Resident Evil 6 is not a poor game.

I got RE6 on PSN via a deal for PS Plus users for only $14.96 recently, and somehow in these sixty hour work weeks I've been pulling at work for two months straight now, I actually found time to play it.  Granted, I am playing it late, and I already have the camera patch, (I adjusted camera options to ten each) but I'm not seeing what I would consider a 4.5 game here.  I'm referring to the Gamespot review, of course.  I don't actually read reviews anymore, still haven't read that one. (I already bought the game after all)  I just noticed the review score when I added it to my collection.

Maybe the scale has been adjusted lately for a broader range than 7 through 10 and I missed it.  But back in my day *spits in bucket* a 4.5 was a fundamentally broken game. As in, it did not function on a basic level, large chunks of the game glitched out and messed up, etc.  RE6 seems like a fine stable game though.  Especially without the camera issues, this is not a 4.5 game, it is ever was.  For the low price I paid, Leon's campaign by itself is worth it.  It's beefy, has great atmosphere, and is pretty much feeling like RE5 with more natural freedom of movement.  Yeah, a lot of QTE's, but I'm on the side that doesn't mind them so long as they are well implemented, and I think these are. (QTE's with unreasonable reaction times that can't be passed the first time are bad ones)

Did the camera really make that much of a difference?

it is not a 4.5 but then again this is lolspot, expecting any decent or fair review is a joke.

But those are your tears.

Gamespot's trying to be edgy recently. They have done this with quite a few reviews. i never got to play the game myself, but dvader had a blast with it and the game's mechanics sounded a lot deeper than 99% of the shooters out there.

I cant believe RE6 is cheaper on PSN than it is on Steam. I wants it on PC!!

I think it's a great game. The campaigns can be inconsistent, but it's still pretty fun. I'm currently doing a playthrough on No Hope, and I'm enjoying it even more.

I'd say it's about 5.5

Didn't it get mixed reviews?

I am still interested in one day playing RE6 for the co-op aspect, but I've heard it's a pretty bad game in a lot of ways.

I haven't played it but I'm sure a 4.5 is too low

i think it was an honest review. however, i think part of the backlash towards it is just that gamespot doesn't have a lot of precedents for giving a negative review to a game in which they do not believe the main problem lies in glitches. i think it's a good precedent to have. otherwise...

"Epic Mickey has so many issues that once you overcome one thing there are a half dozen more problems beating you down. Imprecise controls and boring objectives make progress a chore, and a troublesome camera ensures you won't even be able to see where you need to go a lot of the time. It's a shame the gameplay is so frustrating in Epic Mickey because the story and visuals do give you a solid incentive to play. But it's just not worth the effort. Every gameplay scenario is fraught with problems, and there are very few good moments to look forward to after enduring all the lousy parts. Epic Mickey shows that even a good implementation of a cherished license can't overcome an abundance of fundamental design flaws."

that's the closing paragraph of the epic mickey review. it's the bottom line. tom clearly thinks it sucks. for whatever reason, he gave it a "fair" 6. i'm not one to fret over scores, but that doesn't seem like adjective i'd use to summarize that review.

i think it was an honest review. however, i think part of the backlash towards it is just that gamespot doesn't have a lot of precedents for giving a negative review to a game in which they do not believe the main problem lies in glitches. i think it's a good precedent to have. otherwise...

LoG-Sacrament

no, the backlash is because the game is not a 4.5 period, gamespot and its reviews over the years i have watched them are becoming a joke. Giving a game an unfair score is bad no matter how you may want to put it, there isn-t a single person that has played it between my friends and myself that think it deserves a score that low and seeing gaming forums, that opinion is general.

