There's A Problem With 'Monster Hunter: World' Review Scores, But Fixing It Is Tough

[TBdaGhost]

On the flipside y'all say "how you know if it's good if you have not played it

Y'all just in here talking dumb shyt.

Nobody said anything about going in blind due to the score.

I like action games, I like loot, I like RPGs. From what I watched/read about the game it was appealing to me. The MC score pushed me over the edge in paying full price for the game near launch.

Actually playing the game is not fun at this point. And again that has nothing to do with expectations, and everything to do with how much fun I'm actually having playing it.

Fair enough. I feel like the reviews i watched portrayed it pretty accurately

Not everone likes the same shyt. The reviewers liked it more than you do. It is what it is

 

[Dominic Brehetto]

I'm sure I'll buy the game down the line at some point.


Article reads like nonsense to me. But I don't use review scores to tell me what I should play so

 

[42 Monks]

I really gotta say it again

"souls-like" as a description of combat/gameplay is the dumbest shyt ever

 

[Mowgli]

Game is fun. We'l see how long they can keep throwing new monsters at me, at which point it starts becoming tridash.

 

[el_oh_el]

Game is fun. We'l see how long they can keep throwing new monsters at me, at which point it starts becoming tridash.

Agreed. It's pretty addictive. The combat is also fun in that the weapons have actual strategy behind them and are not blindly hack and slash. There's times to dodge, time to heavy attack, etc. The charge sword has a whole metagame in itself IMO

 

[firemanBk]

Man i bought it cause of the review scores, and I'm feeling the same way.

Not really enjoying it, forcing myself to play hoping it "clicks"

Keep in mind that we bought the XB1 version which has completely broken online play. You cannot join random for hunts in game, you need to use the XB1 Look for Group feature. It's fukking ridiculous and immediately soured me on the game.
All the reviews are for the PS4 version which has perfectly functioning online cause they actually had betas. No betas for XB1 cause Sony paid them for the marketing deal.
So pissed I chose this game over Dragonball but I assumed it was actually gonna function as intended

I really gotta say it again

"souls-like" as a description of combat/gameplay is the dumbest shyt ever

It's especially ridiculous when people use it to describe a series that has been going on well before any souls game.

 

[Eddy Gordo]

Yes and no.

Yes it's the games fault. No it doesn't have to cater to everybody, and that has nothing to do with what's "casual" or not.

is broken as fukk right now.

Only thing appealing is the constant grind for more materials so you can make weapons to grind more. To some of you, that's enough. To me it's not enough due to all the other shortcomings.

You obviously didn't make it to HR. You go into those 6 star missions with just a weapon thinking shyt kosher and it's gonna be rough. Took 46 minutes to beat a rathian when I put jagras down in 2 and half now.

 

[teacher]

Yes and no.

Yes it's the games fault. No it doesn't have to cater to everybody, and that has nothing to do with what's "casual" or not.

Monster hunter isn't a difficult game. You don't need to be an expert with the sticks like you do with other action games. There's no detailed or difficult platforming or exploration. Strategy is basically whatever weapon you want to use and bringing enough potions with you. Online is broken as fukk right now.

Only thing appealing is the constant grind for more materials so you can make weapons to grind more. To some of you, that's enough. To me it's not enough due to all the other shortcomings.

Spoken like a true novice that’s at the beginining of the game....this is so far from the truth at least for the Nintendo exclusive MH...YMMV...well except the platforming (it isn’t a platformer).

 

[teacher]

I really gotta say it again

"souls-like" as a description of combat/gameplay is the dumbest shyt ever

It’s soul like combat because mistakes are punished and the stamina meter I guess *shruhg

 

[Kamikaze Revy]

Casuals hate games like this though. They want everything now now now. Same shyt with Nier. Can't be og gamers.

Why is this your go-to response every time someone doesn't like a game you like?
You sound like a food critic consistently bragging about his "refined palate".
Not every game is for every one. It doesn't immediately mean a person is a "casual" or that it somehow invalidates their opinion altogether.

 

[Dominic Brehetto]

If you're buying a game just because it has a high review score i mean, you should take that L if you don't like it.

