As a seasoned gamer with countless hours under my belt, I can’t help but empathize with Raphael Colantonio’s sentiments about the current state of game reviews and development trends. Over the years, I’ve witnessed numerous titles launched in a polished but soulless state, while innovative, ambitious projects are often penalized for their initial flaws.
The video game titled Stalker 2, despite its potential, has been plagued with issues. In our assessment, we found it to be an intriguing mess, but unfortunately, numerous players have been deterred by the game’s technical glitches at launch, resulting in a less-than-favorable Metacritic rating. Amidst the game’s rocky debut, Raphael Colantonio, former creative director of Dishonored, expressed his concern that the current review system encourages developers to produce “safe and uninspired” games.
Dishonored dev discusses Stalker 2
In a tweet, or “X” if you prefer, Colantonio conveyed that the present system of game criticism on Metacritic tends to motivate developers to create predictable, uninspired games instead. The scores given by Metacritic even impact the bonuses for those who worked on Fallout: New Vegas, which suggests a preference for refining existing elements over fostering creativity.
The developer stated: “If a game is well-polished upon release, you can expect an 80% rating from us, regardless of how uninteresting the game may be.” However, Stalker 2 received a 73 due to its less than perfect condition at launch. This seems unfair and misleading…
Critics and players alike have criticized Stalker 2 for its unpolished launch, particularly its malfunctioning A-Life AI system. Despite GSC Game World’s efforts to improve it post-launch, the game’s current condition might make some players uneasy about playing it at this time. Fans are even trying to modify the AI themselves to make it work better.
Admittedly, it’s a nuanced issue, but assigning fixed scores by Metacritic at the time of game launch can potentially penalize developers who take risks and make improvements post-release, as these enhancements may not be reflected in the initial score.
Even if a game is fantastic but has bugs, its rating will be lower than a mediocre game without issues. This logic holds true: after three months, when the excellent game’s bugs have been fixed, it may still have a poor score,” the developer explained.
In the role of a game critic, Colantonio is spot-on – this subject can get quite intricate. Many media outlets lack the resources to reevaluate and rescore each game release, and Metacritic doesn’t accommodate updated scores from all sources. However, certain games may receive lower ratings due to bugs, but perhaps a more significant problem lies in that audiences often fail to see merit in a 7/10 game, even when the review elucidates its value.
To delve deeper into Stalker-related content, explore a mod addressing my major game grievances, or learn strategies to combat bothersome Bloodsucker mutants. Many fellow players can’t stand Bloodsuckers!
Read More
Sorry. No data so far.
2024-11-26 15:40