RE 6 was horrible (Besides Leon's campiagn...I guess.) They literally destroyed the whole series this game was laughable with zombies having guns. I'm long time fan since like 1st grade watching my friend's brothers play the 1st and 2nd game. RE 4 was so well done but seriosuly 6 was just laughable. I have faith for evil within though (new game from RE 1 creator) 

RE 6 was horrible (Besides Leon's campiagn...I guess.) They literally destroyed the whole series this game was laughable with zombies having guns. I'm long time fan since like 1st grade watching my friend's brothers play the 1st and 2nd game. RE 4 was so well done but seriosuly 6 was just laughable. I have faith for evil within though (new game from RE 1 creator) 

milkshakes793

[QUOTE="LoG-Sacrament"]

i think it was an honest review. however, i think part of the backlash towards it is just that gamespot doesn't have a lot of precedents for giving a negative review to a game in which they do not believe the main problem lies in glitches. i think it's a good precedent to have. otherwise...

Krelian-co

no, the backlash is because the game is not a 4.5 period, gamespot and its reviews over the years i have watched them are becoming a joke. Giving a game an unfair score is bad no matter how you may want to put it, there isn-t a single person that has played it between my friends and myself that think it deserves a score that low and seeing gaming forums, that opinion is general.

You didn't even read the original reviewwhite_sox

Obviously standards have changed, and if no notice was posted here, I probably didn't see it. To each their own, as they say. I also noticed Ni No Kuni scored a 9.0 here, and I hated that. *shrugs* One mans trash is anthers treasure. Reminds me of how IGN rated God Hand for the PS2 a 3 something, and GS gave it an 8.0 score. (IGN also gave Deadly Premonition something in that range) It's all really confusing, which is why I just stopped using reviews.

[QUOTE="white_sox"]You didn't even read the original reviewRandolph

On top of that, no one should fully trust in the reviewier's opinion, no matter how intelligent they sound. People need to realize that the games they play brings out their own, unqiue experience. One gamer, like Kevin VanOrd, may have felt that RE6 was a complete joke, yet another gamer like Dvader thinks the game is the shit. It all depends on how you feel about it as you're playing through it. You're pretty much doing the right thing here, Randolph; you are trusting your own judgement rather than somebody else's judgment on the game. Thus, at least in your opinion, the time with the game is not wasted at all and for you, that's a good thing!

I wonder what the extra Multiplayer DLC is like ? It definately wasn't tacked on.Lulekani

I thought the game was most definitely a 4.5. The controls are absolutely awful as is the level design and QTEs plus it may be one of the most unpolished AAA experiences I've ever played. I've had QTEs straight up not trigger despite me pressing the button in time. 

I thought the game was most definitely a 4.5. The controls are absolutely awful as is the level design and QTEs plus it may be one of the most unpolished AAA experiences I've ever played. I've had QTEs straight up not trigger despite me pressing the button in time. 

Systems_Id

[QUOTE="Systems_Id"]

I thought the game was most definitely a 4.5. The controls are absolutely awful as is the level design and QTEs plus it may be one of the most unpolished AAA experiences I've ever played. I've had QTEs straight up not trigger despite me pressing the button in time. 

Randolph

That knife fight was epic. I downloaded RE4 HD for PS3 and I'm stuck on the actual Krauser boss fight. Good lawd is that ish hard.

I agree RE6 isn't a 4.5, I never trust GS reviews specially ones coming from Kevin V since he's so inconsistent with his reviews. RE6 is more like a 7 or 7.5 game specially with the camera patch (I had no problems with the camera before hand). The only negative things I can say about RE6 was Leons last boss fight was pretty bad and Jakes campaign was pretty meh, other than that RE6 was pretty good and I'll even say it was better than RE5.

If you were one of those people who thought RE6 was gonna be better than RE4,RE2,RE1 remake and RE CVX then you were hyping the game wrong. It's pretty sad when a good majority of the people who bashed RE6 didn't even play it or they do the "I watched my friend play it" excuse. Also when people complain about the QTE's in RE6, guess what RE4 had just as many QTE's as RE6 did.

While I don't think anyone will claim RE6 was some fantastic pinnacle of gaming, I agree a 4.5 was too low.  The problem isn't just with this particular review of one particularly lackluster game.  Gamespot's reviews are wildly inconsistent, It's as if they have no guidelines that every reviewer must follow when scoring a game or writing the review.

