The Last of Us Part II

[eschatological]

https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/w...le-for-azeroth

Yea reviewer scores have never had a stark difference from user scores before, nope not at all.

Second, They could only review up to 5hrs of a game thats suppose to be 25hrs.

Not true. They could only discuss up to a certain point in the game in their week-prior review (because of embargo), but they were obviously allowed to play and review it based on the whole game.

- - - Updated - - -

People are already calling the critic reviews shit. Expect a lot of review bombing, then those who support that shit crying that they get deleted. It's a fun cycle where people continue to care what random user reviews say... for some reason.

The Easy Allies review I normally rely on has 1.3k dislikes on it in the past 20 hours......from an audience who hasn't played the game yet, which only releases next week. And Easy Allies generally have a more positive, mature audience. The IGN review has 13k dislikes out of a total of 41k likes/dislikes. All because these outlets dared to like the game.

It's getting ratioed to hell because.......gamers.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, if you know anything about Easy Allies' Mike Huber, who reviewed this game, the thought of him being a paid shill is fucking hilariously bad.

[Tech614]

Not true. They could only discuss up to a certain point in the game in their week-prior review (because of embargo), but they were obviously allowed to play and review it based on the whole game.

- - - Updated - - -



The Easy Allies review I normally rely on has 1.3k dislikes on it in the past 20 hours......from an audience who hasn't played the game yet, which only releases next week. And Easy Allies generally have a more positive, mature audience. The IGN review has 13k dislikes out of a total of 41k likes/dislikes. All because these outlets dared to like the game.

It's getting ratioed to hell because.......gamers.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, if you know anything about Easy Allies' Mike Huber, who reviewed this game, the thought of him being a paid shill is fucking hilariously bad.

You think the salt is strong now just wait until sales charts for June come out. These people got so caught up in their hate brigade that they not only failed to read the room, they went to a different house entirely. These people are going through the stages of denial now.

[eschatological]

You think the salt is strong now just wait until sales charts for June come out. These people got so caught up in their hate brigade that they not only failed to read the room, they went to a different house entirely. These people are going through the stages of denial now.

The pre-sales are already ahead of the pre-sales for TLOU in general. I'm pretty sure it'll be fine.

[Tech614]

The pre-sales are already ahead of the pre-sales for TLOU in general. I'm pretty sure it'll be fine.

It's going to be way more then fine. It will likely break the sales record currently held by Spider-Man for highest selling Sony published game. If not, it will be damn close.

Also this is the embargo terms people are making a fuss about:



AKA normal shit, don't spoil our game in your review. No where does it say they can't form an opinion or score based on these moments, they just can't blatantly spoil the game. This is normal shit for any review embargo.

[Kallisto]

Yeah the user scores are going to be a disaster. As soon as they open up to the public, people who haven't even played the game are going to start bombing it to hell.

Which is why user reviews are always shit. Too many with 0s and 10 or 100 depending on scoring method without actual playtime or true critical thought

[Yizu]

Last of Us and Naughty Dog in general are those games that are too big to fail.

I could say the same for Mass Effect Andromeda and Bioware.

[Volatilis]

I could say the same for Mass Effect Andromeda and Bioware.

Why limit it to video games?

I cant think of any examples of selling a product that would be a guaranteed success just because of the size of the company behind it.

The only really "too big to fail" things are normally government funded because the country needs its services like airports etc

[Edge-]

It's hard to take anyone seriously that is so blatantly getting paid by the developers to positively review their product.

Citation needed. This is the same bullshit people have been complaining about since forever, without ever having a shred of proof.

And before "BUT GERSTMAN!", it was the opposite. He was fired for giving a shit score. Which is equally bad, but thankfully is the only notable instance of behavior like that in the past decade +.

IGN Japan gave TLOU2 a 7, while IGN USA gave it a 10. And if you read the reviews, it's obvious who is getting paid off and is a shill, and who is being honest.

