Jump to content
Awoo.

TheOcelot
 Share

Dreadknux
Message added by Dreadknux,

Split this from the Megathread as it was new news.

Recommended Posts

Review aggregates update.

Opencritic - 75 "Strong" (37 reviews), 51% of reviewers would recommend

Metacritic: PS4 - 76 "Generally favorable" (35 reviews), NSW - 73 "Mixed and/or average" (4 reviews), XBO - N/A (1 review), PC - N/A (no reviews)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Switch scores are genuinely surprising. Even the ones that explicitly mention the glitches only go as low as 6/10.

How can a game be seemingly so critically strong despite being held together by gum and tape? And also never get much higher than an 8?

A very aggressive "I had a good time. It could be better but I would love to replay it." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, NoKaine said:

The Switch scores are genuinely surprising. Even the ones that explicitly mention the glitches only go as low as 6/10.

How can a game be seemingly so critically strong despite being held together by gum and tape? And also never get much higher than an 8?

A very aggressive "I had a good time. It could be better but I would love to replay it." 

As you have to mess about with menus to encounter the worst bugs, the reviews simply never encountered most of the bad ones when they played the game.

 

One thing about testing is that the number of hours played on launch day will massively exceed the amount of testing a company could possibly do (due to the vast amount of players), and that some players will do unexpected things, which is how things can be completely missed.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

VisionaryofSUPER
1 hour ago, NoKaine said:

The Switch scores are genuinely surprising. Even the ones that explicitly mention the glitches only go as low as 6/10.

How can a game be seemingly so critically strong despite being held together by gum and tape? And also never get much higher than an 8?

A very aggressive "I had a good time. It could be better but I would love to replay it." 

Well, in NintendoLife's case, their 3 reviewers just hadn't encountered them. It's a glitch you do genuinely have to go out of your way to cause happen and when you're just a reviewer, you're not guaranteed to cause something like this to happen.

  • Thumbs Up 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly that. I think I said earlier (and not to downplay the official problems discovered), but a lot of the bigger issues have to actively be hunted out, so 99% of players just wouldn’t/won’t have come across it.

The other issues sound annoying but clearly are not game breaking, and hopefully will also be looked into.

So the fact that (on switch especially) that the game is scoring an average of around 7.5 isn’t surprising because the game itself still holds up well and isn’t really all that “broken” overall.

The Sonic fanbase of course will highlight any issue and really focus on these things when they are discovered. So on here it will naturally go between “this shit is annoying” to “end of the world” problems with the game as we care a lot more about the quality of the franchise.

When you balance this to the reality of it for most players or reviewers of course they won’t notice the intricacies that we would scrutinise. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BadBehavior

Its like Cyberpunk 2077. Even the PC version wasnt exactly free of bugs but reviewers raved about it for the most part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shaddy Zaphod

I would disagree. Cyberpunk is exactly the game you probably could make a "biased reviewers" argument about. I don't know if CDPR was directly paying review sites or anything, but the amount of PR, promotion, and hype for a 7-year vaporware game, possibly the most hyped AAA game of the decade, was such that giving it a negative review or focusing on the horrible technical issues or toxic work culture of CDPR would actively endanger the reputation of a given review site.

That's not to excuse anything about Colors Ultimate, mind you. I think it's just more likely that the reviewers didn't happen to run into major issues. There's just nothing about the game that would incentivize game journalists to give it a different score than it deserves in their opinion. Let's remember, this topic started with a guy claiming it would get worse reviews because supposedly reviewers are biased against Sonic.

  • Thumbs Up 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BadBehavior said:

Its like Cyberpunk 2077. Even the PC version wasnt exactly free of bugs but reviewers raved about it for the most part.

Mmm, No. This is nothing like Cyberpunk 2077 - that was a broken mess across lots of platforms (and as said in the above post)

Colours has its fair share of minor niggles which will irritate the larger fanbase, and a major glitch which has to be rooted out and activated in a specific way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TheOcelot

With today being the official release of the physical version more reviews have been added to Metacritic:

The Switch has 5 reviews and currently sits at 65 - ouch

Xbone has 4 reviews and sits at 75

PS4 has 46 reviews and is holding steady at 76

Meanwhile the PC Epic release hasn't had any reviews so far....

Opencritic score of 74

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon
16 hours ago, BadBehavior said:

Its like Cyberpunk 2077. Even the PC version wasnt exactly free of bugs but reviewers raved about it for the most part.

It's no where close to Cyberpunk 2077. Lol.

Compared to the mass corruption, tomfoolery bug programming, non-existent quality control, and bug-ridden ventures make Ultimate look supremely patched by comparison.

Hell, meme 'em all you want, the bugs in Ultimate don't reach the infamy of Cyberpunk 2077. Hell, unlike 2077, it's clear that glitch-free experiences are relatively common in Ultimate whereas with Cyberpunk, you'd be lucky to take two steps in that game without something going wrong.

That's to say nothing of potentially bribed reviews in Cyberpunk's case.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ryannumber1Scarer
39 minutes ago, Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon said:

That's to say nothing of potentially bribed reviews in Cyberpunk's case.

