It is sitting at a Mostly Positive rating on Steam with almost 4,000 reviews. Sounds in line with the 79 to 80 score it seems to be at. I am more than fine with that score for a game. I think some people are getting a little too granular and judgy. Seems weird to me. Play the game or not. That is really the only two options that matter. Pick one and lean into it.
lol... you're being too impatient, the general population on metacritic cant even vote yet.
Another thing there not lots of people actually playing according to steam unless you think 34k people online is good?
Havent fact checked anything but I am reading it has had at peak 70k players......that's really not good tbh and tells me it's leaning towards being a huge flop.
Being impatient would mean I bought the game and am playing it. I have not. I enjoyed the other Dragon Age games, my favorite being DA:I I enjoyed the Mass Effect games including Andromeda, which was destroyed at launch but now sits at Mostly Positive on Steam and I found it a fun game. This game looks better than Andromeda so the 7 to 8 score is in line with the expectation I have with the game. By the time I get through other games on my list it will be, maybe, March or April next year, it will be patched and ready for me to dive in. I look forward to it. Matters not to me what anyone else thinks about it.
I think you completely missed the context of my post and got too defensive here. If you think and perhaps even enjoy/love the game then great for you, there's nothing wrong with that and I wasn't implying any otherwise.
The point is those scores are too early right now to actually mean anything when it comes to the fact of.... is it a big hit or a huge flop?
Perhaps you are right, Western context is lost on me. Apologies.
The side that matters to me is, is the game fun for me? Maybe and hopefully. MetaCritic users have blasted it. Woke, Trans and so on. (I think MetaCritic is a joke, do you even have to have played a game to post a review of it?) The reviews on Steam from actual players is mostly positive as they are when I checked on both my Xbox and PS5. I see another post citing the 'only' 70,000 players on Steam, but the game is also on consoles, and you can play on PC without Steam. I think you are right that it is too early to tell. In general, but for me it looks to be what I was expecting and that is a positive for me. Hopefully I will like it when I dig into it sometime next year.
Steam numbers are an indication of how well the game is doing overall. Most people are probably playing it on consoles but even if we double the numbers for each console, which I believe is how it normally goes when comparing Steam to XBox and PS5, that's around another 300k. Combined with Steam, it's only about 350-400k total. That's not great for a AAA game that cost as much as DAV and the expectations for sales. I don't think it will flop like Concord or Suicide Squad but I also don't believe it's going to come anywhere near what it needed to make it profitable. My guess is less than 500k total sales. We're going to see some more job losses at Bioware in the next few months if I'm right.
Steam is only one of the PC homes though right? Also Epic and EA launcher? So three PC launchers, Xbox and PS5 that is a good size pool to draw numbers from but not sure what those numbers are. Honestly does it matter? Seems to be a decent seller and we have no idea what it cost to make so how do we know what the ROI is to determine the sales numbers they were aiming for that return?
EGS and the EA store are a fraction of the numbers Steam gets if a game launches on Steam, too. Being generous, that might mean another 35-40k. It still doesn't bring the numbers up very much.
Edit: I just checked SteamDB and the numbers are a little better over the weekend. Peaked at 84,832 yesterday. A good sign but still not breaking 100k. If it doesn't break 100k at any point, then it's in trouble. If it does, then it might be OK. Just OK, I believe, is the ceiling for sales. Even then, it might not be good enough for the number crunchers at EA/Bioware to consider it a success.
Come on, you need to be honest. You have no idea what numbers Epic or EA Play have, you are making up numbers to support your opinion. Confirmation bias.
Additionally, you are saying, with certainty, that if the player numbers on Steam do not hit 100,000 then the game is in trouble.
Was the critic and player liked Star Wars game, Star Wars Jedi Survivor they made in the same situation? This game has more concurrent players and broke EA's record on Steam.
What success metric are you trying to hone in on with that number? If EA considered all platforms and believed their main success would come from, say console sales, then perhaps it is a sum of its parts sort of sales goal. Meaning, we may not hit our goal with one platform and need to rely on diversification to create multiple revenue streams to achieve our ROI. Which most companies do and EA has surely embraced. If that is the case, and historical strategies say it is, then your made up '100,000' number for Steam players would be as baseless a claim as I believe it really is.
