Current Events > Battlefront 2's Metacritic score proves game reviewers are paid off

(+) Yeah! (+)

See how all the user reviews are calling out EA for their greed while all of the gaming "journalists" are soft balling it and dancing around any negatives
---

I mean, let's separate the controversy from the score. I'm sure Battlefront II is a good game. Certainly better than less than a 1/10.

Those ratings mean nothing because it's just people rating 0/10 because of EA.

Are they both based on the same 100 scale or is the gamer scale out of 10 or something?
---

Well, what's more fair:

- Taking the game's mechanics, strengths, and faults and judging the score fairly.
- Giving the game a 1/10 because it has microtransactions and lootboxes.
---

Apparently it's a pretty fun game outside of all the bullshit EA is trying to pull.

they reviewing the game, not the business side.

I bet all of those journalists are transplants
---

The reviewers are giving it actual scores based on how good the game is, while users are just butthurt over lootboxes and don't care if the game is actually good or not
---

The streams I've seen look fun. I'll get it, just won't get any loot boxes
---

PoopPotato posted...

The streams I've seen look fun. I'll get it, just won't get any loot boxes

but itll take you 2000 hours to unlock all your gloves!

real talk: who buys a "AAA" game rated 75 or lower? that is a critical sliming.
---

PoopPotato posted...

The streams I've seen look fun. I'll get it, just won't get any loot boxes

Yeah, I've been meaning to get it, just won't touch the microtransactions. I don't do it on even my free-to-play games.
---

PoopPotato posted...

The streams I've seen look fun. I'll get it, just won't get any loot boxes

If you do this loot boxes will get worse as there is no downside for EA to making them as horrible as possible.
---

PoopPotato posted...

The streams I've seen look fun. I'll get it, just won't get any loot boxes

It's a blast, and it took me two evenings to get Vader without spending a dime.
---

Seems that the full-time reviewers are more accurate. Loot boxes may be crippling to the over all progression, but the soundtrack alone discredits anyone scoring this game under a 1/10. Some player reviewers get angry at one thing and give the game a zero.
---

One's a rating of the game; the other's a rating of the business practices. But let's go with the shill argument. That one always works.
---

charey posted...

PoopPotato posted...

The streams I've seen look fun. I'll get it, just won't get any loot boxes

If you do this loot boxes will get worse as there is no downside for EA to making them as horrible as possible.

The moment they make those essentially mandatory to play (such as locking any weapons/armor behind them), there will be major backlash. Right now it seems like there's not much grind at all to unlock stuff if you choose to ignore loot boxes.
---

Let me guess, Jim Sterling just said this?
---

I love the game and have no complaints at all aside from some glitches. I unlocked Vader in 3 hours and I still get plenty of credits for free lootboxes

Granted having Vader at 60k instead of 15k would have been a real bitch but I would have still bought the game and played it regardless
---

Banjo2553 posted...

Well, what's more fair:

- Taking the game's mechanics, strengths, and faults and judging the score fairly.
- Giving the game a 1/10 because it has microtransactions and lootboxes.

Literally playing devil's advocate for EA

Were_Wyrm posted...

PoopPotato posted...

The streams I've seen look fun. I'll get it, just won't get any loot boxes

It's a blast, and it took me two evenings to get Vader without spending a dime.

t. EA marketer
---

ZombiePelican posted...

Literally playing devil's advocate for EA

ZombiePelican posted...

t. EA marketer

Excellent counter arguments, sir.
---

They are getting payed, and reviewing is a job.
---

Banjo2553 posted...

ZombiePelican posted...

Literally playing devil's advocate for EA

ZombiePelican posted...

t. EA marketer

Excellent counter arguments, sir.

You never made one to begin with.

The game should judged as a whole microtransactions included and if you disagree then there's something wrong with you. It deserves all the 1s and 0s it's getting and no amount a sniveling attempts at trying to play devil's advocate for the most single evil entity in all of gaming will change that.
---

creativerealms posted...

