The last game you bought

[Cas]

So I can have it waiting for me when I get home from work on day of release.

 

[Megaclyde]

So that it's downloaded and installed by the time it comes out. If I buy a physical copy here any DLC I intend to play won't work since my PSN is a UK account.

 

[Eski Boi]

Journey PS4. £6.70

 

[Oaf]

AW SHIT, it's that price on PS store right now? A mate just gave me a £20 code and that's a game I've been meaning to check out for years...

 

[Cas]

AW SHIT, it's that price on PS store right now? A mate just gave me a £20 code and that's a game I've been meaning to check out for years...

Shame you're too busy with Stardew Valley.

 

[Eski Boi]

AW SHIT, it's that price on PS store right now? A mate just gave me a £20 code and that's a game I've been meaning to check out for years...

http://www.videogamebox.co.uk/Journey-PS4-Download-p/20006983713221657454.htm?click=1533

Such a beautiful game

 

[Cas]

Dark Souls 3. Shopto sent me the wrong version though.

 

[Jockney]

I got it as an early birthday present. Apocalypse edition: basically they just shipped the game with the soundtrack, price inclusive. Lovely surprise coming back to the flat this evening, though!

 

[Cas]

Ratchet and Clank for PS4.

 

[Eski Boi]

Star Wars: The Force Unleashed 1+2

Sunset Overdrive (Free) with Xbox Live Gold

 

[Cas]

Uncharted 4 special edition.

 

[Oaf]

Pah, I bought mine a week or two ago.

#parttimenaughtydogfancas

 

[Cas]

Pah, I bought mine a week or two ago.

#parttimenaughtydogfancas

Hope I get mine before yours you fucking cruel bastard.

 

[Oaf]

Nah, they make sure that the real fans get it first.

Discounting the stolen truckload or whatever that's been doing the rounds in recent weeks where people got it really early. I may have to track one of those down actually just to get it first, as a #TRUENAUGHTYDOGFANBOY.

Actually on that topic, have you seen IGN's early impressions? They've basically finished with the single player but are waiting to try out the multiplayer before completing the review. But the single player actually sounded... disappointing. Like, it's still better than 99% of other games out there, but not quite up to Uncharted standards... and for the final third (right up until the final parts) of it they seem to run out of ideas and it's basically just aimlessly shooting through meaningless waves of enemies with no real inspiration or creativity that the series is known for.

Plus it apparently doesn't really have any standout set pieces, which is a bit of a shame.

Despite that though, they still said that based just on the main story it'd score an 8.8 which is obviously very good. Just not quite the 9.5-10 territory I assumed it would be landing in.

Still hyped as FOCK for it though.

 

[Cas]

Why are you bothered about just IGN? Tons of places have given it 10/10. I mean, it sits on 94 on Metacritic if you give a shit about that.

I'm gonna PM you.

 

[Oaf]

I kept meaning to check it out on Metacritic but sort of assumed that nobody had scored it yet

That's good to know, then!

Will check your PM.

 

[Oaf]

Hope I get mine before yours you fucking cruel bastard.

Just saw that mine got dispatched at 11:10am this morning.

:hesk:

Which is actually great for me... as I'm working all night Monday and Tuesday (which is when I expected to get it)... got my Saturday and Sunday evenings free, should hopefully get the entire fucker done then, should it actually arrive tomorrow.

Also, those other reviews you mentioned... yeah, ok, I checked some out now. And yeah, it does look like yet another case of Uncharted being at its very best. Stupid IGN gettting me worried...

 

[Cas]

Just saw that mine got dispatched at 11:10am this morning.

:hesk:

Which is actually great for me... as I'm working all night Monday and Tuesday (which is when I expected to get it)... got my Saturday and Sunday evenings free, should hopefully get the entire fucker done then, should it actually arrive tomorrow.

Also, those other reviews you mentioned... yeah, ok, I checked some out now. And yeah, it does look like yet another case of Uncharted being at its very best. Stupid IGN gettting me worried...

Did you go for the normal edition or the collectors edition? Only way to settle the title of biggest Naughty Dog fan :O

 

[Oaf]

I don't do special editions.

That doesn't count.

 

[Cas]

I don't either. Well not anymore because I'm out of shelf space. First world problems. Damnit.