But why not pay both? Both scores go on Metacritic, if they can buy off one reviewer easily why not buy off them all? Why not buy off Game Revolution? Why not bumps some of those 90's up to 98's

Considering Naughty Dog is forcing reviewers to sign NDA's preventing them from talking about the second half of the game, of course people are calling bullshit.

Embargoes, which are absolutely bog-standard in the industry.

You embargo news to media regularly. This gives them time to prepare a news story to go up alongside the official announcement going public, allowing editors to actually spend a bit of time on an article rather than trying to shit out some half-assed bullshit as quickly as possible. Publishers benefit too because they get more timely coverage. Media can always tell you to piss off.

You embargo events and trade-show presentations, giving all attending media an equal opportunity to write up their thoughts/experiences without rushing to be the first to post a story for clicks. Publishers get to time the release of that news to a big marketing beat, and if outlets decide to post after the embargo they can do so. Media can always decline to come.

You embargo reviews, giving media either specific times when they can begin posting reviews to allow reviewers time with the game rather than trying to rush through a 20 hour game to post an early review, and sometimes for narrative heavy games or games with heavy spoilers you embargo major story beats in order to avoid them accidentally ruining key parts of the experience before people play it. Media can tell the publisher to stuff off, buy the game at launch, and spoil the whole game if they want.

I will truly never understand why many gamers view the very people who create the games they enjoy with such suspicion and hostility. It's a really, really, really weird quirk of the fandom.

[Pebrocks The Warlock]

Why limit it to video games?

I cant think of any examples of selling a product that would be a guaranteed success just because of the size of the company behind it.

The only really "too big to fail" things are normally government funded because the country needs its services like airports etc

Does the Iphone count?

[Stormdash]

I never doubted it's sales would be strong - most people have no idea what they are buying. And, unlike a movie release, there is no "second weekend" effect with a video game, or at least not as easily pronounced or measurable one. all we'll have is player reviews, and if those come in in the 50-75% quartile, not nearly enough will be smart enough to say "hmmm, I wonder if the shockingly flawless reviews from industry press are video game payola"; plenty will be dumb enough to say "only toxic misogynists wouldn't want to play as the woman who brutally murdered one of their favorite characters from the previous game a few hours earlier.

[Rennadrel]

Citation needed. This is the same bullshit people have been complaining about since forever, without ever having a shred of proof.

And before "BUT GERSTMAN!", it was the opposite. He was fired for giving a shit score. Which is equally bad, but thankfully is the only notable instance of behavior like that in the past decade +.



But why not pay both? Both scores go on Metacritic, if they can buy off one reviewer easily why not buy off them all? Why not buy off Game Revolution? Why not bumps some of those 90's up to 98's



Embargoes, which are absolutely bog-standard in the industry.

You embargo news to media regularly. This gives them time to prepare a news story to go up alongside the official announcement going public, allowing editors to actually spend a bit of time on an article rather than trying to shit out some half-assed bullshit as quickly as possible. Publishers benefit too because they get more timely coverage. Media can always tell you to piss off.

You embargo events and trade-show presentations, giving all attending media an equal opportunity to write up their thoughts/experiences without rushing to be the first to post a story for clicks. Publishers get to time the release of that news to a big marketing beat, and if outlets decide to post after the embargo they can do so. Media can always decline to come.

You embargo reviews, giving media either specific times when they can begin posting reviews to allow reviewers time with the game rather than trying to rush through a 20 hour game to post an early review, and sometimes for narrative heavy games or games with heavy spoilers you embargo major story beats in order to avoid them accidentally ruining key parts of the experience before people play it. Media can tell the publisher to stuff off, buy the game at launch, and spoil the whole game if they want.

I will truly never understand why many gamers view the very people who create the games they enjoy with such suspicion and hostility. It's a really, really, really weird quirk of the fandom.

