I also think how the game is developed into episodes instead of a full game. There is some uncertainty in game quality for episodic games. Players don't know how well developed the next episode will be.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't get that rant tbh, the price is still fair, you can skip what doesn't look good...
Comment has been collapsed.
This. Many AAA games have a bad review score because of reasons unrelated to the actual game quality. Price, DLC price, DRM, feature parity with console versions... These are relevant issues, of course, but they should be discussed separately.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's still being regularly updated to address such issues, and the devs do seem sincere in wanting to improve it more. So review scores can lag that.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes and no. They are fitting for that time, but on long term (if it will be improved) majority of those people won't give a toss to update the review so it may be misleading as well. (I wouldn't ignore current problems in favour of future promises either. Speaking of which I should take a look at one of my older reviews, if I remember well they patched some issues, time to check out :) )
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd justify that if it were an early access game. Releasing an unfinished/bad game deserves bad reviews.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not saying the initial review scores aren't justified though, just that it takes time for them to adjust higher once the devs properly patch & update the game to spec...which is very much occurring in this instance and which puts these devs heads & shoulders above so many other dead-beat ones on Steam who release crap and then bail.
http://steamcommunity.com/gid/103582791456938027/announcements/detail/666938475224247021
In general though, I do feel that too games are being released too darn early on Steam...when they are clearly not in a commercially polished state.
Comment has been collapsed.
It really seems that combining GTA V and GTA Online was an blunder. It delayed the launch, complicated the review scores, and resulted in all sorts of compromises to the otherwise-excellent GTA V single-player game. On its own, the single-player would easily get Overwhelmingly Positive - especially without anti-cheat and if Social Club were optional.
Comment has been collapsed.
Just cause 3. I think it's badly reviewed because it needs a fairly good rig to run properly, and people are trying to run it on low spec machines or something? It ran well for me and the graphics are beautiful and the open world is a lot of fun to explore. Even the DLC adds some pretty fun elements.
Batman Arkham knight and Assassin's creed unity. Both had terrible launch performance and were terribly optimised. Now that they've had a few patches they run pretty well and are both really good looking open world experiences.
Comment has been collapsed.
+1 So much this.
Although the performance issue is real. I gave it a poor review due to horrible optimization and false system requirements on AMD GPUs - the game itself is fine and runs okay once you get over 8GB of RAM.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah for real, it's the first game I've encountered where going from 8gigs of ram to 16 gigs actually made a noticeable difference. I suspect 16 will soon become mandatory for all 'big' games. It worked more or less before but would still crash out occasionally. After I upgraded to 16 it was so much more stable. It's a pity that so many of the reviews are negative for technical reasons, rather than the actual content of the game, which is one of the best physics / action sandboxes I've ever seen. The chain reactions you can create with explosions are insane.
Comment has been collapsed.
I really wish you could both review games for the content and the performance, or at least give a "neutral".
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah it would be so much more useful if there were categories for review ratings. Thumbs up and down is too simplistic. If they split it up by 3 or 4 categories you could judge at a snap if the game is badly rated for technical issues, or because it's not actually fun.
Comment has been collapsed.
or at least give a "neutral".
I'm so much in trouble when I love something that I know most of the people wouldn't lke. Or when it's awesome for a group of people but others wouldn't enjoy it at all. (Like FEAR has a pretty weak story, forgets to be a horror halfway through the game, is super repetitive enemy- and map-wise as well, but if you don't give a shit just want to shoot stuff it's top-notch in that aspect)
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah well I enjoyed it. I guess the problem is that the formula is well worn by now after 3 previous games, so anything they did was going to feel a bit tired in comparison to the excitement of playing city for the first time. I don't actually know what people wanted from it to be honest. Some people think it's too formulaic to the other games, others complain that they changed too much. There's this weird way that our scales get skewed by what came before. If Arkham knight was the first game in the series, people would have lost their minds over it. But because it's the fourth game and there are now expectations, it gets judged harshly for not meeting those expectations. It's an experience that still beats so many other games out there and yet it's ranked lower than many of them just because it wasn't what 'we' wanted it to be. Happens with all the other game series I guess.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think if it was the first, it would have been written off as GTA: Batman or Assassin's Creed: Gotham instead.
