Evolve Review: The Shallow End of the Gene Pool: VGFirst

VGFirst writes:

"With Evolve, developer Turtlerock studios have promised something special, a reinvention of the traditional, competitive first person shooter into a asynchronous MOBA hybrid as four human hunters battle it out in unforgiving, wild environments against excessively large, ferocious, alien monsters. It wasn’t an especially hard sell, the prospect of intelligent, teamwork orientated gameplay between hunter and monster found immediate appeal and the visual spectacle of these encounters is immediately apparent even from the games early trailers. However, streamlining all these features into a compelling, competitive experience is perhaps more difficult than describing their intentions, and as such this review addresses exactly how successful Turtlerock have been in crafting this vision into a video game."

[StrayaKNT]

Is it normal that most of the reviewers these days dont even know what theyre doing or how to review a game. This applies to this and the order, A GAME CANNOT BE PLAYABLE AT 4/10

[Gazondaily]

"This applies to this and the order, A GAME CANNOT BE PLAYABLE AT 4/10"

Says who?

[StrayaKNT]

Well to be honest the game has to be terrible to be a 4/10, I think evolve is amazing, they don't FORCE you to buy DLC so how is a game like that with AMAZING gameplay a 4/10 it's just unfair for the dedevelopers. The least would be a 6/10 but even then that would be harsh.

[ChronoJoe]

@Aussiegamer You should perhaps read the article then argue the points that you disagree with rather than just proclaiming the game is 'AMAZING' while disagreeing with the score. No amount of capital letters are going to convince me, but a rational debate would at least hold some value.

Why is it amazing and what do you deem of the criticisms provided in the article? Note, the review doesn't label any problems with the games DLC model as a reason for its score, so I'm not sure why you are bringing that up.

[ChronoJoe]

That's nonsense. Maybe that's what websites like IGN have taught you with their 6-10 scale system, but there's no reason a reviewer would not want to use the entire scale to represent the value of entertainment that the game represents.

That representation should reflect exactly how entertaining the game is relative to its successful design and orchestration of game mechanics. A game can be perfectly playable, but fundamentally unbalanced and absolutely no fun, but based on your system that game would deserve at least a five? That simply does not make sense to me.

[Jdoki]

You said it ChronoJoe.

You know something is wrong with the current review scoring model when people think a game below an 8 is bad and there's arguments on why a game scored 9.5 instead of 10!

I've always liked the idea that 5 is an average game, 7 is a good game, 8 is a great game, 9 is for a game that does something exceptional in the genre, and 10 is for a game that does something exceptional that could impact the entire industry or every genre.

[LAWSON72]

It can, people need to realize a score is simply the final thought from the reviewer. These are not technical scores like a school test where something can be either right or wrong. A playable game is not always a fun game let alone a good one.

[turdburgler1080]

@aussiegamer

If a game can't be playable then what's the use of review scores 3, 2, and 1?

[silvacrest]

IGN gave this game a 9, i just watched angry joes review where it got a 5

considering how in-depth he went i can't help but agree with him

[MasterCornholio]

Joe makes some really good points in that review especially with how lazy some of the DLC is.

[blakstarz]

This is another example of why you shouldn't where your heart on your sleeve when it comes to reviews and make your own judegment.

This is someones opinion, and just how some people are saying this score was ridiculous, how you think people felt about The Order reviews? Some of the ridiculously low scores was damn near laughable.

[ChronoJoe]

I think a crucial distinction is how an opinion is presented. A problem I personally have with a number of reviewers is they don't coherently explain why their 'criticisms' are a problem for the games design, or why they would would prevent the experience being entertaining. That's the case with a lot of reviews for 'The Order' where they claim aspects of the game are boring without accurately articulating why.

This review of The Order is a good example
http://metro.co.uk/2015/02/...

Metro cite problems with The Order pertaining to AI, level design and generic game gameplay, they carefully describe features like how you can kill human targets in the game with two shots to any body part, but they don't explain why this aspect makes the game in any way bad, or poorly designed. They go on to describe stealth segments are irritating, but don't bother explain why exactly they're irritating. Were they too hard? too easy? Neither do they place these segments within the context that they occur in-game. While a score does not bother me when the reviewer properly justifies the verdict, it does when the verdict isn't properly substantiated. Maybe they just didn't enjoy the game but can't quite understand how to articulate their feelings? That's fine, some people just get a subjective feeling about a game but can't articulate it very well, but when written out these do not make for very good reviews, and fail to help the reader understand whether the product is suitable for them, or not.

[spicelicka]

I think we over-exaggerate how seriously people take review scores. Every article has everyone giving their opinion on how we should consider review scores. Some people say they're BS, some people say they're valid, in the end people who want to buy the game buy it. And we know this from the sales figures of call of duty and assassin's creed games.

The people who actually use the reviews to make purchases usually read the actual reviews. The content of the review, regardless of the score, explains how the review pertains to you. The scores are just used to brag and troll.

Oh 4/10 this game is shit, oh 9/10 this game is amazing. It's more about the pride of purchase. And the arguments rarely align with the actual purchase.

So everyone just stfu about giving your opinions on other opinions. Reviewing system isn't going to change just because your game wasn't reviewed how you wanted.