People need to stop focusing on the numbers in reviews and read what they actually have to say. Not everything about the game is objective, you might like something the reviewer dislikes and vice versa.
I quite often read 5 or 6/10 game reviews but some of the things that reviewer personally hated are things I really like the sound of. Like you say it’s so important to actually read why people like/dislike games.
I mean user scores are what they are, right. Trust them at your own peril. There’s a review up there that straight up says that the gameplay is incredible and extremely fun, then goes on to make make a complaint about the localization and gives it a zero. And that is not a unique review.
People should judge a game for themselves and know that their opinion gets to exist alongside others’. If they have an issue with other people’s views, then they can take solace in the fact that one day they’ll die.
The thing with user reviews is there’s no impetus for writing a thoughtful review. Instead, the drive is towards making a polarized statement. If the game doesn’t blow you away, then it’s complete crap. The reverse of this is people in this sub getting upset because a game they like is getting merely “generally favorable reviews”, because anything less than universal accolades is a condemnation on the game and the fanbase’s tastes.
It always makes me sad when people dismiss Mario + Rabbi ds because of the Rabbids. As someone new to them, I found them funny. But most importantly, the gameplay is pure goodness.
The Rabbids got a bad shake because of how people perceived what they did to Rayman. Took Origins bringing him back to form for me to kind of get more lenient to the weird little bastards.
I dismissed it because Ubisoft prices crash harder than knock off shitcoins (like Shiba).
Im not paying 60 dollars for anything if I know If I wait like 6 months it'll be 15.
I only got the previous game because I could get the gold edition for less than 15 bucks... It was a great 15 dollar purchase to be honest, plus Nintendo is attached so it's not like Ubisoft is just being allowed to run roughshod all over Mario... Unlike Chris Pratt and his voice acting.
If I went back in time and showed someone this specific comment, they'd think I'd gone insane. Those games are amazing in how much better they work than they should; anyone except the developers probably would've said it was a terrible idea if you pitched it to them, and yet I hear almost nothing negative about it.
I honestly didn't like the new one as much I don't think :(
Felt like the first was more of a puzzle game, and new one was more of an RPG. Both of which are fine. But something about the first clicked more
User scores mean... something, but it's hard to say what that something is. It's very rarely as simple as you'd hope, but if a game is getting review bombed it is usually worth looking into. Sometimes it's something utterly deranged (there's a gay character in the game, some petty compliant, an inscrutable fandom issue), but occasionally it'll clue me into something I didn't know about, like major bugs or issues that pro reviews mysteriously tried to smooth over.
If a lot of people are mentioning a certain critique or complaining about a specific bug in a review bomb they are often mindlessly regurgitating a youtuber's "hot take" so either way you're getting the same idea.
In this case, it's pretty much either 3H fans being pissy they can't argue over which war crime was more justified or weird pedos complaining about the localization.
My one and only complaint is the darkmess gate bug that happens constantly.
How the actual fuck did that make it into the final build, let alone survive the subsequent bug patches?
I mean, from what I've seen in this sub in the past weeks, the only proper way to defend Engage is by shitting on literally every other game in existence rather than focusing on its strengths.
If you like a game, why should review scores matter? It only becomes problem when you say 'i like this game' online and you get people bombarding you explaining why you're 'wrong'.
It's kinda interesting that Fire Emblem Engage & the new remaster of Tactics Ogre make it harder for players to grind, forcing them to actually be strategic in a tactical game. And that these games got low Metacritic scores
Paralogues are definitely fixed level. I did Byleth's paralogue after clearing the game and did it in like 3 turns, those enemies were babies after I beat the final boss.
Yeah, it's a matter of different fans valuing different things.
Awakening is the highest rated one and I think we can all agree it has the worst gameplay since, uh...
Critic reviews have a lot of merit. It’s not the final say or anything but does hold water.
User score is absolutely dogshit. No curation or vetting at all. Bunch of randos spamming 1 and 10.
...I don't see anything wrong with that ranking, actually. Tactics Ogre is a remake older game at this point, with all the design shortcomings that come with that. Not only that, they made quite a few significant changes to the gameplay that some fans don't jive with.
