• edible_funk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    I mean, they did review well. I guess not according to your unquestionable criteria but you don’t get to say in the seventies is bad. And it’s funny that people always mention botw and elden ring like they don’t do exactly the same thing but with their own gimmicks (and intentionally bad design) attached.

    • ampersandrew@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Ubisoft games put a tower on your map and then reveal other activity icons on your map once you climb it that it expects you to clear. Breath of the Wild asks you to use your eyes to decide what you find interesting from the top of the tower. Elden Ring has different types of rewards tied to certain types of locations, but it expects you to put together what those rules are on your own. There’s a huge difference there.

      I guess not according to your unquestionable criteria but you don’t get to say in the seventies is bad.

      I said reviewing in the 70s tends to not result in a sales bump. In order to average in the 70s, you’ve got far more negative reviews in the mix than a game that reviews in the mid 80s or low 90s. It doesn’t end up so unanimously praised that people can’t shut up about how much they love it, which drives sales, generally. I’m not here to talk you out of a game you enjoy. I really enjoyed Screamer and Invincible VS this year, and I’d call them both great games, both rated 77 on OpenCritic. Neither sold phenomenally well. If they’re lucky, those projects were scoped accordingly so that they were able to turn a profit and continue employing those developers.