• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

DOOM Review Thread - The Fury Road of Shooters

His "response" just scream of "plz stop criticizing us" yet said outlet makes a business out of criticism. The review was bad, and the CoD review clearly was them sucking the dick of a large publisher. Their objectively is being rightly questioned, and he omitted addressing that.
How can a person be so ignorant?
lol

Makes me happy. Glad they helped out the metacritic
What a strange mentality.
 
How can a person be so ignorant?
lol


What a strange mentality.

Do you work for Bethesda. What a bizarre statement

Whether some gamers like it or not, review scores do have an impact on sales. Specifically when dealing with games that aren't sales monsters like a Call of Duty. That's why you'll see publishers citing Metacritic scores in press releases (WB most recently did that for the Arkham collection). So if you enjoyed a game there's nothing wrong with wanting it to review well so it may sell even better as that obviously ups the possibility for sequels.
 
Actually, your statement is the bizarre one. Why wouldn't a fan of the game be happy to see the Metacritic score climb.
Yup. In game development, a lot salaries, bonuses and future projects are decided based on meta-critic. If gaming is something you value, you should care that the games you enjoy are performing well in terms of review.
 

mdsfx

Member
It's also human (and very common) to want your opinion of something validated by others. People will say they dont need this, but their post history ALWAYS proves otherwise.
 

tesqui

Member
This thread: http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=1063009&page=1

Lots of people need to eat crow.

I was all for it! Looking back, the person demoing it played the game super slowly though.

Man, I thought the game looked fantastic!

Although the reception seems mixed.

You guys sound like you expected them to actually recreate doom 1 and 2.

It seems like a real good in between to me. Most of these complaints regarding movement speed and gunplay can be attributed to the person demoing it.
 

BiggNife

Member
Bethesda is a company that has been shown in the past to give bonuses based on Metacritic scores. It's gross, but it happens. Obsidian didn't get a bonus for New Vegas because its MC score was 84 and Bethesda promised a bonus for 85 or above, and that's heartbreaking.

So I'm glad to see Doom hit 85 because hopefully it means the team at Id gets the bonus they deserve for making a fantastic game, MC score aside.
 

Aureon

Please do not let me serve on a jury. I am actually a crazy person.
I'm pretty dumbfounded why they sent review copies so late.
Perhaps they didn't expect the onslaught.
 

ZehDon

Gold Member
This thread: http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=1063009&page=1

Lots of people need to eat crow.
I watched the video again, and read through that, and I don't think a good amount of scepticism was unfair at that point. Who seriously expected this to have GOTY potential? And the gameplay video is much slower than the final game, and elements like the chainsaw are far less prevalent as well.

Found my own post:
I don't think that word means what you think it means.

Anyway, damn. The player was obviously moving slower for the purposes of demoing the game, with a few idiotic "lets slow pan around this corner for a look at the environment" in case anyone was wondering. But man, I'm loving everything about this... save for the chainsaw. Took too much control away from the player. And Snapmap looks cool as fuck. Timesplitters level editor, with a dash of Forge? Sold.
I left my scepticism at the door, and went with my gut. *high fives past-self*
 
Whether some gamers like it or not, review scores do have an impact on sales. Specifically when dealing with games that aren't sales monsters like a Call of Duty. That's why you'll see publishers citing Metacritic scores in press releases (WB most recently did that for the Arkham collection). So if you enjoyed a game there's nothing wrong with wanting it to review well so it may sell even better as that obviously ups the possibility for sequels.

Yup. In game development, a lot salaries, bonuses and future projects are decided based on meta-critic. If gaming is something you value, you should care that the games you enjoy are performing well in terms of review.
Of course you want games you enjoy to sale/review well but caring so much that you're worrying about its metacritic, just seems strange to me. That type of thinking of makes sense to me if your part the development team.
 