To your point: Call of Duty is only number 5 on the steam charts with ≈245K concurrent players right now with 306K peak during the rolling record period. Black Ops 6 is the best selling COD ever. It has millions of players. Just saying, while Steam is a significant indicator, it isn't the only place people game.
Quite so, but we can rely on Steam numbers relative to other Steam games, from what I have seen so far it is doing all right but not great. This whole area is muddied because of the lack of data, all we can work out is an estimate.
It is sitting at a Mostly Positive rating on Steam with almost 4,000 reviews. Sounds in line with the 79 to 80 score it seems to be at. I am more than fine with that score for a game. I think some people are getting a little too granular and judgy. Seems weird to me. Play the game or not. That is really the only two options that matter. Pick one and lean into it.
lol... you're being too impatient, the general population on metacritic cant even vote yet.
Another thing there not lots of people actually playing according to steam unless you think 34k people online is good?
Havent fact checked anything but I am reading it has had at peak 70k players......that's really not good tbh and tells me it's leaning towards being a huge flop.
Being impatient would mean I bought the game and am playing it. I have not. I enjoyed the other Dragon Age games, my favorite being DA:I I enjoyed the Mass Effect games including Andromeda, which was destroyed at launch but now sits at Mostly Positive on Steam and I found it a fun game. This game looks better than Andromeda so the 7 to 8 score is in line with the expectation I have with the game. By the time I get through other games on my list it will be, maybe, March or April next year, it will be patched and ready for me to dive in. I look forward to it. Matters not to me what anyone else thinks about it.
I think you completely missed the context of my post and got too defensive here. If you think and perhaps even enjoy/love the game then great for you, there's nothing wrong with that and I wasn't implying any otherwise.
The point is those scores are too early right now to actually mean anything when it comes to the fact of.... is it a big hit or a huge flop?
Perhaps you are right, Western context is lost on me. Apologies.
The side that matters to me is, is the game fun for me? Maybe and hopefully. MetaCritic users have blasted it. Woke, Trans and so on. (I think MetaCritic is a joke, do you even have to have played a game to post a review of it?) The reviews on Steam from actual players is mostly positive as they are when I checked on both my Xbox and PS5. I see another post citing the 'only' 70,000 players on Steam, but the game is also on consoles, and you can play on PC without Steam. I think you are right that it is too early to tell. In general, but for me it looks to be what I was expecting and that is a positive for me. Hopefully I will like it when I dig into it sometime next year.
Steam numbers are an indication of how well the game is doing overall. Most people are probably playing it on consoles but even if we double the numbers for each console, which I believe is how it normally goes when comparing Steam to XBox and PS5, that's around another 300k. Combined with Steam, it's only about 350-400k total. That's not great for a AAA game that cost as much as DAV and the expectations for sales. I don't think it will flop like Concord or Suicide Squad but I also don't believe it's going to come anywhere near what it needed to make it profitable. My guess is less than 500k total sales. We're going to see some more job losses at Bioware in the next few months if I'm right.
Steam is only one of the PC homes though right? Also Epic and EA launcher? So three PC launchers, Xbox and PS5 that is a good size pool to draw numbers from but not sure what those numbers are. Honestly does it matter? Seems to be a decent seller and we have no idea what it cost to make so how do we know what the ROI is to determine the sales numbers they were aiming for that return?
EGS and the EA store are a fraction of the numbers Steam gets if a game launches on Steam, too. Being generous, that might mean another 35-40k. It still doesn't bring the numbers up very much.
Edit: I just checked SteamDB and the numbers are a little better over the weekend. Peaked at 84,832 yesterday. A good sign but still not breaking 100k. If it doesn't break 100k at any point, then it's in trouble. If it does, then it might be OK. Just OK, I believe, is the ceiling for sales. Even then, it might not be good enough for the number crunchers at EA/Bioware to consider it a success.
Come on, you need to be honest. You have no idea what numbers Epic or EA Play have, you are making up numbers to support your opinion. Confirmation bias.
Additionally, you are saying, with certainty, that if the player numbers on Steam do not hit 100,000 then the game is in trouble.
Was the critic and player liked Star Wars game, Star Wars Jedi Survivor they made in the same situation? This game has more concurrent players and broke EA's record on Steam.
What success metric are you trying to hone in on with that number? If EA considered all platforms and believed their main success would come from, say console sales, then perhaps it is a sum of its parts sort of sales goal. Meaning, we may not hit our goal with one platform and need to rely on diversification to create multiple revenue streams to achieve our ROI. Which most companies do and EA has surely embraced. If that is the case, and historical strategies say it is, then your made up '100,000' number for Steam players would be as baseless a claim as I believe it really is.
