RPG General discussion thread

[Colif]

 

[isleepinabed]

"That's what she said."

 

[ZedClampet]

The user reviews for Avowed on Steam sit at 81 percent positive. Since there aren't technical problems, that kind of means the game is pretty mediocre. Reading through the reviews verifies that. Even the positive reviews tend to be less than enthused about the game. I'll give it a try tomorrow when it releases on Xbox so long as the download doesn't screw up. It took me 3 days to download the last game I wanted.

 

[SHR-51]

The user reviews for Avowed on Steam sit at 81 percent positive. Since there aren't technical problems, that kind of means the game is pretty mediocre. Reading through the reviews verifies that. Even the positive reviews tend to be less than enthused about the game. I'll give it a try tomorrow when it releases on Xbox so long as the download doesn't screw up. It took me 3 days to download the last game I wanted.

This is unrelated to Avowed specifically, but your post got me thinking about it again, and I want to get it off my chest.

I am continuously mildly annoyed by how the scores work in the current industry. We supposedly have a 0-100 scoring system, which would allow for a great range of opinion expression, but in reality, we have a 70-90 scoring system, where anything below 70 is literal garbage, 81 is mediocre, and anything above 90 is a masterpiece. It makes so little sense. Why is it like this?

 

[Pifanjr]

This is unrelated to Avowed specifically, but your post got me thinking about it again, and I want to get it off my chest.

I am continuously mildly annoyed by how the scores work in the current industry. We supposedly have a 0-100 scoring system, which would allow for a great range of opinion expression, but in reality, we have a 70-90 scoring system, where anything below 70 is literal garbage, 81 is mediocre, and anything above 90 is a masterpiece. It makes so little sense. Why is it like this?

Because there's so much choice. If there are dozens of 90+ games, why settle for something worse? Especially if the sub 90 games aren't cheaper.

 

[ZedClampet]

This is unrelated to Avowed specifically, but your post got me thinking about it again, and I want to get it off my chest.

I am continuously mildly annoyed by how the scores work in the current industry. We supposedly have a 0-100 scoring system, which would allow for a great range of opinion expression, but in reality, we have a 70-90 scoring system, where anything below 70 is literal garbage, 81 is mediocre, and anything above 90 is a masterpiece. It makes so little sense. Why is it like this?

I think it's because of school grades in the US. When I was in school, below 70 was an "F", 81 was a "C" and above 90 was a "B" or "A" (above 94). This is the standard grading scale in the US. Or at least it was until recently. They may have changed it a few years ago.

But, overall, I think Obsidian has become a mediocre developer. The days of New Vegas seem far behind them. I still get excited when they are about to release a game, though.

 

[Zloth]

Huh? 70 was a C for me, assuming the teacher wasn't grading on a curve.

90+: Great game. Think about playing it even if you don't normally play the genre.
80-89: Good stuff. It's what I expect for established developers.
70-79: OK. Fans of its genre will still be satisfied. Still worth it if cheap.
60-68: Errrr.... fans of the genre that really like the subject matter can play through it. Maybe.
Below that is the 'do not buy until fixed' scores.

Steam scores are different. They can get pumped up or slammed for weird reasons, like people buying the game thinking it will be different than what it is and people trying to justify buying the game in the first place. Theoretically, you've got a 50/50 chance of liking a game that gets a 50% positive rating, but I doubt it works out like that.

 

[SHR-51]

Huh? 70 was a C for me, assuming the teacher wasn't grading on a curve.

90+: Great game. Think about playing it even if you don't normally play the genre.
80-89: Good stuff. It's what I expect for established developers.
70-79: OK. Fans of its genre will still be satisfied. Still worth it if cheap.
60-68: Errrr.... fans of the genre that really like the subject matter can play through it. Maybe.
Below that is the 'do not buy until fixed' scores.

Steam scores are different. They can get pumped up or slammed for weird reasons, like people buying the game thinking it will be different than what it is and people trying to justify buying the game in the first place. Theoretically, you've got a 50/50 chance of liking a game that gets a 50% positive rating, but I doubt it works out like that.