 

[Eski Boi]

Uncharted 4, Tesco £44

 

[RavenBish]

IGN's voice has no real superiorty over anyone's, in fact I always think there's a hidden agenda with most employees there as they're not faceless reviewers/video game journalists - they all seem to be zany personalities trying to be the next one to make money on Youtube or Twitch. I don't like the 'review in progress' they choose either, just review the game like everyone else ffs.

As Cas said, it's Metacritic tells the story and it is/will be as well-reviewed as the Last of Us was. I'd still be amazed if IGN gave it less than 9.5 considering their scoring scale seems to over-score mediocre games frequently.

 

[Oaf]

Just saw that mine got dispatched at 11:10am this morning.

:hesk:

Got home from work today and a nice package was waiting for me.

(insert LR style video here of Michael Cole asking how it feels)

 

[Jockney]

Consumer reviews are not critical and do not stand up to scrutiny. If you want an honest appraisal of a game, wait a few months and see what kind of consensus the blogosphere and wider forum communities have forged. It might not always tally with your opinion, but at least the criticism will be meaningful.

or just wait for Superbunnyhop, MrBTongue or Errant Signal to do a piece on that game.

 

[Oaf]

Consumer reviews are not critical and do not stand up to scrutiny. If you want an honest appraisal of a game, wait a few months and see what kind of consensus the blogosphere and wider forum communities have forged. It might not always tally with your opinion, but at least the criticism will be meaningful.

or just wait for Superbunnyhop, MrBTongue or Errant Signal to do a piece on that game.

WAIT A FEW MONTHS?! ARE YE MAD!?!

My waiting is done the second that game is out. I don't have it in me to wait longer than that

This being said, I've been home since half 2 with Uncharted 4 sat on my table. Which completely contradicts this. But guess what, fuck you all, because I'm off to play Uncharted 4 now, so suck on that.

But yes, I do agree. The best way to get a reflection on a game is to see how it's generally coming across online on forums and such. But for those of us who have no patience and NEED THAT GAME YESTERDAY, reviews are all we have to go on. Plus, I do find that if you look at a general consensus using meta critic or what not, they do tend to feel about spot on 99 times out of 100.

 

[Jockney]

do you think a game's numerical score reflects the quality of the game? for example, do you think that gta v is qualitatively a better game than fallout new vegas, or should that even be the question, really? And how much can you trust that the outlet in question played that game in appropriate conditions or that the outlet in question is strong in the face of publisher threats and demands (which many outlets, inc IGN, have poor records on).

a good example of how unreliable consumer reviews are was the media love-in with (console version of) the arkham knight when it came out. reviews suggested that it was a significant improvement on previous instalments but all of the improvements were superficial and the only notable gameplay addition was the batmobile gimmick, which actually detracted from the experience. maybe if i had read a piece which critically compared it to its predecessors, or thematically or mechanically similar titles, i might have been able to make a purchase with a broad sense of the kind of experience i'd have with the game, but in the end i had to take the media consensus on their word (that these features were indeed 'jaw-dropping', 'spectacular' and a variety of other completely empty adjectives) and i ended up with a bad case of buyer's remorse.

 

[Oaf]

do you think a game's numerical score reflects the quality of the game? for example, do you think that gta v is qualitatively a better game than fallout new vegas, or should that even be the question, really? And how much can you trust that the outlet in question played that game in appropriate conditions or that the outlet in question is strong in the face of publisher threats and demands (which many outlets, inc IGN, have poor records on).

a good example of how unreliable consumer reviews are was the media love-in with (console version of) the arkham knight when it came out. reviews suggested that it was a significant improvement on previous instalments but all of the improvements were superficial and the only notable gameplay addition was the batmobile gimmick, which actually detracted from the experience. maybe if i had read a piece which critically compared it to its predecessors, or thematically or mechanically similar titles, i might have been able to make a purchase with a broad sense of the kind of experience i'd have with the game, but in the end i had to take the media consensus on their word (that these features were indeed 'jaw-dropping', 'spectacular' and a variety of other completely empty adjectives) and i ended up with a bad case of buyer's remorse.

I'd say that for each of us there's only one source we can use to judge a game compared to others, and that's by playing it ourselves. You can see a game get nice high scores or low scores and that doesn't ultimately mean anything about how you'll feel about the game when it's actually in your hands.