The difference is that Japanese reviewers still have credibility and standards, and it's clear that they don't care about ridiculous NDA's and embargoes that prohibit reviewers from being honest about the game. See, Japan hasn't been plagued with the toxicity that is the games journalist activism that western outlets have been poisoned with. They are also forthcoming about sponsorships from developers and publishers.

And as Alanah Pearce, a former IGN writer points out, the NDA embargo is a freaking stranglehold.

If you want an idea of just how much stuff is forcibly redacted from even being discussed because of the NDA embargo, look no further than this review.

Oh, and if you think that there still isn't an issue of ethics and accountability in game journalism that's become a problem in the last several years, you really haven't done the research. Or do we still willfully forget that a certain woman fucked an IGN writer for a positive review on her shitty "game"?

[Sorshen]

Which is why user reviews are always shit. Too many with 0s and 10 or 100 depending on scoring method without actual playtime or true critical thought

As opposed to 'gaming journalists' circle jerking over every feels trip game...
Looking at user score is always a better metric, exclude all the 0s and 10s and you have a much better picture.

[DarkAmbient]

I must thank the leakers for saving me some money. Really enjoyed the first game but some of the reviews are confirming what I expected about TLOU2.

[Witchblade77]

The difference is that Japanese reviewers still have credibility and standards, and it's clear that they don't care about ridiculous NDA's and embargoes that prohibit reviewers from being honest about the game. See, Japan hasn't been plagued with the toxicity that is the games journalist activism that western outlets have been poisoned with. They are also forthcoming about sponsorships from developers and publishers.

And as Alanah Pearce, a former IGN writer points out, the NDA embargo is a freaking stranglehold.

If you want an idea of just how much stuff is forcibly redacted from even being discussed because of the NDA embargo, look no further than this review.

Oh, and if you think that there still isn't an issue of ethics and accountability in game journalism that's become a problem in the last several years, you really haven't done the research. Or do we still willfully forget that a certain woman fucked an IGN writer for a positive review on her shitty "game"?

so much passive aggressiveness in that redacted review. everything that is redacted seems to be story spoilers. are you honestly expecting ANY company whose product hinges so much on story - to allow full spoilers to be available in reviews BEFORE THE GAME IS EVEN OUT? really?

moreover - wasn't that whole "fucked for review" proven to be a fabricated narrative?

[Stormdash]

Well, they are embargoing things that wouldn't be typically embargoed - like whether or not you play as multiple characters, whether or not those are original characters or returning - because it would confirm leaks that they know could shift sales. Those kinds of details are not within the typical marketing realm of "don't spoil the story" and are instead gameplay features, but Sony has them locked down anyway.

[Tech614]

Well, they are embargoing things that wouldn't be typically embargoed - like whether or not you play as multiple characters, whether or not those are original characters or returning - because it would confirm leaks that they know could shift sales. Those kinds of details are not within the typical marketing realm of "don't spoil the story" and are instead gameplay features, but Sony has them locked down anyway.

God of War had no such leaks and had a very similar embargo that also lifted a week before release from the exact same publisher.

Stop talking out of your ass with claims you can't back up. Every SP story focused game will embargo major plot points from being in a review.

[ZazuuPriest]

I must thank the leakers for saving me some money. Really enjoyed the first game but some of the reviews are confirming what I expected about TLOU2.

nothing like some good old confirmation bias to complement that misogyny.

[everydaygamer]

People do understand that just because they can't talk about later sections of the game doesn't mean that the score is affected by that right? If the later portions of the game were garbage reviewers could absolutely mention that they just aren't allowed to go into detail since that would involve spoilers.

[DarkAmbient]

nothing like some good old confirmation bias to complement that misogyny.

Go on then, I'll take the bait. What's misogynistic about my post?

[Kallisto]

People do understand that just because they can't talk about later sections of the game doesn't mean that the score is affected by that right? If the later portions of the game were garbage reviewers could absolutely mention that they just aren't allowed to go into detail since that would involve spoilers.

This. The whole NDA part of the review is basically every game in existence when it comes to reviews. The whole list is basically "Don't spoil."