While it's true I don't know the actual numbers, Steam numbers are always higher than EA's platform or the EGS if the game is available on Steam. Console numbers are usually double the PC numbers for each platform, XBox and PS5. Why would it be any different this time? Time will tell but I'm fairly confident DAV will not be seen as a financial success by EA.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
At 85k player peak https://steamdb.info/app/1845910/charts/ they might have if you take into account the time zones it has surpassed 100k game purchases for sure. The other three are estimates for steam. Although the 429k number is way too generous.
Console probably surpasses Steam numbers as there is a hungry crowd of console players willing to buy these types of games.
Also bear in mind the high sales figures of Inquisition came over a 3 year period.
To your point: Call of Duty is only number 5 on the steam charts with ≈245K concurrent players right now with 306K peak during the rolling record period. Black Ops 6 is the best selling COD ever. It has millions of players. Just saying, while Steam is a significant indicator, it isn't the only place people game.
Quite so, but we can rely on Steam numbers relative to other Steam games, from what I have seen so far it is doing all right but not great. This whole area is muddied because of the lack of data, all we can work out is an estimate.
I am again going to point out that I think they are targeting this to console players based on the number of PS5 official reviews vs PC. I'm not sure Steam will tell us much about the overall success or failure.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
To your point: Call of Duty is only number 5 on the steam charts with ≈245K concurrent players right now with 306K peak during the rolling record period. Black Ops 6 is the best selling COD ever. It has millions of players. Just saying, while Steam is a significant indicator, it isn't the only place people game.
Quite so, but we can rely on Steam numbers relative to other Steam games, from what I have seen so far it is doing all right but not great. This whole area is muddied because of the lack of data, all we can work out is an estimate.
I am again going to point out that I think they are targeting this to console players based on the number of PS5 official reviews vs PC. I'm not sure Steam will tell us much about the overall success or failure.
I know a few of the sites i monitor (and that did a review on Metacritic) for PC reviews, performed the review on the PS5 version of the game. I assume they had their choice of device to get the game code for the review.
Maybe @StevenWeber could clarify if he had an option between PC, Xbox and PS5 (or whomever got the original code).
A PS5 dualsense controller works just fine on Steam so just to use that controller wouldn't be the reason so who knows.
At 85k player peak https://steamdb.info/app/1845910/charts/ they might have if you take into account the time zones it has surpassed 100k game purchases for sure. The other three are estimates for steam. Although the 429k number is way too generous.
Console probably surpasses Steam numbers as there is a hungry crowd of console players willing to buy these types of games.
Also bear in mind the high sales figures of Inquisition came over a 3 year period.
I think it will do OK but not fantastic. No idea how much it cost to make but I'm guessing around $100M might be fair given the amount of time it's been in development. At $70 a pop, they'd have to sell several million copies to make a profit. The numbers right now don't indicate they'll sell that many, at least not in the first few months. Breaking even might be the best case scenario. Who knows, though?
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
There is a lot of explanation coming from the companions. It’s as if they don’t trust the player to put two and two together.
Remember when we talk about games leading us by the hand well its been that way for story too for quite a while. But the game does seem to have an extra large dose of that from what I have seen.
It is irritating, like those TV documentaries and travel shows that start with a run down of what you are going to see, then have a run down of what you are going to see before the ad break, then after the ad break have a nod to what you just saw and then a run down of what you will see next, then finish with a summing up of what you have just seen in the whole programme.
It's not like dumbing down is confined to gaming guys. It reminds me of the way the Tele Tubbies showed the TV bit twice so the five year olds got it!
To your point: Call of Duty is only number 5 on the steam charts with ≈245K concurrent players right now with 306K peak during the rolling record period. Black Ops 6 is the best selling COD ever. It has millions of players. Just saying, while Steam is a significant indicator, it isn't the only place people game.
Quite so, but we can rely on Steam numbers relative to other Steam games, from what I have seen so far it is doing all right but not great. This whole area is muddied because of the lack of data, all we can work out is an estimate.
I am again going to point out that I think they are targeting this to console players based on the number of PS5 official reviews vs PC. I'm not sure Steam will tell us much about the overall success or failure.
