Diablo 4 is bad.

[Nymrohd]

First diablo game thats not for me. I love the setting and storyline, but the game play just isn't fun for me. I absolutely hate either watching my player get progressively crappier with each level instead of better OR having to just use an icy veins meta leveling build.

Isn't that exactly how D2 was when for several builds there was no value leveling to max because they just got weaker and poor builds were often useless? It took an expansion for systems to be added that allowed for enough build variety.

- - - Updated - - -

If I had to look at metacritic, I guess I'd remove outliers and then look for the median reviews. Definitely not the average ones.

[Rageonit]

That has no bearing on the quantitative relevance of metacritic data as a relative representation of the game's public reception. The fact that it isn't perfect does not make it unrepresentative.

Your confusion and lack of understanding of how community ratings work seem to stem from an unfounded assumption that what is represented by those scores, is the game in question - it and only it - which is blatanty false. That's not how people's opinions (and people's feelings, which affect those opinions) work. It is a known fact that big AAA games from big studios are rated, on average, lower than games from small studios or new studios, or simply less known studios, and why? Because big studios release plenty of titles players may have encountered in their gaming lives, prior to giving a rating to the newest title.

Why does it matter? Because things like resentment have an "expiration date". Lets say you were very much disappointed with Dragonflight ("hated it"), for any reason and all, and you still feel resentment towards Blizzard. For most people, that feeling will very much affect how they rate the next title from the same studio; they may even give the game a 0 simply out of spite, because it gives them a feeling of agency. They can have their "revenge". This is even more prelevant in the case of studios and (mostly) publishers that use controversial practices like MTX or whatever.

The idea of critical review is to put those feelings aside and rate a game on its own mertis - and that's why critical reviews are, in fact, more accurate than player scores. It's by no means perfect - reviewers can fall to those feelings too, after all - but many are capable of giving a game a fair score, or at least less unbiased score (like: "Game is ok, 0/10" - no reviewer would ever do that).

Blizzard games, EA games etc. etc., will always receive lower scores compared to smaller studios, because they release lots of games and sometimes use shady practices to get more money, and in result make people upset. So the claim that user scores - even if biased - are a good metric, because you can always compare scores to those of other games, is simply false. Look at an AAA game like Hogwart's Legacy. Who is Avalanche Studio? How many people ever played a game from that Studio or remember it, if they did? That's why Avalanche Studio had a clean slate with HL. Blizzard will never get that luxury. Thus, HL has a critic score of 84 and player score of 8.7 (almost the same); and D4 has a critic score of 87 and user score of 5.1. If you don't understand why by now, I don't think your opinions have any merit.

[Flame6]

You want easy proof that User critic MC scores are useless? Compare the steam approval rating to Metacritic user scores and you'll see tons of inconsistencies.

Monster hunter rise? MC 3.2 > Steam 86
Street fighter 6? MC 5.3 > steam 90


Now do I think Diablo 4 is an amazing game? Hell no, but its' not a bad game either. It does a lot of things really well, and if they fix the level scaling pre-50 it'd be much better.

I would love to see more games come to steam just because of its open reviews and player count data. I do half wish steam would kill its player count data because it sucks to hear "GAME IS DYING!" all the time.

[mbit2]

You want easy proof that User critic MC scores are useless? Compare the steam approval rating to Metacritic user scores and you'll see tons of inconsistencies.

Monster hunter rise? MC 3.2 > Steam 86
Street fighter 6? MC 5.3 > steam 90

MC is useless, however steam scores are positively biased.
First you need to own a title to review on steam. So it excludes people who wont even buy the game cause they think its trash.
Street Fighter 6 is a good example - the control change was controversial. So people who dont even buy it cause they say fuck that arent in the steam reviews but they can still rate it a 0 on sites like metacritic. The second aspect is steam has been purging "false reviews" in some instances. So if its unusually positive it might be also just that.

[Rageonit]

MC is useless, however steam scores are positively biased.
First you need to own a title to review on steam. So it excludes people who wont even buy the game cause they think its trash.

"Positively biased" because you need the game to review it xD Golden.

[Gaidax]

So it excludes people who wont even buy the game cause they think its trash.

Reread this again and then think about what a word "review" means.

[mbit2]

Reread this again and then think about what a word "review" means.

You dont need to play to know aspects of a game... if i disagree with intrusive anti-cheat or hardcore p2w crap i can tell its trash without wasting time playing the game.

[Gaidax]

You dont need to play to know aspects of a game... if i disagree with intrusive anti-cheat or hardcore p2w crap i can tell its trash without wasting time playing the game.

So practically you can "review" and score whatever uninformed bullshit you have in your head based on your feels?

And then you claim these "reviews" and scores produced from them are legitimate?

Dam, you can't make this shit up.

[mbit2]

So practically you can "review" and score whatever uninformed bullshit you have in your head based on your feels?

And then you claim these "reviews" and scores produced from them are legitimate?

Dam, you can't make this shit up.

