A disappointingly low-tech space exploration game that relies too much on the legacy of Skyrim and Fallout and lacks the innovation and imagination to do its concept justice.
Here we go again.
MS cherry picked who got codes so there’s going to be a lot of late reviews
I guess they shouldn't have cherry picked IGN then.
@generic Unfortunately they couldn't exclude the two biggest outlets in IGN and Gamespot without making their little plan too obvious. Too bad it backfired on them since they are too big to care about hurting Microsoft's feelings and gave it an honest score.......just like all the reviews coming in are doing now.
Bethesda know that there's something wrong with their game that is why they chose who got the codes first.
@generic IGN is normally MS mouthpiece.
MS didn't cherry pick shit, look at the OpenCritic it has over 133 reviews and it's still sitting at 87, where as BG3 only has 106 reviews so did they cherry pick
Because metro has had a smear campaign for the past year. They already didn't like SF so this score was to be expected.
@Lightning77: That works the other way as well, then? People praising the game for the last year are suspect to give the game a good score just as much as Metro is of giving it a bad one, no? This is logical fallacy territory we're entering in here. We should look at the words presented and base them on their merit alone, not try and scapegoat some sort of reporting history, especially that about the parent company and not Starfield itself, as a means to discredit a review. Having read this review, I'm not certain I agree with their resulting score, but I can't deny their opinion and objective points made seem on point as far as I can tell.
I find it's scores people disagree with; not so much worded opinion. I agree with much of the criticism of the more popular critical reviews - IGN, GameSpot, et al. I'm still having a great time with the game though. People don't disagree with Dan Stapleton as much as they disagree with the number 7. It's all about Metacritic and fanboy flexing. Comparing Baldur's Gate to Starfield and Spider-Man to Starfield is ridiculous on every level, but they'll slap those numbers side by side as if it's meaningful. Stapleton could've given the game an 8 with the exact same worded opinion and it wouldn't have made as much of a ruckus.
@Chris When you have publications like IGN who gave it a 7 despite all the hype for the past year from them as if they were gonna give it a 9 maybe even a 10 is telling. IGN did Hype campaigns and still gave it a 7. While Metro had smear campaign's and gave it a 6/10. I guess you can say that's "generous" the hate train they've been on but it still reflected the score nonetheless. Regardless the general consensus is the game is very much liked and favored definitely not perfect even I have some serious gripes but the game generally is very much liked. Even breaking several milestones compared to their other Bethesda titles.
@generic-user-name - didn't IGN give Starfield a 7.
My thoughts exactly when I see a bought and paid for 10/10 review.
Seriously. Even most people playing it say they'll give it an 8 at the most. I've watched multiple streamers play this game, not one has praised it as a perfect game.
What did you expect after Metro wasn't given a review copy? This type of review has 0 impact at this point so maybe it was good strategy to delay some review copies. The game is a commercial success already
MS manipulated reviews clearly and got what they wanted. It may not matter now but it definitely matters to many later. You guys defending MS behavior is crazy
just look at how they figured out week 1 sales with GP? Let's use early access as a selling point!! People even paying extra for a game they don't technically own! Bloody brilliant...
TBH alot of Xbox fans who paid the 35$ for the EA with gamepass dont know they dont own the GAME u only own the dlc u bought if ur gamepass runs out u cant use it LOL There was a sub reddit on the xbox page about it LOL
Have you played the game?
At least you can say Metro’sDavid Jenkins explains what he doesn’t like.
They haven't said it's a commercial success yet. They've only said they got 6 million players. No sales data has been finalized or given here yet. To give you some perspective. If you pretend that the 6 million are Gamepass subs then they've made absolutely 0 profit. Any subscriber that was already on Gamepass contributed 0 additional dollars...maybe 35 for early access. If you were to assume all 6 million paid 35 for the game your at a little over 200 million in revenue. Not sure that's a success for this studio..after taking into account costs
Yep and we also don't even know if the game contributed to a significant increase in gamepass subscribers either. We know sweet fuck all about what the FINANCIAL gains have been for this game and I doubt we ever will, since I predict it is going to be waaay under MS' expectations and needs.
We all know the game is going to be lauded a success publicly it's the behind doors conversations we don't know about that will determine its success seemingly they want the game to be drawing in subscriptions so they have a whole bunch of metrix to determine its success however did it make money back no don't think it ever will unless it goes multiplatform in a year or two ps5 and next gen switch as a launch game could possibly find success
its the #1 most sold game on Steam for 2 weeks in a row with a steam concurrent player peak of 330k players after full launch (all bought the game), with 234k concurrent players during early access (paid the $100 for early access). That's just Steam early access lol. It also topped the UK physical sales charts on Xbox. I think it will most definitely be considered a financial win.
Lol, you guys are hilarious. The obsession ppl have with this game is tickling on what planet does making 200 million considered a failure? Regardless of that it's breaking milestones for Bethesda and yall like holding out hope it isn't a success cause we don't know the hard numbers outside of steam, UK and it moving Xbox into a top seller on Amazon 😆
A game in development for 7yrs and only managing 6M sold is quite under performing. Can't even beat Elden Ring or Hogwarts. Definitely a far way from being some massive runaway success like most people predicted. Right now it's just average numbers for any half decent AAA title.
So.... You are comparing a game that came out 6 days ago on two platforms two games that came out on multiple platforms over 6 months ago. Brilliant.
@Jon Hogwarts sold 12M in it's first 2 weeks, no chance at all for Starfield to come even close to that. I thought Xbox was all about reaching more users? Also Hogwarts came out on only 1 more platform, it was on PS5, XBX, PC. Last gen versions didn't arrive until much much later. Ignorance is bliss I guess. Brilliant.
It might not even match Baldur's Gate 3's sales. It sold 2.5 million on Steam in early access. I'm seeing some suggest it sold 5.2 million as of like 3 weeks ago, but that looks suspiciously like a flipped 2.5. Now add on whatever has sold on PS5.
6m sold isn't even accurate just 6m played and that could be a shared subs like primary on GP and 3 other accounts played it or similar on PC best estimates I've seen is 300k actual purchases based on steam data. That is likely under representing sakes so call it 500k.
Elden Ring and Hogwarts are on PS5 as well Starfield is not how do you expect it to sell as well when it's missing the largest console base and was either of those games on gamepass?