• 100 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#1 Posted by Fredchuckdave (5353 posts) -

The metacritic for Last of Us recently went down to 95/100; a horrific score to be sure; what greater failure could there be than 95%. 95 is almost 94, which Bioshock Infinite is down to now and we all know what a horrible game that was. Anyway this is because of some random guy's review here. Scoring a game poorly to generate publicity is an amusing thing to do and I'm all for it but the comment sections are where the true gold lies.

I haven't actually read the review since I stopped reading them for fear of spoiling the game but I did look at his Starcraft 2: HoTS review which is so awesomely God awful as to generate mad respect for this divergent reviewer; to opaquely review something poorly surely requires massive cajones, or you know just being an idiot. But I'm sure his Last of Us review is probably not half bad comparitively; I mean I agreed with his AC3 review mostly so that's something.

#2 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

Wait, so you can just create your own random site that not many people have heard of, and it'll actually count for Metacritic? Resume material ahoy!

#3 Edited by Marcsman (3177 posts) -
He is a douche

#4 Posted by devilzrule27 (1239 posts) -

Wait, so you can just create your own random site that not many people have heard of, and it'll actually count for Metacritic? Resume material ahoy!

If only the folks at Obsidian knew about this after making New Vegas.

#5 Posted by leftie68 (215 posts) -

Wow both those reviews are hard to read. I get the gist, he hated the gameplay aspect of the game but loved the story and production value. It took him thousands of words to sh*t that out. Oh well, the mass hysteria on the comment section is hilarious.

#6 Edited by Zero_ (1973 posts) -

"If Bioshock Infinite was Irrational’s Christopher Nolan’s Inception, The Last of Us is Naughty Dog’s Cormac McCarthy’s The Road."

I don't have a dog in this fight, but jeeeeezus his writing is bad. Mentioning Bioshock 4 times in the review isn't helping - it's lazy and has no value to people who haven't played Bioshock. Clearly playing for clicks.

#7 Edited by fisk0 (4022 posts) -

@video_game_king: Quarter To Three have been around for a while, don't keep updated with them, but I've liked the reviews I've read from them so far. It's just goddamn crazy that people are so bothered by their scores lowering the metacritic average.

#8 Edited by BaconGames (3371 posts) -

Oh, you should have just said it was Tom Chick and everything would have made sense from the beginning. He kind of makes a career out of being hyper critical of games and has been doing so for ages. As much as I don't like him or take anything he says seriously, he's not just some random guy. I don't know too much about his personal history but yeah, this is just the latest corner of the internet he's carved out for himself to tear down video games as he sees fit. And to be fair, at no point does he really claim it's more than his personal views, but yeah (I could also be wrong about this).

#9 Posted by Colourful_Hippie (4337 posts) -

Dude is smart, he must be getting a huge amount of attention from this and threads like this continue to help him.

#10 Edited by Nictel (2403 posts) -

Dude is smart, he must be getting a huge amount of attention from this and threads like this continue to help him.

For this reason I am not going to click any links.

#11 Edited by AlmostSwedish (551 posts) -

I liked his review. He stated his opinion and backed it up. Seems like legit criticism to me.

#12 Edited by Rafaelfc (1327 posts) -

Enraged fans of products that are not even out yet really annoy me.

#13 Edited by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -

I love how he, most of the time, spends an entire "review" talking more about 50 other games than the one he pretends to be reviewing.
But that's his internet-act. It's what made him popular and gave him a following.

It's kinda like those crazy people who move into a house and then people join that person in the house and they become their own little society of nutjobs.
Hopefully just with less suicides than those nutjobs in farmhouses have.

#14 Posted by Giantstalker (1623 posts) -

Read it, seems reasonable, don't see what the problem is. This never seemed like my type of game anyway, maybe I'm more accepting of less-than-stellar reviews.

It's not like he gave it a 1/5.

#15 Edited by jimmyfenix (3852 posts) -

HOLY SHIT THIS GAMES OUT TOMORROW

#16 Edited by Milkman (16637 posts) -

Who cares?

#17 Posted by Karkarov (3064 posts) -

I liked his review. He stated his opinion and backed it up. Seems like legit criticism to me.