"you need to waste time before you can say p2w sucks" stupid take.
And lets not forget i can review positive with 5h played on a 90h game. Its equally worthless to say if you purchase your take valid.

[Gaidax]

"you need to waste time before you can say p2w sucks" stupid take.
And lets not forget i can review positive with 5h played on a 90h game. Its equally worthless to say if you purchase your take valid.

What P2W?

So basically you create some bullshit in your head, then review it, then decide it's 2/10. And you call that credible.

Gotcha.

Got some more of that shit? I didn't finish my coffee yet, few more laughs would do.

[mbit2]

What P2W?

So basically you create some bullshit in your head, then review it, then decide it's 2/10. And you call that credible.

Gotcha.

Got some more of that shit? I didn't finish my coffee yet, few more laughs would do.

It was about steam in general not d4 which isnt even on steam. Maybe get more coffee so you can start using your brain.

[Gaidax]

It was about steam in general not d4 which isnt even on steam. Maybe get more coffee so you can start using your brain.

Yes, Steam reviews are more relevant because games reviewed by people who own them. "Positively biased"? You got any empirical data to back that up, buddy, aside from your headcanon?

[mbit2]

Yes, Steam reviews are more relevant because games reviewed by people who own them. "Positively biased"? You got any empirical data to back that up, buddy, aside from your headcanon?

Are too stupid to understand that people who hate p2w wont buy p2w games and thus wont review them negative?

[Rageonit]

"you need to waste time before you can say p2w sucks" stupid take.
And lets not forget i can review positive with 5h played on a 90h game. Its equally worthless to say if you purchase your take valid.

If you give a bad rating to a game you've never played, because it has some P2W elements, you're not giving your opinion on the game - you're giving an opinion on P2W elements. The fact that you don't understant this is another proof why community ratings mean shit. Most people are unable to put their personal pet peeves aside to review a product in its entirety (something that a reviewer is expected to do), and that's why you see stupid takes like: "Game's ok, great graphics, solid gameplay, BUT there's this one thing I don't enjoy, so 0/10". Same thing with people downrating products they've never tried, because "woke agenda" or whatever. They don't review products, they just present their political opinions that have nothing to do with the quality of the product itself.

- - - Updated - - -

Are too stupid to understand that people who hate p2w wont buy p2w games and thus wont review them negative?

And it's a great thing, because nobody needs shallow, biased opinions muddling a game's reception due to personal pet peeves of angry gamers. Don't like p2w, then don't buy the game and just sod off to a greener pasture.

[Aliven]

Are too stupid to understand that people who hate p2w wont buy p2w games and thus wont review them negative?

Dear God, i hate mtx, p2w and all that crap but your take is stupid. Even shits like Destiny 2 have good sides. REVIEW is a critique of something, and critique is:
a detailed analysis and assessment of something, especially a literary, philosophical, or political theory - by oxford dictionary.

[mbit2]

If you give a bad rating to a game you've never played, because it has some P2W elements, you're not giving your opinion on the game - you're giving an opinion on P2W elements. The fact that you don't understant this is another proof why community ratings mean shit. Most people are unable to put their personal pet peeves aside to review a product in its entirety (something that a reviewer is expected to do), and that's why you see stupid takes like: "Game's ok, great graphics, solid gameplay, BUT there's this one thing I don't enjoy, so 0/10". Same thing with people downrating products they've never tried, because "woke agenda" or whatever. They don't review products, they just present their political opinions that have nothing to do with the quality of the product itself.

Thats an issue with the review process though since steam forces you to choose between 0/10 and 10/10. People have been asking for a long time to get a neutral option at least.

[Rageonit]

Thats an issue with the review process though since steam forces you to choose between 0/10 and 10/10. People have been asking for a long time to get a neutral option at least.

Every system has pros and cons; there are other sites that let you rate however you like. But even the best system won't help with stupid takes, and those takes are a problem - not the system.

[mbit2]

Every system has pros and cons; there are other sites that let you rate however you like. But even the best system won't help with stupid takes, and those takes are a problem - not the system.

The system fosters it. A lot of negative reviews start with "its not really that bad but i got no middle option so im going with bad".
One simple improvement they did is mention additional software like denuvo on store page. So now everyone already knows and people wont bomb them with negative reviews for unwanted suprises after purchase.

[Gaidax]

Are too stupid to understand that people who hate p2w wont buy p2w games and thus wont review them negative?

How P2W has anything to do with Diablo 4?

What?

People who won't buy D4 because it's P2W are fucking morons acting based on feels. They would not be able to review this game on Steam? Good! Because their review would review something they constructed in their brain as opposed to actual game.

[mbit2]

How P2W has anything to do with Diablo 4?

What?

People who won't buy D4 because it's P2W are fucking morons acting based on feels. They would not be able to review this game on Steam? Good! Because their review would review something they constructed in their brain as opposed to actual game.

It has nothing do with d4 and i repeatedly wrote that. Simple remark why steam and MC reviews will differ got exaggerated into 20 posts cause you cant read...