You see this A LOT in the games that score between 6.0-7.5.  Many times what is said in the review does not reflect the score given.  I recall many times reading a review for a game that got a 7.0 when the review was mostly positive and never stressed the negative points, making me ask why the game only got a 7.0.  Other times, they will have reviews that are also a 7.0 that are pretty much entirely negative, stressing the game brings nothing new to the table or certain mechanics just don't feel refined or well implemented, yet these games also get a 7.0.

In my personal opinion, Gamespot has the nasty habit of busting down a games review scores if they don't fix genre-wide issues.  How many MMORPG's has Kevin V busted way down because they only make minor tweaks and changes to the standard formula?  How many fighting games has Max McGee come down on because they don't do a good job of walking newbies through every little thing about the fighting system?

While I don't think anyone will claim RE6 was some fantastic pinnacle of gaming, I agree a 4.5 was too low.  The problem isn't just with this particular review of one particularly lackluster game.  Gamespot's reviews are wildly inconsistent, It's as if they have no guidelines that every reviewer must follow when scoring a game or writing the review.

 

You see this A LOT in the games that score between 6.0-7.5.  Many times what is said in the review does not reflect the score given.  I recall many times reading a review for a game that got a 7.0 when the review was mostly positive and never stressed the negative points, making me ask why the game only got a 7.0.  Other times, they will have reviews that are also a 7.0 that are pretty much entirely negative, stressing the game brings nothing new to the table or certain mechanics just don't feel refined or well implemented, yet these games also get a 7.0.

 

In my personal opinion, Gamespot has the nasty habit of busting down a games review scores if they don't fix genre-wide issues.  How many MMORPG's has Kevin V busted way down because they only make minor tweaks and changes to the standard formula?  How many fighting games has Max McGee come down on because they don't do a good job of walking newbies through every little thing about the fighting system?

keech

Ironically Kevin gave GW2 a 9, even when he was playing a Necro which was a glitchy/bugged class. He trys to be an idealist when it comes to reviews but it just makes him look bad specially when he came out and said he wanted to score games lower and "make games earn that 8+ score".

I think it's a great game. The campaigns can be inconsistent, but it's still pretty fun. I'm currently doing a playthrough on No Hope, and I'm enjoying it even more.

LASer354

People are STILL sour about that RE6 review? Good God...

[QUOTE="keech"]

While I don't think anyone will claim RE6 was some fantastic pinnacle of gaming, I agree a 4.5 was too low.  The problem isn't just with this particular review of one particularly lackluster game.  Gamespot's reviews are wildly inconsistent, It's as if they have no guidelines that every reviewer must follow when scoring a game or writing the review.

 

You see this A LOT in the games that score between 6.0-7.5.  Many times what is said in the review does not reflect the score given.  I recall many times reading a review for a game that got a 7.0 when the review was mostly positive and never stressed the negative points, making me ask why the game only got a 7.0.  Other times, they will have reviews that are also a 7.0 that are pretty much entirely negative, stressing the game brings nothing new to the table or certain mechanics just don't feel refined or well implemented, yet these games also get a 7.0.

 

In my personal opinion, Gamespot has the nasty habit of busting down a games review scores if they don't fix genre-wide issues.  How many MMORPG's has Kevin V busted way down because they only make minor tweaks and changes to the standard formula?  How many fighting games has Max McGee come down on because they don't do a good job of walking newbies through every little thing about the fighting system?

Ballroompirate

Ironically Kevin gave GW2 a 9, even when he was playing a Necro which was a glitchy/bugged class. He trys to be an idealist when it comes to reviews but it just makes him look bad specially when he came out and said he wanted to score games lower and "make games earn that 8+ score".

An excellent point about GW2.  Don't get me wrong I like GW2, I think It's a very well made game, but after a week of playing it I felt the same tired old MMO habits creeping into my soul. 

While at the same time he gives a game like Rift an 8, which was about as polished and full featured as you could possibly expect an MMO to be at launch.  Admittedly I felt Rift stuck a little too close to the tiered gear grind progression.  Though their legit attempt to make dynamic content that just randomly happens as you're playing was fun.  I was also impressed that they (mostly) managed to balance pvp and pve without having them effect each other.