To be fair - when initial reviews came out for Cyberpunk 2077, CDPR specifically only gave out review codes for the PC version - which was the most stable experience by far, and from there, immense hype from the game more or less carried it to the ridiculously overrated status it has. Several review sites - after the news broke about how broken the console ports were - then took it upon themselves to do a second review to clarify the situation and call out how shit the console ports were:

It's unlikely to be a case of bribery, more that CDPR was purposefully misleading review sites and hiding the information behind the actual state of the console ports of the game.

It's besides the point, given this is about Colours, but it's important to state that after the ridiculous tangent we had earlier in the thread regarding Sonic and Pokemon scores. 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon

Hence why I put it down as "potentially". There was a lot to suggest that some of the glowing reviews may have been bribed, but nothing solid came of it.

30 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

It's unlikely to be a case of bribery, more that CDPR was purposefully misleading review sites and hiding the information behind the actual state of the console ports of the game.

Either are scummy,  but I do see your point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/5/2021 at 2:30 AM, Ryannumber1gamer said:

Can I just say - screw the Big Chasers in this version of the game. They took an annoying enemy from Colours as is, somehow managed to make him more annoying (If you dash ahead in certain sections, you can have the camera outpan him so you can see his attacks any longer), and sometimes he just gets random speed boosts out of absolutely nowhere so he can still land a hit on Sonic even if boosting - this actually lost me my S-Rank on Terminal Velocity Act 1 due to him managing to hit me literally as the level faded out and I was boosting at that, making me lose my ring bonus.

Worst of the lot however is a graphical bug in Terminal Velocity Act 1 where - once you get to the section where you have to outrun Big Chaser while Motobugs flood the screen, one of the lasers will glitch out and not show any visuals, making it a complete and total guess as to where he's going to hit. This means it's practically RNG at the last section of the level, and if you die, you redo the entirety of it all over again. This sucked in the original game, and it's even worse now.

The Big Chasers seem identical to the original for me.  The trick I find is to ration your boost - keep in range of them, do a quick boost to dodge their swing attack, quick-step the lasers if you went far enough to trigger them, repeat.  On TV1, once the camera pans out and they're no longer on-screen, you can start holding down boost the entire time until the end of the stage.  As long as you are killing motobugs constantly as you go, the boost meter will stay filled.  If you're boosting the whole time, the lasers won't reach you no matter where they are (can't say I've had the glitch where either laser is invisible on PC, but if you're boosting you don't need to see them anyway - they were too short notice to dodge afer the camera changes in the original too anyway).  I got an S rank on TV1 using this method (which seems to pretty much come down to "max out the quick-step bonus as fast as possible during the safer parts of the stage by constantly flicking back and forth between legitimate dodges, and then just don't get hit until the end so your rings mean something when the score is tallied up at the end".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Review aggregate update.

Opencritic - 73 "Fair" (43 reviews), 49% of reviewers would recommend

Metacritic: PS4 - 74 "Mixed and/or average" (39 reviews), XBO - 72 "Mixed and/or average" (5 reviews), NSW - 65 "Mixed and/or average" (5 reviews), PC - N/A (no reviews)

The discrepancy between the “early access”/pre-release batch of reviews and the post-release reviews pouring in is becoming all the more apparent.

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nintendo World Report explicitly stated they had to delay their review because of the seizure glitches, so I would assume that other reviewers had to actively change their review to support their findings and gave it a lower score.

I would also think the very public reaction to the glitches also spurred more reviewers to mention them and rate accordingly.

I don't think there's some kind of conspiracy or willful ignorance on the positive reviewers' part, though. 

  • Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

End-of-week review aggregate update.

Opencritic: 74 "Fair" (54 reviews), 50% of reviewers would recommend

Metacritic:

PS4 - 74 "Mixed and/or average" (39 reviews)

XBO - 75 "Generally positive" (7 reviews)

NSW - 64 "Mixed and/or average" (6 reviews)

PC - N/A (1 review)

Will probably do one final review aggregate update a week from today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/8/2021 at 9:10 AM, NoKaine said:

Nintendo World Report explicitly stated they had to delay their review because of the seizure glitches, so I would assume that other reviewers had to actively change their review to support their findings and gave it a lower score.

I would also think the very public reaction to the glitches also spurred more reviewers to mention them and rate accordingly.

I don't think there's some kind of conspiracy or willful ignorance on the positive reviewers' part, though. 

So I saw the CVG podcast a few days ago, and according to a reviewer who's friends with the crew, it's possible the issues were a result of a patch.

To be more specific, reviewers were given early review copies of the game which were apparently more stable when they played and reviewed the game, and when a patch was loaded, that's when the bugs and glitches reared their ugly heads.

That's what I understood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Metascore update, one week after release.

Opencritic: 74 "Fair" (69 reviews), 51% of reviewers would recommend

Metacritic:

PS4 - 74 "Mixed and/or average" (45 reviews)

XBO - 74 "Mixed and/or average" (9 reviews)

NSW - 64 "Mixed and/or average" (10 reviews)

PC - N/A (1 review)

I think the metascores have stabilized by this point (any future reviews will probably be in the same nature of the ones we have now), and I'm not expecting much more reviews to be posted afterwards anyway. So unless the score changes significantly (at least by a 2 or more point difference from where they are now), these are likely the final standings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.