A 1-5 scoring system would work perfectly in your example, yet we use 1-100.

I think it's because of school grades in the US. When I was in school, below 70 was an "F", 81 was a "C" and above 90 was a "B" or "A" (above 94). This is the standard grading scale in the US. Or at least it was until recently. They may have changed it a few years ago.

That's an interesting point. You might be onto something.

 

[JCgames]

Because there's so much choice. If there are dozens of 90+ games, why settle for something worse? Especially if the sub 90 games aren't cheaper.

The problem is people have different tastes, and what some else thinks means almost nothing

I still make reviews on steam for the one simple fact that if someone likes something I do, clicks on my reviews and sees 30 games they also like, then maybe something I like might be useful. Outside of that ratings are basically pointless.

But when I see a review and a person likes the game but they don't have a single other game I like or enjoy, there review means almost nothing and that's fine.

I think a 70 I'd base line worth playing to me, but only if it's my 70. I could list a ton of games you could not pay me to play that are 80+ .

Basically the older I get, the less I care what others say and I just pick up stuff cheap so I can make up my own mind.

Does any of this make sense?

 

[Pifanjr]

The problem is people have different tastes, and what some else thinks means almost nothing

I still make reviews on steam for the one simple fact that if someone likes something I do, clicks on my reviews and sees 30 games they also like, then maybe something I like might be useful. Outside of that ratings are basically pointless.

But when I see a review and a person likes the game but they don't have a single other game I like or enjoy, there review means almost nothing and that's fine.

I think a 70 I'd base line worth playing to me, but only if it's my 70. I could list a ton of games you could not pay me to play that are 80+ .

Basically the older I get, the less I care what others say and I just pick up stuff cheap so I can make up my own mind.

Does any of this make sense?

Of course it also matters that you actually like the genre of the game. And for fans of niche genres a 70 might still be a must-play, just because there's so little choice.

 

[JCgames]

Of course it also matters that you actually like the genre of the game. And for fans of niche genres a 70 might still be a must-play, just because there's so little choice.

That's not what I mean, I like rpgs, did not like fallout 3 or Oblivion, or world of warcraft. I like tactical games, hate xcom, but loved wasteland and omerta.
Love baldures gate and icewind as a second tier for lack of story but, hate planscape both infinity engine games and ps us all about story.

Basically what masses say is good often has zero corelation if I'm going to like it. Honestly I find I'm more likely to Like something of it's got a 71 that an 85.

Maybe I'll post a list of my top 40 games one day and you will understand

 

[Zloth]

A 1-5 scoring system would work perfectly in your example, yet we use 1-100.

If your only interest is in the "buy or not" aspect, yeah, but there are other things to consider! 50 may not be something you would want to buy, but a game in the 20's makes you dubious of the developer and publisher's future games.

Basically what masses say is good often has zero corelation if I'm going to like it. Honestly I find I'm more likely to Like something of it's got a 71 that an 85.

Yeah, the futility of the review score. 80 means the game is pretty good in the reviewer's opinion. If you want to find out if YOU will like it, you've really got to read the review. A good review will say what they liked and didn't like. Then you've got to alter the score according to how different your viewpoint is from the reviewer's. If they write a whole paragraph about how sick they are of your player being "the chosen one" in RPGs when it doesn't bother you at all, you've gotta add some points back! The real trick (IMHO) of reviewing is anticipating the factors people want to know and addressing them in the article.

 

[Pifanjr]

That's not what I mean, I like rpgs, did not like fallout 3 or Oblivion, or world of warcraft. I like tactical games, hate xcom, but loved wasteland and omerta.
Love baldures gate and icewind as a second tier for lack of story but, hate planscape both infinity engine games and ps us all about story.

Basically what masses say is good often has zero corelation if I'm going to like it. Honestly I find I'm more likely to Like something of it's got a 71 that an 85.

Maybe I'll post a list of my top 40 games one day and you will understand

Review scores are of course largely subjective too, so if you prefer a certain style or mechanic that other players/reviewers would subtract points for you can't rely as much on review scores.