Also look at Tera, which got a 7.5.  The game has some pretty major development support issues, but that was in no way apparent when the review was published.  IMO the combat in Tera was better than GW2 and the game was graphically superior to just about every MMO on the market.

Also sorry, I didn't mean to hi-jack this thread.  Back on topic:

RE6 was about a 6 out of 10 to me.  Nothing about the game was massively broken.  I never encountered any game-breaking bugs or glitches.  The controls could be a bit awkward, but never to to the point where I felt they just weren't working as intended.

The problem with RE6 was that it was 1) trying to appeal to non-Resident Evil gamers by impersonating games like Call of Duty and Uncharted.  2) It was a mash-up of half developed ideas from a team of developers who just weren't good enough to pull it off.  All the talent left Capcom awhile ago, so all the major franchises they have are now in the hands of people who just aren't up to task.

A lot of games are not what Gamespot says they are.

[QUOTE="Ballroompirate"]

[QUOTE="keech"]

While I don't think anyone will claim RE6 was some fantastic pinnacle of gaming, I agree a 4.5 was too low.  The problem isn't just with this particular review of one particularly lackluster game.  Gamespot's reviews are wildly inconsistent, It's as if they have no guidelines that every reviewer must follow when scoring a game or writing the review.

 

You see this A LOT in the games that score between 6.0-7.5.  Many times what is said in the review does not reflect the score given.  I recall many times reading a review for a game that got a 7.0 when the review was mostly positive and never stressed the negative points, making me ask why the game only got a 7.0.  Other times, they will have reviews that are also a 7.0 that are pretty much entirely negative, stressing the game brings nothing new to the table or certain mechanics just don't feel refined or well implemented, yet these games also get a 7.0.

 

In my personal opinion, Gamespot has the nasty habit of busting down a games review scores if they don't fix genre-wide issues.  How many MMORPG's has Kevin V busted way down because they only make minor tweaks and changes to the standard formula?  How many fighting games has Max McGee come down on because they don't do a good job of walking newbies through every little thing about the fighting system?

keech

Ironically Kevin gave GW2 a 9, even when he was playing a Necro which was a glitchy/bugged class. He trys to be an idealist when it comes to reviews but it just makes him look bad specially when he came out and said he wanted to score games lower and "make games earn that 8+ score".

An excellent point about GW2.  Don't get me wrong I like GW2, I think It's a very well made game, but after a week of playing it I felt the same tired old MMO habits creeping into my soul. 

While at the same time he gives a game like Rift an 8, which was about as polished and full featured as you could possibly expect an MMO to be at launch.  Admittedly I felt Rift stuck a little too close to the tiered gear grind progression.  Though their legit attempt to make dynamic content that just randomly happens as you're playing was fun.  I was also impressed that they (mostly) managed to balance pvp and pve without having them effect each other.

Also look at Tera, which got a 7.5.  The game has some pretty major development support issues, but that was in no way apparent when the review was published.  IMO the combat in Tera was better than GW2 and the game was graphically superior to just about every MMO on the market.

Also sorry, I didn't mean to hi-jack this thread.  Back on topic:

RE6 was about a 6 out of 10 to me.  Nothing about the game was massively broken.  I never encountered any game-breaking bugs or glitches.  The controls could be a bit awkward, but never to to the point where I felt they just weren't working as intended.

The problem with RE6 was that it was 1) trying to appeal to non-Resident Evil gamers by impersonating games like Call of Duty and Uncharted.  2) It was a mash-up of half developed ideas from a team of developers who just weren't good enough to pull it off.  All the talent left Capcom awhile ago, so all the major franchises they have are now in the hands of people who just aren't up to task.

People are STILL sour about that RE6 review? Good God...

Lucky_Krystal

i'm sour about the bunch of crap reviews from gamespot actually, i would understand if it was just one.

...and just when the comment section was starting to recover from that shitstorm.

I would say it perfectly deserves that 4.5...

