The video game review process is broken. It’s bad for readers, writers and games.

I just gotta disagree with this entirely, buggy unplayable messes get harsh scores.

Cyberpunk has a score 57

FO76 has a score of 49

These are probably the two most famous, recent, examples of what you're talking about and they got bad scores.

They are harsh when games are released, worth being criticized that harshly. The thing is, publishers do their own in house scoring and won't release until it is an acceptable standard in most cases. Some games get cancelled all together because the product just isn't working out, even if the game is decent.

AAA games don't get bad scores, because they tend to be released in a great state and they're a good game on top of that. If they're not, they get horrible reviews and bad sales. Publishers would go under if they consistently released 4/10-6/10 games.

Games aren't like movies, TV, music, where a poorly made product can still sell well. Games are software and poorly made software is unenjoyable to pretty much anyone who uses it. They are buggy, unplayable, boring, frustrating and an all round bad experience.

Hype hasn't done shit IMO. Games are the only properly rated media in my experience. If a game in consistently rated 10/10 across the board. Like TLOU2, GoW18, RDR2, the GTA games. It's gonna be a great game. If a game consistenly gets 4/10s across the board, it's gonna be a shit game.

/r/Games Thread Parent Link -