorizing all video games on this one identical scale. Even most reviewers will tell you that the score is a largely meaningless flourish. But it's satisfying to slap on at the end.
Reviews are opinion pieces, but the best ones will discuss the game in enough depth that they help you decide whether it's worth picking up or not. At the end of the day, that's the primary value of a review: helping the customer to make an educated choice when deciding to purchase or not to purchase a product.
I rate games in my head, but I'd never in a million years want to use too specific a grading for a game. Also, I'd probably rate games lower than in my head, because I'm not insulting people's intelligence by saying even the worst Zelda game is still a 7/10.
I like rating things out of 100 too because it’s more specific. I like doing that for basically everything, not just games. I can understand why websites like this might use a less-specific rating system though.
Heigh Ho Heigh Ho. It’s off to work (from home) I go.
@zeldafan79 Assassins Creed would be 13,000% better if they ditched the stupid animus thing, or at least just had it as an intro cut scene and then ignored it lol
@BloodNinja
Yeah i mean i like the series, Well the early ones anyway but it's getting to be a major burnout. Imagine if a new zelda came every year. Ugh! New entry's are way more special if they give you time to miss it. Besides I'm so far behind on AC I'll never get caught up!
BOTW is not the greatest zelda of all time. So sick of top 10 lists always putting BOTW at #1.
Considering this is the direction of main Zelda titles going forward, it feels like that's gonna age the same way the extreme hype for OOT did. It's reasonable to assume their first attempt at this type of open world wasn't the best one they will ever make like this.
I don’t know how popular this opinion is, but I think that BOTW is a good game, but just not a good Zelda game. I love it’s gameplay, and I love exploring the open world itself, but the dungeons are extremely lacking, and I really don’t like how the story has no actual stakes in it due to everyone being dead already. Hoping BOTW 2 will have a great narrative as well as better dungeons and an even better open world.
"It is fate. Many have tried, yet none have ever managed to escape it's flow."
I don’t really agree with people who say BOTW is lazy however, since the physics engine and the fact that the game’s structured in the way that it is.. isn’t really what I’d call lazy. Honestly, I think it was a much needed change compared to what happened with Skyward Sword, and I feel like the more they do open world games, the more they’ll improve with it.
"It is fate. Many have tried, yet none have ever managed to escape it's flow."
@Zeldafan79 I'd prefer a new game every two years, to strike a blend between getting a good game and not waiting too long. It's not like Nintendo's short-staffed, so they could make a Zelda team just for that. They may already have one, with Aonuma, Fujibayashi and co but still. I actually agree with all your points, and although I don't play Assassin's Creed they keep churning the out so I imagine they're compromising quality and true depth.
@BloodNinja I've always stressed that Breath of the Wild is an incredible game, but as a Zelda game borderlines decent to average. The things that should be fixed are varied but most importantly dungeon design; a five year old could beat the Divine Beast dungeons. The open world design was very good, without considering the fact that this was Nintendo's first open world game ever. When you do consider that, it becomes very clear why Nintendo game design is so revered.
@VoidofLight The game physics are what draw me back every time to the world, they're truly addicting. Messing around with the game physics makes for some very creative options of travel, and seeing speedruns evolve throughout the years is great. And as my comment pointed out, the honeymoon period for this game was over a while ago, so I doubt it's unpopular, so much as, underappreciated.
@Snatcher Personally I'm bored of seeing "I don't like popular game as it's actually bad" over and over again in the thread, it's not that interesting of a topic. I'd rather see people making the case for why commonly thought of bad games are good, why divise controls/mechanics are valid and an alterantive take of controversial issues.
Sorry what I actually meant to say was that the anime game is thrash because it's popular like all popular anime thrash and has no story. ;p
Surely the rating is just meant to be the TL;DR at the end of the review?
If you want to know what caveats there are to any recommendations you get, there's no substitute to reading the review. And while we're at it, reviews shouldn't just be dry breakdowns of how the game fares against a bunch of criteria; I want to read strong opinions, and if the writers can put these forward in an engaging fashion with a narrative that runs the length of the review, a heck of a lot less people would just skip to the scores at the end of them.
Sorting games by review scores, particularly aggregated ones like on Metacritic, seems particularly egregious to me. I'll usually just go on there and read the ones that give it the lowest scores to see if they've got a convincing argument as to why I shouldn't get the game. Sometimes they succeed, sometimes not. Surviving that test is generally going to tell you far more about a game than a swathe of 90%, 5/5, and triple thumbs up scores.
The most important thing for me in a review are the pros and cons section as I won't read a review of a game I want to play as I don't want to be spoiled by it
Forums
Topic: Unpopular Gaming Opinions
Posts 8,081 to 8,100 of 12,940
Please login or sign up to reply to this topic