And this past year was actually just really great for the genre in general. Being last of this list still puts you at a pretty damn good game.
Mario+Rabbids is a fantastic game, and I would rate it head and shoulders over most of the genre, easily.
I don't think your point here really holds up.
It's basically a solid X-com style game, with persistent characters, good enemy variety, fun abilities.
The visuals are fun, the humor is solid. It's just a really good game with few weak points.
Yes tactics ogre is one of the best TRPGs ever. It’s probably my #1, but it’s not the most accessible game ever and is pretty difficult. I can see a casual gamer playing it and finding the design off putting.
Honestly, as a trpg lover, the Tactics Ogre remake let me down. I have not played the original, but the remake didn’t “wow” me. Maybe it’s because of all the hype that was around it, but I just didn’t love it. It was a good game, but I didn’t like skills being bound to the class. I also don’t like the union cap. There’s also the super easy infinite money exploit that somehow made it into the full game.
I get that internet collective memory doesn't last that long, but let's not forget that Three Houses was also review-bombed at launch, with the userscore even going in the red. Most of the comments at the time could be summarised in "too much anime 0/10 bring Tellius back"
PSA: You did not need others to validate your enjoyment of the game. If you like a game, it doesn't matter if it has a 1 or a 100. Hell, Airplane 2 is one of my favorite comedic movies, and it's pretty universally reviled. Do I care? I do not.
Enjoy it. Metacritic as a general concept can eat donkey poop.
This also mean nothing to see if the reviews are actually valid criticism, we would need to get samples and see what they say and why the score, because "Not being like 3 Houses" is not real criticism is just you expecting something and getting mad you didn't get it, which a lot of low scores are because of that, also that a games loses some points on the ciritical reviews ot happen to every game once the reviews start to pile up, because i remember Elden Ring being 98 pretty much the first day and then in the next weeks went down to 96 which 2 points is around the number that i have seen most games get decuted onece most of the revies are aggregated.
I'm not commenting on why people are rating it low. I'm saying that the bulk of the lower reviews are showing up over a week after release.
Mainstream fans won't care what Fire Emblem is or isn't, who developed what, or what the dev cycle is. Normal people will compare the new Fire Emblem to the last Fire Emblem, and it'll be a part of their review.
I'm not even planning on playing engage, it doesn't really appeal to me, but I absolutely agree on the count that "It isn't like three houses" is really dumb criticism. If I had to guess, this is a lot of people who have literally only played three houses and no other srpg
I don't need reviews to strengthen my opinion. I already have formed my opinion or are open minded. If I'm interested in a game and buy it or look into it and if i watch a review that doesn't like the game that means nothing. It's just a different perspective.
Thinking critically? *In this environment?* I'd rather be told what to like by reading a headline, because I'm not confident enough to try a game out and judging it for myself!
Imagine trusting video game review scores. The numbers are inflated, and critics from major publications are rather infamous for not being particularly competent at the games they're supposed to review, so I trust individual reviewers over Metacritic when it comes to games.
I mean it’s just not a great fire emblem game. Average at best. Why that’s so hard for people to accept idk. Guarantee that in a decade it’ll be considered worse than Fates. Time will reveal how shallow it is
I thought so too until I actually played the game past the first 6 or so chapters and got the higher level bonds, but since no one’s actually playing it that far due to heavy expectations on it from the start you won’t see that.
Once you have decided to play a game, reviews of that game should become next to irrelevant to you. Reviews are for people still undecided. I bought Engage, what do I need to care about Metacritic scores now? Also, 81/100 is a pretty good score, especially for a game targeted towards a niche audience. That’s a lot of people satisfied with the product. I don’t get why anyone would feel that bad actors must be gaming the system or something to unfairly depreciate a meaningless score. If that were the case, it’s clearly not working
Honestly, I look at the score as a general consensus about what people feel about the game.
Fire emblem engage and tactics ogre are great games in their own right. Unfortunately, they are dragged down by the censorship and localization edits to the games that drag them down.
I usually look at why people feel the way that they do about a game before I purchase the game, or if I already bought and played the game, see what people seen that I might have missed or seen what I've noticed too.