To shed a little light on this: when PR offers code, oftentimes they give us the choice of platform. We tend to choose PC because most of us are PC first players. But many, many games critics are more likely to have a console versus a high-end PC, so that would explain the inordinate console to PC review ratio.
Sometimes only one platform is available, or there is a delay on other platforms in the review process, but more often than not if it's multiplatform, we choose what platform we want to review it on, not the developer or publisher.
To your point: Call of Duty is only number 5 on the steam charts with ≈245K concurrent players right now with 306K peak during the rolling record period. Black Ops 6 is the best selling COD ever. It has millions of players. Just saying, while Steam is a significant indicator, it isn't the only place people game.
Quite so, but we can rely on Steam numbers relative to other Steam games, from what I have seen so far it is doing all right but not great. This whole area is muddied because of the lack of data, all we can work out is an estimate.
I am again going to point out that I think they are targeting this to console players based on the number of PS5 official reviews vs PC. I'm not sure Steam will tell us much about the overall success or failure.
I know a few of the sites i monitor (and that did a review on Metacritic) for PC reviews, performed the review on the PS5 version of the game. I assume they had their choice of device to get the game code for the review.
Maybe @StevenWeber could clarify if he had an option between PC, Xbox and PS5 (or whomever got the original code).
A PS5 dualsense controller works just fine on Steam so just to use that controller wouldn't be the reason so who knows.
Just saw this - see my other post, but to confirm, more often than not we choose the platform, not PR or developers. It doesn't always shake out that way, and sometimes our platform choice is delayed for one reason or another (bugs on a version, delays with code from console platform holder, etc), but very rarely is the platform chosen for us on a multiplatform release.
In this instance, we chose PC. For Metaphor, we reviewed it on PC (which is what I chose), but were offered an Xbox and Playstation code as well for other writers for potential features, guides, etc. For New World: Aeternum, even though I own it on PC, I asked for an Xbox code since console was the big push with that game.
Just for some added clarity on how the process works.
To your point: Call of Duty is only number 5 on the steam charts with ≈245K concurrent players right now with 306K peak during the rolling record period. Black Ops 6 is the best selling COD ever. It has millions of players. Just saying, while Steam is a significant indicator, it isn't the only place people game.
Quite so, but we can rely on Steam numbers relative to other Steam games, from what I have seen so far it is doing all right but not great. This whole area is muddied because of the lack of data, all we can work out is an estimate.
I am again going to point out that I think they are targeting this to console players based on the number of PS5 official reviews vs PC. I'm not sure Steam will tell us much about the overall success or failure.
To shed a little light on this: when PR offers code, oftentimes they give us the choice of platform. We tend to choose PC because most of us are PC first players. But many, many games critics are more likely to have a console versus a high-end PC, so that would explain the inordinate console to PC review ratio.
Sometimes only one platform is available, or there is a delay on other platforms in the review process, but more often than not if it's multiplatform, we choose what platform we want to review it on, not the developer or publisher.
Thanks.
I did find it strange that a site called PC GAMES reviewed the game on the PS5...
Sign of the times I guess.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
By the way... the MetaCritic User Scores are out and they are a shitshow.
I bet half the scores are either a ZERO with the reasons of (and I quote) "Garbage Woke Game!!!!" or a 10 with the reason being it's (and I quote) "demasking all the riduculus homophobics "
I wish there was a way to filter out the 0's and 10s and just read the ones from normal folks.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
To your point: Call of Duty is only number 5 on the steam charts with ≈245K concurrent players right now with 306K peak during the rolling record period. Black Ops 6 is the best selling COD ever. It has millions of players. Just saying, while Steam is a significant indicator, it isn't the only place people game.
Quite so, but we can rely on Steam numbers relative to other Steam games, from what I have seen so far it is doing all right but not great. This whole area is muddied because of the lack of data, all we can work out is an estimate.
I am again going to point out that I think they are targeting this to console players based on the number of PS5 official reviews vs PC. I'm not sure Steam will tell us much about the overall success or failure.
To shed a little light on this: when PR offers code, oftentimes they give us the choice of platform. We tend to choose PC because most of us are PC first players. But many, many games critics are more likely to have a console versus a high-end PC, so that would explain the inordinate console to PC review ratio.
Sometimes only one platform is available, or there is a delay on other platforms in the review process, but more often than not if it's multiplatform, we choose what platform we want to review it on, not the developer or publisher.
