Even if the stories are great, the animation most often doesn't come anywhere near close enough to portraying human emotion to have me convinced or feel anything. The episodic Game Of Thrones games was like watching the real thing being performed by wax sculptures on unconvincing dead backgrounds.
It all depends what you play and how much you play it. I'm sure Fallout 4 has over 100 hours of stuff for me to do but I've been playing Rocket League all week.
I hated the campaign more than any other game I have played on the PS4 but I am still playing Conquest on Battlefield 4, 2 years after its release! Seriously, I play that game a few times a week, and mainly on 2-3 maps.
All I'm saying is 'content' often a few thin concepts stretch...
I'm not saying I entirely disagree with the sentiments here but everything about this screams clickbait early review - probably because I have never heard of Pixelgate, who submitted this to N4G themselves, with their 45 Twitter followers. Just saying I'll wait for more reputable source before I settle.
The first level on the Ps1/N64 game had me thinking 'hey, this might not be so bad once I get a proper weapon and I get past these turkeys' - then I realised that every level is basically turkeys and snowballs. Still I don't think it was as bad as everyone says.
Well the good news is that it looks a bit better than the controversial 'downgraded' footage but still not quite like the original E3 footage.
Why do Ubisoft do this? They did the same with Watch_Dogs. First trailer looked incredible, then they released something that looked sub-ps3 standard, then eventually settled for something inbetween.
Such a shame. Sounds and looks like it would have been awesome.
BC is always a good thing but it's not really a compliment to say you finally started liking your Xbox One upon loading up a 360 game.
People still listen to Michael Pachter despite never saying anything of value.
Best start getting my hopes up that a new console will deliver graphics never before seen - even more powerful than the best PC rig available - yet still will be under $400 - then act all disappointed when it turns out that isn't possible.
Why are people so bothered by other people's opinion on a game?
I don't think there is any problem with non-professional user feedback being overly enthusiastic and positive about a game. If they are happy then let them be happy. I just don't understand why anyone would make such an effort to say a game is 0/10 when then most likely haven't played it and have no intention of playing it. I see no purpose.
There are very few games that deserve a 0. Anyone who gives a modern, playable game a 0 is an idiot and shouldn't be taken seriously. Even Duke Nukem Forever deserves 2/10.
If you are angry about Fallout4, giving it a 0 on Metacritic has to be the most pathetic form of protest possible. Though, any hyped game can expect this sort of backlash. Why this deserves an article is anyone's guess.
Most are glitches rather than gamebreaking bugs - though I did get trapped in an elevator.
Trying to love a game? That's a weird concept. I don't like rap music but I hear Kanye's last album got great reviews. Should I TRY and love it just to fit in?
Complaint culture. Anti-hype brigade. Stop being disappointed by default.
I'm so hungry, I could eat at Arby's!
It's interesting to see the same site give Black Ops 3 an 89 - a game that will be forgotten the moment the next COD appears. Not saying there is anything entirely wrong with BO3 but people will be playing Fallout 4 for years.
IGN are a reflection of the gaming mainstream. The majority still buy into Call Of Duty hence the high score. IGN are not being paid off by Activision they are speaking to their audience.
They didn't send me any review copies anyway.
Because PS3 still sells a few thousand per week