It doesn't matter if that new Dragon ball z game got a perfect 100, I'm not a Dragon ball z fan and I'm not a fighting game fan. I know that shyt isn't for me. I'm not going to get mad at reviews for praising it. I'm sure it deserves its reviews. If I buy it and hate that's on me and my tastes not on the reviews.

A game scoring in the 90s doesn't mean that game is suddenly for everyone. That makes no sense.

As for it being reviewed by people that like them, again,it's nonsense. Why would you say,get somebody who absolutely hates fps games to review an fps game? They probably know nothing about the game they're supposed to review and are not going to like it. So who cares if people that liked monster Hunter games reviewed this?They're the people most qualified to tell if you if it's *gasp* a good monster Hunter game


Either way,relying on other people's opinions is just silly.

 

[Deltron]

As for it being reviewed by people that like them, again,it's nonsense. Why would you say,get somebody who absolutely hates fps games to review an fps game? They probably know nothing about the game they're supposed to review and are not going to like it.

unfortunately sites/mags have done/do this.

 

[Dominic Brehetto]

unfortunately sites/mags have done/do this.

I'm aware, some of the most ridiculed reviews ever in the history of the internet are from journalists who hates the genre they were reviewing.

I still remember ign giving some football manager game like a 1.0 because it was about managing a team and not playing it ign had to pull the review down and apologize after

 

[Kamikaze Revy]

What in the blue hell is going on here?
I don't even know where to start unpacking the loads of B.S. in this thread right now.

This isn't the fault of the game. It's just either not clicking with you or it isn't for you.

This is a slippery slope argument. It implies that if a person doesn't like a game, nothing is wrong with the game, the issue is with the person. That just isn't true.

So because someone doesn't enjoy a game its the game's fault? All games have to be everything to all people? Pure casual bullshyt.

Yes. If a person does not like a particular game it's the game's fault. Who else's fault would it be? Mine? Something has to be wrong with me to not like a game now?

A 90+ on MC usually implies universal appeal, as it's an aggregate score presumably coming from all types of different gamers.

I knew what the general gameplay loop was going in. My problem is that the combat is just not fun, skilled, or varied enough to keep me grinding for hours on end. Only way I could find that out is to play the game.

No, a 90+ doesn't mean universal appeal. You just wanna argue to argue. Case in point, I'm sure I can find plenty of people who don't like Forza Horizon 3. Is it the game's fault those players aren't hooked? You got games like Zelda with a 97 and there's people saying it's boring. Meanwhile a mediocre game like Quantam Leap is flawless if I listened to you.

This is where you have to make up your mind @Fatboi1 (and the rest of the review score whores that only bring them up when it benefits their argument). One day the arcadium is citing review scores let and right like chapter and verse from The Bible, the next they are falling back and downplaying them depending on which side of the argument they want to make. Overall, I feel like there's way too much weight placed on review scores. Group think is a real thing and it definitely applies to gaming opinions.

Forza Horizon 3 is about as universally appealing as a racing game can be. That's why it got the score it got.

Universally appealing doesn't mean that literally EVERYBODY will like it. You're the one playing dumb with that

Zelda is overrated as fukk. Reviewers are stans too. Remember that.

Have I negged you recently, because it isn't letting me rep you.


All this aside; Monster Hunter definitely isn't for everyone. Sure that's a statement that applies to every game, but MH is in a pretty niche genre with some very passionate fans.
If you don't like it, it doesn't mean you are a casual with a trash taste in video games. Some of you really have this weird superiority complex when it comes to your perceived refined taste in video games.
I personally think the game is alright, but for me, there's entirely too much slow repetition. That's why I've played the previous MH games in small doses.
I don't think the game sucks, I just don't run to it every afternoon after work, because the game play doesn't work for me personally on that level.

 

[Thanos]

Letting another man who is a complete stranger decide what you gonna buy for yourself , especially when a lot of reviewers sound like they played 2 hours of a game/got paid to do a review by a game company, and/or describe any game as souls-like ( do people play other action rpgs?).

I'll stick to watching gameplay and reviews from peers to determine if I'm gonna buy something