Personally, I never really agree with the idea of having to say that X is better than Y*... I just like to take things for what they are and take their positives and negatives together to give an overall opinion of that thing on its own by its own merits or shortcomings. I watched that new Jungle Book film back along, and the first thing people ask me when I talk about it is "is it better than the original". And honestly, I still don't really have an answer, nor do I even stop to think about that answer. Because I don't care. I love the original, but I thought the new one was great too. And that's about all I'm interested in saying about it.

(*and yes, I am aware that this is coming from the guy who runs like 50 "top 100 whatever" lists on here per year )

However I do find that if I look on metacritic for video games, generally speaking, it tends to lean toward the opinion that I'll end up forming on the game when I do get it in my hands. In the sense that if a game holds a score up or around 90 or above, I'll tend to find that the game is fantastic... or if it's got a score around 70 or so, I'll tend to get bored of it after not too long. It's not always right, but it generally gets very close more often than not. I'm not interested in whether it scores 95 or 96, that point means nothing to me. It's more to do with the general area that it falls into. So while I don't take it as a definitive, quantifiable number that says exactly, scientifically how good or poor a game is, I'm still happy to use it as a guideline when deciding what to buy. But that's not to say it's the only guideline I'll follow. I also tend to look at previews/clips of people playing the game or read about it or whatever.

Reviews are, at the end of the day, just the opinion of one guy who just happens to be lucky enough to get paid for their opinion. To me, my opinion on the views of some reviewer on IGN or Gamesradar or whatever website isn't any higher that the view of anybody on 1FF, or a friend, or whatever.

 

[Jockney]

I'd say that for each of us there's only one source we can use to judge a game compared to others, and that's by playing it ourselves. You can see a game get nice high scores or low scores and that doesn't ultimately mean anything about how you'll feel about the game when it's actually in your hands.

Well, yeah ultimately, but a more critical consensus can make that decision process a lot easier and also give us the language to explain what we do and don't like about video games.

Personally, I never really agree with the idea of having to say that X is better than Y*... I just like to take things for what they are and take their positives and negatives together to give an overall opinion of that thing on its own by its own merits or shortcomings. I watched that new Jungle Book film back along, and the first thing people ask me when I talk about it is "is it better than the original". And honestly, I still don't really have an answer, nor do I even stop to think about that answer. Because I don't care. I love the original, but I thought the new one was great too. And that's about all I'm interested in saying about it.

i agree completely, but then i think it's also useful to know why you liked both or why you might possibly have thought one succeeded more than the other.

However I do find that if I look on metacritic for video games, generally speaking, it tends to lean toward the opinion that I'll end up forming on the game when I do get it in my hands. In the sense that if a game holds a score up or around 90 or above, I'll tend to find that the game is fantastic... or if it's got a score around 70 or so, I'll tend to get bored of it after not too long. It's not always right, but it generally gets very close more often than not. I'm not interested in whether it scores 95 or 96, that point means nothing to me. It's more to do with the general area that it falls into. So while I don't take it as a definitive, quantifiable number that says exactly, scientifically how good or poor a game is, I'm still happy to use it as a guideline when deciding what to buy. But that's not to say it's the only guideline I'll follow. I also tend to look at previews/clips of people playing the game or read about it or whatever.

i do wonder for how long you held those highly-rated games in high esteem ultimately, and which you found truly memorable and would hold up for posterity. e.g. mgs compared to mgs 4.

Reviews are, at the end of the day, just the opinion of one guy who just happens to be lucky enough to get paid for their opinion. To me, my opinion on the views of some reviewer on IGN or Gamesradar or whatever website isn't any higher that the view of anybody on 1FF, or a friend, or whatever.

reviews tend to be hedged to avoid pissing off important industry contacts and/or their readership, so in a weird way there is consensus across publications but the wrong sort of consensus. a good reviewer/critic won't try to convince you with a forceful opinion but through comparison (i.e. instead of saying this game has 'this, this and this and this was good but this was bad', they will say 'this had the feel of this title from yesteryear with similar themes from such and such games, except, etc, etc'), which is something that is inherently unquantifiable. a good score says a game 'succeeded', but 'succeeded' at what? fallout 4 was largely successful but then FO4 delivered something that only appealed to me and many others on the most superficial level. so how could i have avoided wasting my time with fo4? maybe with a critique that illustrated the loot-driven ARPG the series had taken...?

 

[Eski Boi]

Uncharted 4 - Tesco £37 with a fiver off voucher

 

[Eski Boi]

Ratchet and Clank - £28 Tesco PS4