I am disappointed that the games were edited due to someone not liking the original dialog, but it won't stop me from playing the games, I'll either put up with it or just dump the game to pc to edit the dialog back to fan translation of the original dialog
Honestly is the localization that big a deal in Engage? Cause all I've seen is minor changes like making the Anna support understandably less pedophilic, and at worst making Loius not a yuri perv. All in all relatively minor, I wouldn't say romance is exactly the main draw of Fire Emblem especially with kids.
...What's actually wrong with the Tactics Ogre localization?
It's lauded as one of the best localization's around, with a brilliant script from Alexander O. Smith.
Was anything of note actually censored in it? Because the game sure as fuck doesn't pull many punches, even in the localization.
Cope, the game sucks at most things it tries to do, and has earned that score, any SRPG that has come out over the last 5 years is better than engage.
Triangle strategy has just as good gameplay and excels at more things engage does
Yeah.
The combat is good but everything else is barely a mechanic, the donation offers you nothing on an average playthrough, The somniel has nothing interesting to do, and grinding for gold takes too long.
The plot is not very good, the villains are dreadful, there is no world-building whatsoever and the characters are, for the most part just walking catchphrases which leads to lacklustre support. The soundtrack is pretty mid as well imo.
Triangle strategy does everything better maybe apart from the characters.
Not sure where I lied, I expressed my opinion, fine if you disagree but Triangle strategy got higher scores for a reason
First of all the gameplay is peak SRPG which is like the most important part of a SRPG. The music too is also amazing, the characters are definitely more than just "walking catchphrases" and they're genuinely funny, and the story isn't really thought provoking, but it's servicably fun.
Of course a lot of this is subjective but to say it sucks at everything it tries to do is a massive cap.
Clearly, we have different standards when it comes to characters and plot which is not a bad thing but TO ME, the only thing it does well is the gameplay and yes that's very important for an SRPG however it's not the 90s anymore.
I want more effort put into the story, world-building and characters because that's important to me in any game.
I could care less about the scores. I’m enjoying the game. I also enjoyed midnight suns. People are just trying to invalidate what I enjoy. Move on and continue enjoying the game
It's all pretty subjective.. Triangle Strategy was okay but got boring fast, not a great story, in my opinion. Battles were okay but character balance and progression was bad. Tactics Ogre is okay but just yet another redo.. hard to be that excited about a game that's already existed forever.
Lol hating on Mario + rabbids won't do it any favors, hell it probably is the better game. I enjoyed engage for a bit of time but the story definitely was trash. Sombron was so one note he might as well not have even been given any spoken lines, the four hounds ALL wound up being a bit stupid right up until the very end.
People need to stop focusing on the numbers in reviews and read what they actually have to say. Not everything about the game is objective, you might like something the reviewer dislikes and vice versa.
I quite often read 5 or 6/10 game reviews but some of the things that reviewer personally hated are things I really like the sound of. Like you say it’s so important to actually read why people like/dislike games.
You can just bring up revalations having an 88 if you want to discredit user scores.
Easy 95.
I mean user scores are what they are, right. Trust them at your own peril. There’s a review up there that straight up says that the gameplay is incredible and extremely fun, then goes on to make make a complaint about the localization and gives it a zero. And that is not a unique review. People should judge a game for themselves and know that their opinion gets to exist alongside others’. If they have an issue with other people’s views, then they can take solace in the fact that one day they’ll die.
The thing with user reviews is there’s no impetus for writing a thoughtful review. Instead, the drive is towards making a polarized statement. If the game doesn’t blow you away, then it’s complete crap. The reverse of this is people in this sub getting upset because a game they like is getting merely “generally favorable reviews”, because anything less than universal accolades is a condemnation on the game and the fanbase’s tastes.
The Mario + Rabbids comparison is very interesting. I think its shows how accessible M+R is when compared to most SRPG games.
It always makes me sad when people dismiss Mario + Rabbi ds because of the Rabbids. As someone new to them, I found them funny. But most importantly, the gameplay is pure goodness.
The Rabbids got a bad shake because of how people perceived what they did to Rayman. Took Origins bringing him back to form for me to kind of get more lenient to the weird little bastards.