...and just when the comment section was starting to recover from that shitstorm.Goyoshi12

It never recovered, man. It never recovered.

People are STILL sour about that RE6 review? Good God...

Lucky_Krystal

I'm never making another thread that mentions a review score though, obviously the politics of scoring are still a big thing... and like real politics, divisive.Randolph

Which is ridiculous. They're reviews. Hardly anything of import. How people can get so angry at them baffles me.

[QUOTE="Randolph"]I'm never making another thread that mentions a review score though, obviously the politics of scoring are still a big thing... and like real politics, divisive.c_rake

Which is ridiculous. They're reviews. Hardly anything of import. How people can get so angry at them baffles me.

I believe Mr.Watchtower likely has a good remembrance of that one. ;)

[QUOTE="Lucky_Krystal"]

People are STILL sour about that RE6 review? Good God...

Randolph

Kevin openly admitted wanting to "judge"/review games more harshly on GS, it was about a week before they did the article about "7 is still an awesome score for games so don't pass up on them".

[QUOTE="Randolph"]

[QUOTE="Lucky_Krystal"]

People are STILL sour about that RE6 review? Good God...

Ballroompirate

Kevin openly admitted wanting to "judge"/review games more harshly on GS, it was about a week before they did the article about "7 is still an awesome score for games so don't pass up on them".

The problem is when they changed the score metric, they screwed everything up.  For years GS conditioned their readers to believe that a 7 is average at best, but usually has some big problems you have to overlook to enjoy.  When you suddenly scale down your metric and try to claim games that score a 7 are still really good and worth playing, It's a pretty big jump considering the games that score a 6 or lower are usually pretty terrible games.

This wouldn't be so bad if they would just come right out and say "this is our scoring metric and these are our guildlines when reviewing a game that every single person on our staff follows", but they don't, and we get a lot of wildly different reviews from different reviewers.  Some reviews which the information therein can drastically clash with the score given.

This is kind of where I agree with Adam Sessler's take on review scores.  That if you can't boil down a score to a 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5, then your scoring table is to complicated.  That there's virtually no quantifiable difference between a game that gets a 7.0 and a game that gets a 7.5.

 I'm not sour at all, just made an observation and statement, but I can't control how people respond. Apparently GS DID change the way they grade games to greater encompass the 1 through 10 scoring system, so I guess that answers why the harsh score was there. I enjoy a lot of games that get shit scores here, I still think PN03 is a godly game.  I'm never making another thread that mentions a review score though, obviously the politics of scoring are still a big thing... and like real politics, divisive.

Randolph

Well I wasn't trying to attack you specifically.

It was a general statement. Its just, that review was so long ago and people still bring it up to badmouth Gamespot and Kevin. I just don't get why people get so upset over one person's opinion. Sure it sucks that someone may not like your favorite game, but still. I just don't think its anything worth having a months long tirade over. Or stooping to petty insults and personal attacks.

And I'm not saying you did any of this Randolf. Even still, you're never going to agree with everything GS says about every game. Resident evil 6 was met with mixed reception by both fans and critics anyhow. If you look on Metacritic, GS score isn't even the lowest.  It gets tiring hearing people bring up the same reviews for 7 months out of pure bitterness. If you enjoy the game then enjoy it and have fun. Don't listen to what some other guy behind a computer says.

Getting hung up on numbers is even worse than getting hung up on reviews, but I didn't think much of RE6 after playing the demo (of course I didn't buy the full game because if one doesn't enjoy the demo there is no sense in buying the full game). Here are my old (and current) thoughts on the demo.

I like the variety and commend Capcom for offering such a meaty demo, but the graphics were too dark, the controls too mushy, the camera was too close and too spastic and the AI of the enemies which were supposed to be intelligent is terrible. I might pick this up at a reduced price but $60 is too much.

[QUOTE="Goyoshi12"]...and just when the comment section was starting to recover from that shitstorm.c_rake

It never recovered, man. It never recovered.

No, it appears it never did. I guess I just filtered all the comments out of my head and trained my brain to blur out the comments pertaining to RE6.