I didn't read his whole review, but I read enough to learn 2 things. 1: He is a little pretentious and "art housy" as a reviewer, which I don't particularly like but understand. 2: The review is legit. If he did this just for the page hits he sure fooled me because what I read seemed pretty salient, reasonable, and was backed up by factual things from the game. He clearly didn't like it, tough. Truth is you would hate me as a reviewer too, because I wouldn't have scored Last of Us well either. Nor would I have scored any other Naughty Dog game well.

#18 Posted by Jimbo (9799 posts) -

95? Eww.

#19 Posted by Brodehouse (9842 posts) -

Tom Chick.

#20 Edited by Butano (1731 posts) -

I remember the Qt3 guy rating a game extremely low at one point that was kinda odd.....

Oh yea, his Halo 4 review, rating it a 1/5. He's pretty critical about games that don't satisfy his taste.

#21 Edited by Pr1mus (3868 posts) -

Ah yes, Tom Chick.

You know that guy was always much more critical than the average reviewer and this is something that is much needed. Unfortunately Tom also decided somewhere in the last 2 years to throw away any respect he had for himself, his readers and his job and decided that it was no longer necessary to try and find reasons to score games badly. He wasn't like that and for years there was merit to his reviews but no longer.

You know when people constantly accuses the likes of Kotaku of posting anything and everything with the sole intent of getting as many clicks as possible? Tom Chick as now been 100% that for a good 2 years now. It's really sad too because there is definitely a place for much more critical and harsher reviews but not the way he's been going at it for a while now.

#22 Edited by Fredchuckdave (5353 posts) -

@colourful_hippie: Word, I must figure out how to break the exceptionally low Metacritic legitimacy barrier!

#23 Posted by iAmJohn (6117 posts) -

Tom Chick continues to be Tom Chick, I see.

#24 Posted by Red (5994 posts) -

@zero_ said:

"If Bioshock Infinite was Irrational’s Christopher Nolan’s Inception, The Last of Us is Naughty Dog’s Cormac McCarthy’s The Road."

I don't have a dog in this fight, but jeeeeezus his writing is bad. Mentioning Bioshock 4 times in the review isn't helping - it's lazy and has no value to people who haven't played Bioshock. Clearly playing for clicks.

Oh boy, that really is a terrible, terrible line. Not only is it clunky (Irrational's Christopher Nolan's?) but it makes an asymmetrical comparison (video game to movie, video game to book), the first of which I would call a little bit ridiculous. I guess thematically Inception and Infinite both deal with regret and are a bit mind-trippy (Infinite far moreso than Inception) they're still miles apart. The comparison to The Road does make sense, kind of, but are either of these (in the canon of art, very recent) releases some sort of huge watermark studios will model games after in some sort of tribute? No.

He goes further: "If there’s any Hollywood in this game, it’s the downbeat art house Hollywood of the Coen Brothers’ True Grit, Joe Wright’s Hanna, or Benh Zeitlin’s Beasts of the Southern Wild. Young women coming of age in harsh times and the men who try to protect them." The point of the sentence is to introduce the main theme and characters of the game, and demonstrate that it has been done before. However, the sentence begins with a comparison to Hollywood, hot off a comparison in Uncharted's production values to that of a Hollywood film. A comparison to Hollywood (or really any sort of design studio) would be one involving style or production values, not plotline. A "downbeat art house" movie like Drive has a plot rather similar to a movie like Fast and the Furious; it's not the story that makes it art house, but rather its tone and visual style. The movies he uses as examples are perhaps the most different movies possible, in style and production values, with Beasts of the Southern Wild not really even counting as a Hollywood movie. Yet again, the examples he uses are very recent films.

Here are some other highlights:

"There will be no baptism. There is only the father and this child of men. Okay. The central question of Bioshock is “Dude, what if there were a million dimensions?” The central question of The Last of Us is, “How do you demonstrate that you love your daughter more than all the world?”
I haven't played the Last of Us, but those don't seem like the central questions of either game.

"Metro: Last Light is another linear shooter with sneaking elements (and a very similar theme), but it has a consistent gameplay identity, an ongoing setting and tone, a sense of focus that sustains it"
He seems to only be able to evaluate a game through comparisons.

"It visits urban jungles, suburban idylls, and even wilderness, but it’s always the same tortured rooms and hallways"
What is he saying here? That in the wilderness you walk through the same hallway and room models (or even outlines) as when you're indoors?

"But the zombies become oddly peripheral, and they’re way too silly. They’re fungus zombies. Did anyone think this wasn’t ridiculous?"
He finds it ridiculous that a disease could be spread through a fungus.