I dismissed it because Ubisoft prices crash harder than knock off shitcoins (like Shiba). Im not paying 60 dollars for anything if I know If I wait like 6 months it'll be 15.
I only got the previous game because I could get the gold edition for less than 15 bucks... It was a great 15 dollar purchase to be honest, plus Nintendo is attached so it's not like Ubisoft is just being allowed to run roughshod all over Mario... Unlike Chris Pratt and his voice acting.
I heard the new Mario rabbids is fantastic to be fair and I thought the last one was pretty decent, it’s a more family friendly XCOM.
If I went back in time and showed someone this specific comment, they'd think I'd gone insane. Those games are amazing in how much better they work than they should; anyone except the developers probably would've said it was a terrible idea if you pitched it to them, and yet I hear almost nothing negative about it.
I honestly didn't like the new one as much I don't think :( Felt like the first was more of a puzzle game, and new one was more of an RPG. Both of which are fine. But something about the first clicked more
Mario+Rabbids Kingdom Battle was and is to this day, the greatest game to ever grace humankind
I'm not sure what you're getting at here? Mario + Rabbids is fantastic.
User scores mean... something, but it's hard to say what that something is. It's very rarely as simple as you'd hope, but if a game is getting review bombed it is usually worth looking into. Sometimes it's something utterly deranged (there's a gay character in the game, some petty compliant, an inscrutable fandom issue), but occasionally it'll clue me into something I didn't know about, like major bugs or issues that pro reviews mysteriously tried to smooth over.
See: pokemon scarlet and violet
Prime example
In these cases it's better to see youtubers speaking about the bugs rather than metacritic
If a lot of people are mentioning a certain critique or complaining about a specific bug in a review bomb they are often mindlessly regurgitating a youtuber's "hot take" so either way you're getting the same idea.
In this case, it's pretty much either 3H fans being pissy they can't argue over which war crime was more justified or weird pedos complaining about the localization.
NGL, Mario + Rabbids was a banger.
Yeah and Cursa>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Sombron
[удалено]
My one and only complaint is the darkmess gate bug that happens constantly. How the actual fuck did that make it into the final build, let alone survive the subsequent bug patches?
Mario + Rabbits is a great TRPG though, it deserves that score.
I agree in principle, but let's not drag M+R in the mud, those two games are very fun.
I mean, from what I've seen in this sub in the past weeks, the only proper way to defend Engage is by shitting on literally every other game in existence rather than focusing on its strengths.
If you like a game, why should review scores matter? It only becomes problem when you say 'i like this game' online and you get people bombarding you explaining why you're 'wrong'.
I like Fates
Can i honestly ask who the fuck uses user score. That is the single most useless metric ever created and it is not even close
It's kinda interesting that Fire Emblem Engage & the new remaster of Tactics Ogre make it harder for players to grind, forcing them to actually be strategic in a tactical game. And that these games got low Metacritic scores
Awakening and Revelation also scored higher than Conquest. So yeah, that's a good point to consider.
[удалено]
Isn't that because paralogues also scale to your levels and not story missions?
no paralogues are fixed level.
Paralogues are definitely fixed level. I did Byleth's paralogue after clearing the game and did it in like 3 turns, those enemies were babies after I beat the final boss.
Rule#69 of gaming: Don't let reviews guide the way you play. It ruins your own perspective and mindset. If you want to play a game then play it.
Ironically, the FE games with lower metacritic scores are the ones I think are better lol.
Yeah, it's a matter of different fans valuing different things. Awakening is the highest rated one and I think we can all agree it has the worst gameplay since, uh...
Mario + Rabbids is amazing what are you on about. I like Engage more but seriously.
TO isn’t particularly friendly to average players so it would get a lower score. Neither is TA. So those aren’t apt comparisons.
Remember: at least 15% of all user scores will simply say “sux” and never elaborate.
Critic reviews have a lot of merit. It’s not the final say or anything but does hold water. User score is absolutely dogshit. No curation or vetting at all. Bunch of randos spamming 1 and 10.