I know about the story as I watched the whole thing on Twitch, and it really shows that the writer of the previous games left; the writing is simply atrocious, an amateur attempt to copy-paste Under the Red Hood into Nolan's Dark Knight Rises. Scarecrow's endless monologues on how awesome he is and how much Batman failed were especially tiresome compared to the random barks written for Joker and the other criminals in Asylum and City.
But I hoped the gameplay will compensate, but it also feels lacking. The Batmobile shoehorned in everywhere (I travelled on foot to the Ace Chemicals first then the game told me that nope, you can only start the mission if you go inside a building in the car… and it continues to force in the car inside the building…) combat feels clunky and unfair (all common mooks now have an unblockable, uncounterable base attack, yay). I love the fear takedown system and some of the general city movement outside the car is awesome. I hope it gets better as I progress, I just don't remember if you need to 100% the city or only do the story side missions to unlock the final task. I hope it is not the latter, because the car challenges (including Riddler) are horrible. I thought I hated the AR missions in City, but at least there were only 3+1 of them, not thirty…
Comment has been collapsed.
You think it would be written off as a clone? I think it's different enough to those two. The free-flow combat was always the big innovation and i think there's been quite a few games that have copied that which wouldn't have come up with the concept on their own. (looking at you mad max and shadow of mordor). As for the writing, honestly I don't expect oscar material from my games... haha. I think even a 'good' game story such as The last of us or Life is strange, would be considered a pretty cliched movie, filled with so many lazy tropes.
The AR challenges are actually optional for the first time in the series if you're aiming for 100% game completion score. That's one change I think everyone liked. You don't even need to do all of them to get 100% of the achievements. Not to say they didn't include some really bastards in there, but that's par for the course in the arkham series I think. The game has 2 or 3 different cut scenes at the end, based on how many of the extra tasks you'd completed. Doing all of them gets you the 'best' ending, but in reality it's mostly the same with a few extra scenes. You need 7 out of 14 to activate the 'knightfall' protocol if I'm not mistaken. But yeah I can see how that could be annoying if you're not enjoying the game enough to spend extra time chasing down riddler trophies. If you've already beaten the other arkham games to 100% that's nothing new though.
Comment has been collapsed.
City was mildly annoying with the side stuff—I honestly think they went overboard with the Riddler trophies, the Arkham Asylum system and amount was just enough to be enjoyable but challenging, not to mention that it gave us backstories along the way, not just collectibles for collecting.
But City still mostly focused on the core story and the side missions were incredibly short to only spice things up a bit.
I think what I mean is that both Asylum and City felt focused, they wanted to tell a coherent, fluent story from start to finish, and game design was just trying to work alongside it. Here, I feel as if they just want to showcase level gimmicks and strung the different stages together with some excuses and tons of cut-scenes to hide the lack of a clear direction.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ahhh cool. Thanks for the explanation. All the other people saying they hate arkham knight don't really explain why apart from technical reasons. I do agree the first two games were better, I just don't think arkham knight is a bad game. I would love rocksteady to do a full DC universe game.
Comment has been collapsed.
As a player, I am still early in it to form a complete opinion, so I am mostly just listing my impressions so far. I hope it gets better to at least reach a decent mediocrity. We'll see. Maybe I finish it soon, maybe months later. (Kinda in a mood to finally start Shadow Tactics nowadays.)
Comment has been collapsed.
So im the only here that thought it was mediocre....
Comment has been collapsed.
Bad Rats has a lot of unfair bad reviews, its a great game.
Comment has been collapsed.
For Honor. Got lots of bad reviews due to connectivity issues at launch and the p2p system, also because they dare to have uplay on it (nevermind that if valve ever released l4d3 on uplay, it would require steam).