Ixion

Member
I finished the campaign today on PS4. My summarized thoughts are below, but they're not too different from the general consensus here:


PROS:

+The best FPS combat I've every played. The constant movement, the mixing & matching of your arsenal against a varied enemy set, the satisying shooting and executions, and the well designed arena spaces make for action that's fun 100% of the time
+Detailed visuals with a slick framerate
+Soundtrack is fresh for video games and elevates the combat to another level
+Storytelling is done via the environment in a non-intrusive way, but it still adds to the game
+Levels are fairly open and explorable for the most part, which adds another element to the game amidst the combat
+Surprisingly good humor sprinkled throughout


CONS:

-Sound mixing is off for a handful of things
-Level structure could use more tension and unpredictability (needs slightly less emphasis on arenas and slightly more emphasis on more organic/surprising encounters throughout the rest of the levels)

Overall: 9/10 - This game isn't perfect and can be improved upon in a couple areas, but it definitely lived up to the hype. It's one of the most purely fun games I've ever played, so it's something special.
 

Lego Boss

Member
Yup. In game development, a lot salaries, bonuses and future projects are decided based on meta-critic. If gaming is something you value, you should care that the games you enjoy are performing well in terms of review.

I think this is a bit rough considering how arbitrary (and inconsistent) the whole process is.

I can understand taking averages from SOME outlets, but not from across the board. Even then, games like Ridge Racer Unbounded review well (9/10 in Edge), but are really poor.

I guess sales is a better indicator, but problematic too: games can have long tails and just because a game doesn't sell, doesn't make it poor.

Clearly it's results driven, but it seems something of a difficult hinge to place people's livelihoods on . . .
 

Ixion

Member
The more reviews are added the higher the MC gets, started at 80 and now at 86, that's a wonderful score.

It actually started around 74 after the first handful of reviews, mainly because of the IGN and Digitally Downloaded reviews. My thought was "Well, I guess this will be more of a cult hit."

But yeah, it's climbed a lot since then. I figured a bunch of reviewers would review DOOM with the expectations of a typical modern shooter, but I'm glad to see that only a few reviewers did that. Everyone else understood the appeal.
 

Gurish

Member
It actually started in the 70s. Nice to see it reaching so high.

It actually started around 74 after the first handful of reviews, mainly because of the IGN and Digitally Downloaded reviews. My thought was "Well, I guess this will be more of a cult hit."

But yeah, it's climbed a lot since then. I figured a bunch of reviewers would review DOOM with the expectations of a typical modern shooter, but I'm glad to see that only a few reviewers did that. Everyone else understood the appeal.

Even more impressive, I was afraid the game would end up as underrated because of undeserved reviews, glad to see it turned out well eventually.

And yea I mentioned undeserved reviews exactly because it felt like they judged it because they don't like its old school style, which is bullshit.
 
This was in a "Rave reviews for DOOM" solicitation from Amazon this morning:

DOOMAccolades610._V271979098_.jpg


I know they just send those for whatever your buying/browsing interests are, but it was cool to see it pitched as a critical success.

That was my thread. See the post above yours. :)

Ah, my bad. I sat in the reply box too long.
 

FatherBrain

Neo Member
It actually started around 74 after the first handful of reviews, mainly because of the IGN and Digitally Downloaded reviews. My thought was "Well, I guess this will be more of a cult hit."

But yeah, it's climbed a lot since then. I figured a bunch of reviewers would review DOOM with the expectations of a typical modern shooter, but I'm glad to see that only a few reviewers did that. Everyone else understood the appeal.

I actually hope that bethesda will rethink their 'no-review-copies'-mentality because of that. Otherwise the game would probably have started with a better MC-score, which COULD have leaded to more sales.
 

Sullichin

Member
This thread: http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=1063009&page=1

Lots of people need to eat crow.

I was concerned about:
- Chainsaw on its own button. wtf
- BFG on its own button. wtf.
- focus on melee finishers

Turns out the chainsaw/BFG/melee all play off each other and help form the genius give and take of the action. Chainsaw when you need ammo or need to get rid of something ASAP, and BFG is like the bomb in geometry wars. It's genius.

I was always going to buy the game regardless but I was perhaps most impressed that my concerns wound up not being acceptable but some of the best design choices in the game.
 
Top Bottom