🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 10 Nov 2015 20:27:59 +0300, "Andrew Rybenkov"
<aryb...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Awesome score!

Honestly, that would seem an appropriate score: it's a
middle-of-the-road game. All reviews indicate that it is not
particularly innovative and its production values are "okay" (not bad,
but not jaw-droppingly gorgeous either). Its gameplay has all the
perks and all the flaws of earlier iterations of the series. It's
/average/.

Unfortunately, years of score-inflation means that people perceive
anything less than a 7 out of 10 as a failure; 8 is considered
"average" and a 5 would mean a game not even worth getting a second
glance. But, in a perfect world (with spherical cows) I think 5.1
would be a fair score.

Mind you, it's really too early to pay any attention to meta-critic
user scores; both the fanboys and haters are out in full force and
there's going to be some wide swings and deviations. Most of these
people probably haven't even played the game, and none of them have
played it very long (seeing as the game has been out less than 24
hours) so they are judging the book, as it were, by its cover. I have
no doubt this score will trend upwards over the next few months.

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 09:12:43 -0500, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 10 Nov 2015 20:27:59 +0300, "Andrew Rybenkov"
><aryb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Awesome score!
>
>Honestly, that would seem an appropriate score: it's a
>middle-of-the-road game. All reviews indicate that it is not
>particularly innovative and its production values are "okay" (not bad,
>but not jaw-droppingly gorgeous either). Its gameplay has all the
>perks and all the flaws of earlier iterations of the series. It's
>/average/.
>
>Unfortunately, years of score-inflation means that people perceive
>anything less than a 7 out of 10 as a failure; 8 is considered
>"average" and a 5 would mean a game not even worth getting a second
>glance. But, in a perfect world (with spherical cows) I think 5.1
>would be a fair score.

The issue is that when US $59.99 is considered the upper range of a
AAA game (not counting DLC / season pass gimmicks, etc)., the customer
has a reasonable expectation that a game at this price point is going
to be in the upper range of it's class, as an overall offering.  

Charge a best-in-class price, and the expectation is a best-in-class
game.

If they had set a $40 price point on this game that user score on
metacritic would be higher, just as the Steam ratings would be more
enthusiastic.

Currently the Steam rating is "Mostly Positive".  While that might not
sound bad, it's a few notches down from enthusiasm, which would be
"Positive", ""Very Positive" or "Overwhelmingly Positive".  It's a
little better than "Mixed", but it's not what we want to see on a AAA
game that's going for full price.

Metacritic is set up to consider a games' user score somewhat like a
school grading system, where 7 and up is considered good enough to
buy, and below that it might be passable and still worthy of
consideration.  Individual users might interepret a score or 5 or 6
however they want to, but because all things are relative, and because
there are plenty of games with user metascores in the "green" ranges,
a score in the yellow range should be indicative of exactly what the
color represents -- caution.  Caution about whether the potential
buyer has really read about the game in depth and understands what it
is and is not.  In other words yellow means "warning, you might be
unhappy with your purchase".  All Bethesda would need to do to
alleviate a problematic (to sales) metascore like this is to simply
adjust the price point.  

The perceived value by the end user would adjust itself accordingly
and problem solved.

>Mind you, it's really too early to pay any attention to meta-critic
>user scores; both the fanboys and haters are out in full force and
>there's going to be some wide swings and deviations. Most of these
>people probably haven't even played the game, and none of them have
>played it very long (seeing as the game has been out less than 24
>hours) so they are judging the book, as it were, by its cover. I have
>no doubt this score will trend upwards over the next few months.

Let's come back and check on this later.  Most of the time metacritic
user scores tend to start out optimistic and head downward.  In the
case of a Bethesda game it usually has show stopping bugs out the
door, which tend to get slowly fixed over time.  But, I'm not sure
gamers who buy it a year after release even care enough to review it
on MC, so those improvements might never be reflected in user score.

Right now the user score is 5.5, which is a fairly shitty score and in
my opinion the game is a little better than that (maybe a 7), but I
think a yellow score says more about the overall disappointment at the
$60 price point than it says its a bad game, and in that case I agree.
The entire game has a "been there done that" feel, even if it's not
the worst sin ever committed by a game franchise.  Gamers who were
expecting a next gen game at a next gen price do have a right to be
disappointed.

For now I'm still having fun with it, but I can see it potentially
becoming repetative over time just as their other games in the
franchise did.  IMO they should have either done better or charged
less for it.