Gnomoria. because the dev said he planned some stuff but in the end decided he couldnt do it. People took as a broken "promise" when it wasnt such, and just destroyed it.
Skyward Collapse. I guess this is a matter of taste. Its a reasonable game. I think people got frustrated on the nature of it.
Viking: Battle for Asgard. Another reasonable game if you dont expect much.
Now I cant say this game is good since I havent played it, but the new Deus Ex got a lot of bad reviews because there was microtransactions on the game (even though they are completely unnecessary and it wasnt balanced to require buying them).
Some games got bad reviews due to having too many DLC, or a DRM they dont like (specially denuvo and uplay). So yeah, people just like to mass shit on stuff.
Comment has been collapsed.
For Honor has micro transactions and can be considered as P2W.
Comment has been collapsed.
Except the items you get are totally random and have malus as well, so if you want a item that gives +attack, you can pay and get one that is +revive speed -attack. Its very inefficient to spend money that way. And the items only works in 4x4 mode.
I wouldnt consider it that, but I can understand people would.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think that solution is better, although I rather it didnt had any item influence at all. Or that you couldnt purchase random items. But again, they always have a malus. Its not a direct improvement that you have over people without it, since you will have a penalty attached as well. More attack? Lower defence or exhaustion recovery.
And if you play 1x1 or 2x2 they have no effect.
Comment has been collapsed.
While like I said the ideal would be no purchases, between a purchase being guaranteed a item you want like normal p2w game and a purchase giving you a chance of getting a item you want, I will choose the last one.
Also that random item (its a crate with goods on it) you can also get without paying. By finding on the campaign or as a reward for participating in either "contests" (random events of a certain mode, say participating on dominion in a certain week) or the end of a season.
Comment has been collapsed.
FUEL is one of my favorite games. I still play it from time to time. I don't understand how you can't enjoy it. (GFWL was probably alot of it).
Comment has been collapsed.
Basically every Kalypso game that isn't Tropico, just for that reason.
Comment has been collapsed.
I used to say Remember Me, but it climbed quite a lot in user ratings over the years.
Now I only recall one hidden object game, Vault Cracker. Pretty good story and some interesting mechanics, but people complain about how it is locked to 1024×768.
Comment has been collapsed.
A situation where justice was definitely served. Remember me is actually a genuinely interesting game that didn't deserve the bad reviews it got at launch. 65 on metacritic? Bull!
Comment has been collapsed.
To their defence, the combat is way too Arkham-ish to overlook and the game was incredibly butchered down even compared to what they shown as a playable techdemo at some E3. The fact that the castrated end product is so good shows how much potential could be in that world if they somehow manage to build a new story in it. Or just plainly remake it. With a skip cutscene button. That has to be in it.
Comment has been collapsed.
True. The world and atmosphere was what I loved the most.
Comment has been collapsed.
Weird Worlds: Return to Infinite Space Is as great little roguelike/tactical battle sim. It got a great review from Kieron Gillen when it came out in 2005 but hasn't fared well with Steam's audience.
Comment has been collapsed.
Alum - Probably over 90% of the negative reviews are just because they didn't realize the game had a religious plot and they are upset because they feel like the game is trying to push religion on them. I am not religious and I didn't mind it at all. If you can get over the fact that it is a religious game and not let that bother you, I found it very enjoyable.
Comment has been collapsed.
I have a tough time with point and click adventures to start with, but I found Alum highly verbose... and I couldn't keep attention. There were places where I was just wishing they'd stop talking so I could interrupt.
Comment has been collapsed.
I actually got pulled into this story and didn't mind all the talking, but I know exactly what you are talking about, I have felt that way in a couple P&C games.
As much as I love Daedalic P&C games, The Night Of The Rabbit was one of the ones where I was getting bored of all the dialogue and some of the tasks. I really had high hopes for the game, but unfortunately it didn't live up to my expectations.
