You’re probably on point with the branding (and that’s probably why Nintendo reportedly delayed their official announcement when Sony announced the PS5 Pro).
It’s a double-edged sword. But f2p has become so dominant that certain types of games almost NEED to be f2p to be relevant. See Concord for a recent example.
Well if I only have time to play a game a month, I’m not gonna play a 6/10 game. I’m not saying to blindly trust metacritic but when you seldom play games you need to filter them aggressively somehow.
Gotta be careful with that even, people go out of their way to artificially inflate their play time and use third party programs to unlock achievements.
I can’t remember ever having used meta critic to guide a purchase. There is so much content both from forums and YouTube/Twitch that gives you much more accurate impressions of games. Meta critic seems rather pointless nowadays.
It’s kind of wild that I’ve seen trailers and posts for Lollipop Chainsaw’s remaster, but the first time I hear about a Shadows of the Damned remaster is buried in the last paragraph of a dev interview.
It’s a useful place to find out if something totally sucks though. That’s how I use it. 60+? Probably good, at least for some audiences. Less than that? Only if you’re already hyped or a fan of whatever thing it’s related to.
Yeah I mean ratings are giving you an idea of whether there’s a chance you like that game. The higher the rating, the higher the chance. But there’s always a bit of chance involved.
I tend to buy highly rated games much more often, but if I really am hyped for a game with an OK rating, I still might give it a go. You never know if it will hit your specific niche.
videogameschronicle.com
Gorące