I don't think of the retail/release price of a game a measure
of its quality/originality  as a game.
That price is its production costs.

Like wise when a game goes discounted - may be very low- I don't take 
that as a sign its a poor game play.
(\__/)
(='.'=) 
(")_(") Mouse (Cheese Toasty n Sweet Pickle Be Nice)

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 19:46:03 -0000, "Trimble Bracegirdle"
<no-spam@never.spam> wrote:

>I don't think of the retail/release price of a game a measure
>of its quality/originality  as a game.
>That price is its production costs.

If you mapped the correlation between retail price and production cost
in the gaming industry, it would be all over the board.  There is in
many cases some relationship between the two, because if a game is
projected to sell X copies at Y amount, a budget of Z might be
allocated to it.  However what happens with that budget can range from
something magnificent to something of catastrophic proportions.

Having worked both in the gaming industry for some years, and in
software development in general for many decades, I can tell you that
at the end of the day a price point is set for a given piece of
software based on one factor and one factor only:  The highest price
marketing thinks buyers will be willing to pay.  

The reason is that it's much easier to discount the price of the game
later or even offer full or partial refunds to those who complain than
it is to find ways to bolt on added value and inflate the price after
the fact.  This applies to a lot of things, not only software
actually.

>Like wise when a game goes discounted - may be very low- I don't take 
>that as a sign its a poor game play.

Right -- in fact there is probably an inverse relationship going on
there.  You are happier with the game because you paid less for it.  

That was part of the point I was making.

(\__/)
(='.'=) 
(")_(") Mouse (Rin Comments Noted)

9 out of 10


Love everything about it, except the main story line; but like other games from B you can ignore the main plot for a long time. Everything else can be fixed ny mods. 

On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 23:31:29 +0300, T987654321 <qwrt...@gmail.com> wrote:

> 9 out of 10
>
>
> Love everything about it,

what do you like more in RPGs - to grow vegetables or to build outdoor johns?


-- 
Andrew Rybenkov

On Sat, 21 Nov 2015 12:06:29 +0300, "Andrew Rybenkov"
<aryb...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 23:31:29 +0300, T987654321 <qwrt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 9 out of 10
>>
>>
>> Love everything about it,
>
>what do you like more in RPGs - to grow vegetables or to build outdoor johns?

My answer would be C)  dropping my own vegetables in other folks'
johns

On Friday, November 20, 2015 at 12:31:31 PM UTC-8, T987654321 wrote:
> 9 out of 10
> 
> 
> Love everything about it, except the main story line; but like other games from B you can ignore the main plot for a long time. Everything else can be fixed ny mods.


Was completely wrong about the main quest line, it's got a twist, and then...

Revised score 10 out of 10

On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 11:26:09 +0300, T987654321 <qwrt...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Revised score 10 out of 10

yeah we got it already - you do not like RPGs.
Enjoy your fallout settlers, fallout simcity, whatever...

-- 
Andrew Rybenkov

On Tuesday, November 24, 2015 at 3:56:26 AM UTC-8, Andrew Rybenkov wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 11:26:09 +0300, T987654321 <qwrt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Revised score 10 out of 10
> 
> yeah we got it already - you do not like RPGs.
> Enjoy your fallout settlers, fallout simcity, whatever...
> 
> -- 
> Andrew Rybenkov

I love CRPGs, have been playing them since at least the gold-box AD&D games from SSi (look them up).  Fallout isn't an rpg, it's an adventure game.

On 11/11/2015 2:46 PM, Trimble Bracegirdle wrote:
> I don't think of the retail/release price of a game a measure
> of its quality/originality  as a game.
> That price is its production costs.

It can be had for 20 pounds (or US$30) right now if anybody is 
interested - hmm, what's that tell you about FO4 production costs I 
wonder :)

http://www.game.co.uk/en/fallout-4-637099?categoryIdentifier=792678&catGroupId=

On 12/1/2015 5:13 AM, MetalGuru wrote:
> On 11/11/2015 2:46 PM, Trimble Bracegirdle wrote:
>> I don't think of the retail/release price of a game a measure
>> of its quality/originality  as a game.
>> That price is its production costs.
>
> It can be had for 20 pounds (or US$30) right now if anybody is
> interested - hmm, what's that tell you about FO4 production costs I
> wonder :)
>
> http://www.game.co.uk/en/fallout-4-637099?categoryIdentifier=792678&catGroupId=

It's already over, it was good for some while it lasted.