Comment has been collapsed.
I knew it has religious overtones and started it expecting like that. But I didn't expect that I'll feel smothered by that bullshit. It's overbearing at an incredible degree. And it's not about christian love, no. It's about fighing "the evil" because god said that. For goodness' sake, they destroyed buildings with explosives in the name of god. In the news they call that religious terrorism, and the game expects me to symphatize with them :\
Comment has been collapsed.
Probably most games that have some sort of 3rd party DRM where people tend to rate the annoyance of the DRM rather than the game itself. And while there are some DRM's that indeed are terrible i always get a chuckle out of people buying a Ubisoft game only to whine about UPlay.
A game that did fit the description pretty well but has climbed a lot in rating since release is State of Decay: YOSE http://store.steampowered.com/app/329430/. Game was rated as mixed when they released the YOSE version because the developer thought it was smart to abandon support for the original version of the game and hide small improvement and bug fixes behind a full game price. The game itself deserves a very good rating, the developers behavior deserves a giant middlefinger but since you cannot rate devs on steam, people used the game rating to vent their frustration.
Comment has been collapsed.
Reviews assessing game stability are always valuable, and uplay DRM all too often makes it so that only a portion of players can actually play the game at all. Troll reviews exist regardless of the topic, but outside of those, complaints about uplay aren't there to whine about it, but to note that "yes, this is as broken as is expected from a uplay-DRM-integrated game".
Your point fits the theme of the thread- they may be good games, if you can get past their flaws- but the review percentage they've earned is usually well justified.
you cannot rate devs on steam
If only.
Then again, it still probably wouldn't affect my negative reviews for most "good-with-developer-issues" games, as those issues tend to relate to elements that make the game less playable (such as the devs not caring about server stability, bugs, hackers, or severe trolling).
Still, maybe the devs would take criticisms under better consideration if they were directed directly at them- and if not, well, at least we'd have the benefit of more easily being able to warn people about groups like DigiHom.
Comment has been collapsed.
I would say Sword Coast Legends.
It's a good game with a good story and some small issues. So if you start it with that in mind you'll enjoy it for sure. Most of the bad reviews come from the fact that the developers over-promised some tools which they weren't able to deliver because they went out of business :( and from the fact that P&P D&D players expected some mechanics to be closer to the actual P&P game.
Comment has been collapsed.
A game that has a mixed rating and that i actually enjoyed is The Bureau: XCOM Declassified http://store.steampowered.com/app/65930/. I actually liked the setting of the game and didn't mind the combat that so many people seem to hate. Also had none of the fps problems some people seem to have. The game would probably be rated higher if it didn't have XCOM in name and would therefore be compared to the other XCOM games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Company of heroes 2, maybe because of the paid commanders even though they are not overpowered commanders actually they only give you a new strategy
Comment has been collapsed.
+1 I've just tried a bit the game, I though they just replaced some textures with some random orcs, but they actually did a nice job, total war is an old "formula" and they managed to relaunch it in a nice way
Comment has been collapsed.
43 Comments - Last post 19 minutes ago by Myklex
1 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by lostsoul67
71 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by lostsoul67
76 Comments - Last post 5 hours ago by Reidor
765 Comments - Last post 6 hours ago by grimfandango8888
43 Comments - Last post 7 hours ago by Qnemes
12 Comments - Last post 8 hours ago by orono
70 Comments - Last post 3 minutes ago by Vampus
419 Comments - Last post 20 minutes ago by Myklex
4 Comments - Last post 23 minutes ago by ngoclong19
537 Comments - Last post 25 minutes ago by Serebix
498 Comments - Last post 27 minutes ago by Cleverman
1,252 Comments - Last post 52 minutes ago by ProphetFinagle
6,335 Comments - Last post 58 minutes ago by lext
Are really there many good Steam games with bad reviews?
Please, recommend Steam games that actually have bad reviews (from mixed to even lower). Say why, if you want
Comment has been collapsed.