Thanks.
I did find it strange that a site called PC GAMES reviewed the game on the PS5...
Sign of the times I guess.
Keep in mind that many sites use freelancers for reviews because of the time commitment involved. So that plays into as well. The main staff might all be pc players, but if they had to freelance the review out, ps5 might have been the only platform available to that reviewer.
It is weird that a PC-centric site would have a console review, but with the time commitment involved with reviewing a 40-60 hour rpg on a deadline, that might have been the only way a review gets done, especially in such a busy review period like we’ve had.
Keep in mind that many sites use freelancers for reviews because of the time commitment involved. So that plays into as well. The main staff might all be pc players, but if they had to freelance the review out, ps5 might have been the only platform available to that reviewer.
It is weird that a PC-centric site would have a console review, but with the time commitment involved with reviewing a 40-60 hour rpg on a deadline, that might have been the only way a review gets done, especially in such a busy review period like we’ve had.
I am sorry but that is a disgrace, a PC mag should review things only using the PC. As to why there are so many console reviews, it seems made for consoles for me, I can't see how anyone could think the PC was the primary platform here, so it makes sense to review on a console...unless you are a PC mag for heavens sake.
219 comments for one thread. Usually only Microsoft lawsuit threads would get this much attention (if they weren't locked up with commenting disabled)
Is this Hogwarts legacy all over again with it's game community in-fighting?
I find that we gamers spend far too much time talking about politics and revenue methods in games these days and we can hardly put all the blame for that on players.
By the way... the MetaCritic User Scores are out and they are a shitshow.
I bet half the scores are either a ZERO with the reasons of (and I quote) "Garbage Woke Game!!!!" or a 10 with the reason being it's (and I quote) "demasking all the riduculus homophobics "
I wish there was a way to filter out the 0's and 10s and just read the ones from normal folks.
You've got that right, they should have a better method on Metacritic for filtering scores.
You can put it to MIXED reviews which looks like 5-7 scores and many of them seem normal, but then you are still missing out on any exceptional reviews good or bad.
Keep in mind that many sites use freelancers for reviews because of the time commitment involved. So that plays into as well. The main staff might all be pc players, but if they had to freelance the review out, ps5 might have been the only platform available to that reviewer.
It is weird that a PC-centric site would have a console review, but with the time commitment involved with reviewing a 40-60 hour rpg on a deadline, that might have been the only way a review gets done, especially in such a busy review period like we’ve had.
I am sorry but that is a disgrace, a PC mag should review things only using the PC. As to why there are so many console reviews, it seems made for consoles for me, I can't see how anyone could think the PC was the primary platform here, so it makes sense to review on a console...unless you are a PC mag for heavens sake.
I wouldn't call it a disgrace. It's odd, sure, but the realities of the business are what they are. Sometimes you do what you can to have the coverage, and with massive games it makes more sense sometimes to freelance it out.
I haven't seen the review that is being mentioned here, but one thing I'll also note is if you're basing the platform on what's being listed on Metacritic or OpenCritic, sometimes that's incorrect. If a review doesn't state what it's being reviewed on, those sites will often assume and assign a platform. We've had that happen to us a few times (and it's why we list the review platform in our disclosure at the bottom of each review now).
I do think it's weird a site with a PC-focus would opt for a console review, but given the fact that most freelance critics I know and work with don't have a powerful PC, there might not have been much choice - otherwise there might not be a review on the site. Sometimes them's the breaks, speaking as an editor who has to make those calls on occasion. (And as mostly PC-focused site here, there are tons of pitches and reviewers we can't work with because they just do not have PCs - nature of the beast).
Keep in mind that many sites use freelancers for reviews because of the time commitment involved. So that plays into as well. The main staff might all be pc players, but if they had to freelance the review out, ps5 might have been the only platform available to that reviewer.
It is weird that a PC-centric site would have a console review, but with the time commitment involved with reviewing a 40-60 hour rpg on a deadline, that might have been the only way a review gets done, especially in such a busy review period like we’ve had.
I am sorry but that is a disgrace, a PC mag should review things only using the PC. As to why there are so many console reviews, it seems made for consoles for me, I can't see how anyone could think the PC was the primary platform here, so it makes sense to review on a console...unless you are a PC mag for heavens sake.