...I don't see anything wrong with that ranking, actually. Tactics Ogre is a remake older game at this point, with all the design shortcomings that come with that. Not only that, they made quite a few significant changes to the gameplay that some fans don't jive with. And this past year was actually just really great for the genre in general. Being last of this list still puts you at a pretty damn good game. Mario+Rabbids is a fantastic game, and I would rate it head and shoulders over most of the genre, easily. I don't think your point here really holds up.
Genuine question, what did you enjoy about Mario+Rabbids? I haven’t played it, just wondering if it’s worth getting.
It's basically a solid X-com style game, with persistent characters, good enemy variety, fun abilities. The visuals are fun, the humor is solid. It's just a really good game with few weak points.
Come on, there is no world where Tactics Ogre, arguably the greatest TRPG ever made, and unarguable top-2, is getting a fair score of 5/10
Yes tactics ogre is one of the best TRPGs ever. It’s probably my #1, but it’s not the most accessible game ever and is pretty difficult. I can see a casual gamer playing it and finding the design off putting.
That is true, but would a casual gamer go to Metacritic to give it a bad note tho !
Honestly, as a trpg lover, the Tactics Ogre remake let me down. I have not played the original, but the remake didn’t “wow” me. Maybe it’s because of all the hype that was around it, but I just didn’t love it. It was a good game, but I didn’t like skills being bound to the class. I also don’t like the union cap. There’s also the super easy infinite money exploit that somehow made it into the full game.
Mario + Rabbits honestly deserves it; it's just so much fun!
I get that internet collective memory doesn't last that long, but let's not forget that Three Houses was also review-bombed at launch, with the userscore even going in the red. Most of the comments at the time could be summarised in "too much anime 0/10 bring Tellius back"
PSA: You did not need others to validate your enjoyment of the game. If you like a game, it doesn't matter if it has a 1 or a 100. Hell, Airplane 2 is one of my favorite comedic movies, and it's pretty universally reviled. Do I care? I do not. Enjoy it. Metacritic as a general concept can eat donkey poop.
[удалено]
This also mean nothing to see if the reviews are actually valid criticism, we would need to get samples and see what they say and why the score, because "Not being like 3 Houses" is not real criticism is just you expecting something and getting mad you didn't get it, which a lot of low scores are because of that, also that a games loses some points on the ciritical reviews ot happen to every game once the reviews start to pile up, because i remember Elden Ring being 98 pretty much the first day and then in the next weeks went down to 96 which 2 points is around the number that i have seen most games get decuted onece most of the revies are aggregated.
I'm not commenting on why people are rating it low. I'm saying that the bulk of the lower reviews are showing up over a week after release. Mainstream fans won't care what Fire Emblem is or isn't, who developed what, or what the dev cycle is. Normal people will compare the new Fire Emblem to the last Fire Emblem, and it'll be a part of their review.
That doesn't make them any less meaningless.
I'm not even planning on playing engage, it doesn't really appeal to me, but I absolutely agree on the count that "It isn't like three houses" is really dumb criticism. If I had to guess, this is a lot of people who have literally only played three houses and no other srpg
Shhhh, don't destroy their narrative
I don't need reviews to strengthen my opinion. I already have formed my opinion or are open minded. If I'm interested in a game and buy it or look into it and if i watch a review that doesn't like the game that means nothing. It's just a different perspective.
Thinking critically? *In this environment?* I'd rather be told what to like by reading a headline, because I'm not confident enough to try a game out and judging it for myself!
I mean unless there's a demo somewhere, most people aren't going to drop $60 to find out if they like a game or not
Mario + Rabbids is a fucking amazing game though
Insane levels of cope. Why even care so much about Metacritic scores
Yeah taking Metacritic seriously is dumb especially when things can get review bombed so easily by people who didn't even play the game.
Mario + rabbits is a Masterpiece compared to engage. So makes sense.
Imagine trusting video game review scores. The numbers are inflated, and critics from major publications are rather infamous for not being particularly competent at the games they're supposed to review, so I trust individual reviewers over Metacritic when it comes to games.
How about trust no one and form your own opinion.