"Furthermore, the entire McGuffin that motivates the characters to make their journey is a disappointing cliche and nearly as eye-rolling as Milla Jovovich herself being the fifth element."
Another comparison to a movie completely unrelated to the game, if only to show that he has seen movies and has opinions about them.

"Furthermore, there are no stakes. There is no risk of failure in a game like this. There is only the risk of having to play the same section yet again."
What modern game hasn't used a system like that? He provides no comparison for this.

I'm fine with a reviewer not liking a game, but this is just awful.

#25 Edited by believer258 (11785 posts) -

Bioshock Infinite’s final note was the last piece of a mind-bending puzzle, more mind than heart, more concept than character. But the final note of The Last of Us is all heart, as broken as the world, small, fierce, withdrawn, resolved, salvation be damned. There will be no baptism. There is only the father and this child of men. Okay. The central question of Bioshock is “Dude, what if there were a million dimensions?” The central question of The Last of Us is, “How do you demonstrate that you love your daughter more than all the world?” I have immeasurable admiration that Naughty Dog has done this. I am proud that game designers are growing up and having children and expressing their power fantasies in a different context. I marvel at the emotional depth of Naughty Dog’s creation. And I therefore hate that I didn’t like the actual game piled onto this emotional depth.

I like this paragraph. In fact, I like it a lot, because the Uncharted games can be described in a similar way, only far more bent toward Hollywood action and characters and not Cormac McCarthy-ish dark and dreary worlds.

#26 Edited by Ben_H (3338 posts) -

quote:

Reviews are supposed to be OBJECTIVE. The criteria have to be the SAME every time. You can't just dismiss games because "you don't like them". I don't like movies like The Godfather. Does that mean I should get my own website to review it with a low score? Ridiculous.

Also I'm an adult idiot. Don't judge without knowing.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

That's rich.

#27 Edited by Fredchuckdave (5353 posts) -

@believer258: It's kind of poorly written is all, I could see that in someone else's hands being a well written interesting paragraph and not to say the guy doesn't have points but he sure as hell isn't good at expressing them. It's basically Simmons-esque writing without the punchy humor or tiredness. Maybe if Cormac McCarthy wrote a critical review of the Last of Us then this would all come full circle and the world would explode; dude's like 79 though.

Also the site just looks like garbage, not too many ways around that one. Quarter to Three's sickly blue and green colors depict a coming of an apocalypse delivered by aerobic viral pathogens; the most fearsome of which was deemed "Metacritic," a grisly vision of things to come.

#28 Edited by believer258 (11785 posts) -

@believer258: It's kind of poorly written is all, I could see that in someone else's hands being a well written interesting paragraph and not to say the guy doesn't have points but he sure as hell isn't good at expressing them. It's basically Simmons-esque writing without the punchy humor or tiredness. Maybe if Cormac McCarthy wrote a critical review of the Last of Us then this would all come full circle and the world would explode; dude's like 79 though.

Well, it's not the writing of it that I like. It's admittedly overwritten, to the point of being as silly as those popcorn-headed zombies he complained about, but it gets a point across that I've been trying to put into words for a while. I don't like Uncharted because the gameplay, throughout all three games, is dull and tedious and bland. The bombastic antics of Nathan Drake and the good dialogue coming from the characters makes those games, but I don't want to fucking play them. This is frustrating because Naughty Dog can make some great gameplay. Almost as frustrating as Insomniac making this and this.

#29 Posted by AiurFlux (902 posts) -

As somebody that has played and beat the game he's a fucking dolt. Plain and simple.

#30 Edited by Winternet (8014 posts) -

Are you criticizing his purposely low-score reviews for the purpose of gaining publicity while creating a thread with links to those reviews? Something doesn't sound right about that.

#31 Posted by Ramone (2961 posts) -

More power to him, I'm not going to read the review for fear of spoilers but 3/5 isn't a horrible score especially for someone who tends to utilise the full review scale.

#32 Posted by RonGalaxy (3095 posts) -

Oh no, a 95? That fucking bastard. As a hollow ass hole, I'm not allowed to play anything lower than a 96. Oh well, guess I won't download it on psn tonight

Online
#33 Posted by Pocky4Th3Win (134 posts) -

This website gave journey 2 stars... burn it to the ground!!!!