If it's this review, looks like they reviewed both versions:
Reviewing both versions is fine, in fact that is a way to tease out how good the UI and controls are for the PC which is often an issue for ports. But if they don't review the PC version that is beyond odd for me!
Comments
I think it's just how a person would stop moving if they ran. You stop on one leg. They just incorporated that.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
You have no idea what numbers Epic or EA Play have, you are making up numbers to support your opinion.
Confirmation bias.
Additionally, you are saying, with certainty, that if the player numbers on Steam do not hit 100,000 then the game is in trouble.
Was the critic and player liked Star Wars game, Star Wars Jedi Survivor they made in the same situation?
This game has more concurrent players and broke EA's record on Steam.
What success metric are you trying to hone in on with that number?
If EA considered all platforms and believed their main success would come from, say console sales, then perhaps it is a sum of its parts sort of sales goal. Meaning, we may not hit our goal with one platform and need to rely on diversification to create multiple revenue streams to achieve our ROI.
Which most companies do and EA has surely embraced.
If that is the case, and historical strategies say it is, then your made up '100,000' number for Steam players would be as baseless a claim as I believe it really is.
I also loved this comment in the comment section lol:
"They knew all the dragon age fans were getting old so they made sure to recap it for the dementia patients."
"We should applaud BioWare for being the first developer to make their games fully accessible to those with complete short term memory loss."
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
- ~144.3 k by PlayTracker
- ~280.3 k by VG Insights
- ~429.2 k by Gamalytic
At 85k player peak https://steamdb.info/app/1845910/charts/ they might have if you take into account the time zones it has surpassed 100k game purchases for sure. The other three are estimates for steam. Although the 429k number is way too generous.Console probably surpasses Steam numbers as there is a hungry crowd of console players willing to buy these types of games.
Also bear in mind the high sales figures of Inquisition came over a 3 year period.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
It is irritating, like those TV documentaries and travel shows that start with a run down of what you are going to see, then have a run down of what you are going to see before the ad break, then after the ad break have a nod to what you just saw and then a run down of what you will see next, then finish with a summing up of what you have just seen in the whole programme.
It's not like dumbing down is confined to gaming guys. It reminds me of the way the Tele Tubbies showed the TV bit twice so the five year olds got it!
Sometimes only one platform is available, or there is a delay on other platforms in the review process, but more often than not if it's multiplatform, we choose what platform we want to review it on, not the developer or publisher.
In this instance, we chose PC. For Metaphor, we reviewed it on PC (which is what I chose), but were offered an Xbox and Playstation code as well for other writers for potential features, guides, etc. For New World: Aeternum, even though I own it on PC, I asked for an Xbox code since console was the big push with that game.
Just for some added clarity on how the process works.
I did find it strange that a site called PC GAMES reviewed the game on the PS5...
Sign of the times I guess.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
I bet half the scores are either a ZERO with the reasons of (and I quote) "Garbage Woke Game!!!!" or a 10 with the reason being it's (and I quote) "demasking all the riduculus homophobics "
I wish there was a way to filter out the 0's and 10s and just read the ones from normal folks.
All time classic MY NEW FAVORITE POST! (Keep laying those bricks)
"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator
Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017.
Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018
"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018
Is this Hogwarts legacy all over again with it's game community in-fighting?
Fishing on Gilgamesh since 2013
Fishing on Bronzebeard since 2005
Fishing in RL since 1992
Born with a fishing rod in my hand in 1979
I haven't seen the review that is being mentioned here, but one thing I'll also note is if you're basing the platform on what's being listed on Metacritic or OpenCritic, sometimes that's incorrect. If a review doesn't state what it's being reviewed on, those sites will often assume and assign a platform. We've had that happen to us a few times (and it's why we list the review platform in our disclosure at the bottom of each review now).
I do think it's weird a site with a PC-focus would opt for a console review, but given the fact that most freelance critics I know and work with don't have a powerful PC, there might not have been much choice - otherwise there might not be a review on the site. Sometimes them's the breaks, speaking as an editor who has to make those calls on occasion. (And as mostly PC-focused site here, there are tons of pitches and reviewers we can't work with because they just do not have PCs - nature of the beast).
https://www.pcgames.de/Dragon-Age-The-Veilguard-Spiel-74702/Tests/Review-Rollenspiel-epische-Geschichte-tolle-Charaktere-viel-Lore-1458467/4/
It's listed under PC Reviews on Metacritic too.