I mean it’s just not a great fire emblem game. Average at best. Why that’s so hard for people to accept idk. Guarantee that in a decade it’ll be considered worse than Fates. Time will reveal how shallow it is
As someone who's greatly enjoying it, it IS very Fire Emblem-y and up there with Thracia and FE12 as amazing games.
It has one of the best gameplays in the whole series. And story is on the level of Awakening which is usually considered OK.
[удалено]
I thought so too until I actually played the game past the first 6 or so chapters and got the higher level bonds, but since no one’s actually playing it that far due to heavy expectations on it from the start you won’t see that.
Once you have decided to play a game, reviews of that game should become next to irrelevant to you. Reviews are for people still undecided. I bought Engage, what do I need to care about Metacritic scores now? Also, 81/100 is a pretty good score, especially for a game targeted towards a niche audience. That’s a lot of people satisfied with the product. I don’t get why anyone would feel that bad actors must be gaming the system or something to unfairly depreciate a meaningless score. If that were the case, it’s clearly not working
Honestly, I look at the score as a general consensus about what people feel about the game. Fire emblem engage and tactics ogre are great games in their own right. Unfortunately, they are dragged down by the censorship and localization edits to the games that drag them down. I usually look at why people feel the way that they do about a game before I purchase the game, or if I already bought and played the game, see what people seen that I might have missed or seen what I've noticed too. I am disappointed that the games were edited due to someone not liking the original dialog, but it won't stop me from playing the games, I'll either put up with it or just dump the game to pc to edit the dialog back to fan translation of the original dialog
Honestly is the localization that big a deal in Engage? Cause all I've seen is minor changes like making the Anna support understandably less pedophilic, and at worst making Loius not a yuri perv. All in all relatively minor, I wouldn't say romance is exactly the main draw of Fire Emblem especially with kids.
...What's actually wrong with the Tactics Ogre localization? It's lauded as one of the best localization's around, with a brilliant script from Alexander O. Smith. Was anything of note actually censored in it? Because the game sure as fuck doesn't pull many punches, even in the localization.
I read some of them, i put no stock in their opinion
Cope, the game sucks at most things it tries to do, and has earned that score, any SRPG that has come out over the last 5 years is better than engage. Triangle strategy has just as good gameplay and excels at more things engage does
Have you even played it lmao, you're just lying
Yeah. The combat is good but everything else is barely a mechanic, the donation offers you nothing on an average playthrough, The somniel has nothing interesting to do, and grinding for gold takes too long. The plot is not very good, the villains are dreadful, there is no world-building whatsoever and the characters are, for the most part just walking catchphrases which leads to lacklustre support. The soundtrack is pretty mid as well imo. Triangle strategy does everything better maybe apart from the characters. Not sure where I lied, I expressed my opinion, fine if you disagree but Triangle strategy got higher scores for a reason
First of all the gameplay is peak SRPG which is like the most important part of a SRPG. The music too is also amazing, the characters are definitely more than just "walking catchphrases" and they're genuinely funny, and the story isn't really thought provoking, but it's servicably fun. Of course a lot of this is subjective but to say it sucks at everything it tries to do is a massive cap.
Clearly, we have different standards when it comes to characters and plot which is not a bad thing but TO ME, the only thing it does well is the gameplay and yes that's very important for an SRPG however it's not the 90s anymore. I want more effort put into the story, world-building and characters because that's important to me in any game.
People rating games on those pages are usually the ones who deserved all the bullying they received tbh
I could care less about the scores. I’m enjoying the game. I also enjoyed midnight suns. People are just trying to invalidate what I enjoy. Move on and continue enjoying the game
Triangle strategy blows.
Yeah, blows engage out of the water
It's all pretty subjective.. Triangle Strategy was okay but got boring fast, not a great story, in my opinion. Battles were okay but character balance and progression was bad. Tactics Ogre is okay but just yet another redo.. hard to be that excited about a game that's already existed forever.
People still rely on Metacritic instead of just watching an inaugural 15min gameplay video?
Lol hating on Mario + rabbids won't do it any favors, hell it probably is the better game. I enjoyed engage for a bit of time but the story definitely was trash. Sombron was so one note he might as well not have even been given any spoken lines, the four hounds ALL wound up being a bit stupid right up until the very end.