#34 Edited by Turtlebird95 (2360 posts) -

Tom Chick and Tom Mc Shea both gave the game less than perfect scores and they have the same first name this must be a conspiracy by M$ omgomg gehmz gerbilizm geyez

Mentality of the people commenting on Gamespot's Youtube review of The Last of Us.

#35 Posted by ShaggE (6415 posts) -

Holy shit, it's terrifying to think that those comments belong to people that actually exist in the real world. I really need to break my fascination with stuff like this. I spent way too long reading that "Public Shaming" tumblr yesterday, which already put me in a bad mood, and now these idiots.

I need a plug-in that changes every website's comment section to "Derp"s so I can stop myself from giving in to curiosity.

Online
#36 Posted by ArbitraryWater (11616 posts) -

Tom Chick has taken it upon himself to be the outlier and this is just a continuation of that trend. I'd be interested in seeing what he scores high, to be honest... Ok, his review scores don't actually seem to have any consistent trend other than that he seems to not have very good taste.

Online
#37 Posted by DrDarkStryfe (1106 posts) -

Tom Chick is the Armond White of game critics.

#38 Edited by Fredchuckdave (5353 posts) -

@winternet: No it's just funny to me, couldn't really discuss it without linking to it.

#39 Posted by davidwitten22 (1708 posts) -

I feel like this review was a challenge from someone to include as many references as possible and avoid actually explaining anything about the gameplay other then "I had to reload a lot because I died X.X". I haven't played the game so I'm not going to comment on whether the gameplay is good or bad, but his writing is pretty damn bad.

#40 Posted by GorillaMoPena (2042 posts) -

I right here and now am giving Last of Us 2.5 stars.

I haven't played it yet, but my review stands.

#41 Posted by YOU_DIED (702 posts) -

@aiurflux said:

As somebody that has played and beat the game he's a fucking dolt. Plain and simple.

He's a fucking idiot for not having the same opinion as you. Well done.

#42 Posted by ProfessorEss (7310 posts) -

I would love to know what percentage of people knew this would be a Chick review before clicking.

#43 Edited by DharmaBum (1049 posts) -

I should've known this was a Tom Chick thread. Love that guy, he's a fantastic writer. Qt3 movie podcast is great too!

#44 Posted by ImmortalSaiyan (4676 posts) -

I never read the review of played the game. He could be right, I don't know.

#45 Edited by I_Stay_Puft (3184 posts) -

Tom Chick, kinda sad I didn't see him on "The Office" series finale.

#46 Posted by connerthekewlkid (1825 posts) -

@shagge said:

Holy shit, it's terrifying to think that those comments belong to people that actually exist in the real world. I really need to break my fascination with stuff like this. I spent way too long reading that "Public Shaming" tumblr yesterday, which already put me in a bad mood, and now these idiots.

I need a plug-in that changes every website's comment section to "Derp"s so I can stop myself from giving in to curiosity.

You do realize that actually exists right?

Except only for youtube http://www.tannr.com/herp-derp-youtube-comments/

#47 Posted by Oldirtybearon (4700 posts) -

That wasn't a review, it was criticism.

Big fucking difference, guys.

#48 Edited by Vamino (207 posts) -

Most of the complaints come from the idiotic conversion via Metacritic. 3/5 stars does not equal 60. 3/5 says he liked the game (and he did). People read 60 as being a fail.

It's pretty fucking rich to see people making this same mistake on THIS SITE where they use the same five star system. Would you accuse Brad of just trolling for hits if, god forbid, a big blockbuster AAA game just didn't grab him and he gave it a 3/5?

Why do people take review scores so goddamn personally anyway? So Tom Chick didn't like it as much as others. Oh no. Does that stop YOU liking the game? He's not a troll reviewer (though people like to paint him as such), he just has different things he likes.

Though I will give you that maybe he references too much other stuff in his reviews. It's fair enough to get some thrown in, most reviewers compare to similar stuff, but he does seem to do it a lot.

#49 Posted by JCGamer (663 posts) -

I'm always kind of iffy when a gets universal acclaim. I played Bioshock Infinite and honestly had a better time with Dishonored. Wonder how people will remember Last of Us in a few months.

#50 Posted by HaltIamReptar (2029 posts) -

Dunno if I've agreed with a single post you've made, Fred. Though you're smarter than most people here so I'll keep reading.