They are getting payed, and reviewing is a job.

They're being paid to give shit games good scores to scam people into buying the trash of their corporate overlords
---

ZombiePelican posted...

The game should judged as a whole microtransactions included and if you disagree then there's something wrong with you.

I never disagreed with that. Full retail games should definitely be docked points for including microtransactions, with how serious the score drop being how "necessary" buying microtransactions feel. But scoring the game 1s and 2s is obvious hyperbole and something that not even EA will take seriously.
---

I agree that the loot boxes are directly tied to game mechanics, so their implementation definitely should factor in prominently as part of the written review. How much that should effect the score, I don't really know, but It should definitely be addressed in the written portion of the review whether the microtransactions are purely cosmetic or not.
---

They'd probably give the game actually good scores if it didn't have those poor business practices.

A 7.5/10 aggregate is hardly universal praise.
---

7.5 for BF2 is pretty bad considering it is one of the most beautiful looking games made that actually ties in with the film universe ESPECIALLY well.
---

M_Live posted...

They're reviewing the game itself, not the loot boxes.

Well if they don't make the loot boxes 95% of their score, then they are paid shills!

But seriously, imagine citing Metacritics user scores as an accurate representation of a game. Games that don't even have egregiously scummy business practices get creamed in those user scores. Do anything that a a small portion of nerds don't like and hello, less than 4/10.
---

Jeff AKA Snoopy posted...

7.5 for BF2 is pretty bad considering it is one of the most beautiful looking games made that actually ties in with the film universe ESPECIALLY well.

This, I'm almost positive that the reviews actually did factor in the microtransactions. But because they're not absolutely trashing the game TC thinks they're paid off.
---

The version of the game reviewers played had the heroes cost significantly less, which is just hilarious.

EA truly is the cancer of gaming.
---

Link HT posted...

The version of the game reviewers played had the heroes cost significantly less, which is just hilarious.

EA truly is the cancer of gaming.

Isn't that the final version? I thought EA used the beta to balance things before release.
---

Banjo2553 posted...

Link HT posted...

The version of the game reviewers played had the heroes cost significantly less, which is just hilarious.

EA truly is the cancer of gaming.

Isn't that the final version? I thought EA used the beta to balance things before release.

"During the review event EA had lowered the prices to allow reviewers the chance to play with most of the heroes. The in-game cost is not representative of the final game cost."

https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/7cm1lq/star_wars_battlefront_ii_hero_price_reduced/
---

Link HT posted...

Banjo2553 posted...

Link HT posted...

The version of the game reviewers played had the heroes cost significantly less, which is just hilarious.

EA truly is the cancer of gaming.

Isn't that the final version? I thought EA used the beta to balance things before release.

"During the review event EA had lowered the prices to allow reviewers the chance to play with most of the heroes. The in-game cost is not representative of the final game cost."

https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/7cm1lq/star_wars_battlefront_ii_hero_price_reduced/

...Oh.
---

ZombiePelican posted...

Banjo2553 posted...

Well, what's more fair:

- Taking the game's mechanics, strengths, and faults and judging the score fairly.
- Giving the game a 1/10 because it has microtransactions and lootboxes.

Literally playing devil's advocate for EA

Were_Wyrm posted...

PoopPotato posted...

The streams I've seen look fun. I'll get it, just won't get any loot boxes

It's a blast, and it took me two evenings to get Vader without spending a dime.

t. EA marketer

boy you really do argue like a /v/ poster

just go back there and stay there
---

Didn't EA say getting a higher Metacritic was a major goal for them? Because this looks like a big failure for that metric.
---

Banjo2553 posted...

Well, what's more fair:

- Taking the game's mechanics, strengths, and faults and judging the score fairly.
- Giving the game a 1/10 because it has microtransactions and lootboxes.

Whats more fair

-Taking a sandwichs freshly baked bread, home grown pig meat, and cheese made fresh from the farm
-Give the sandwich 1/10 because its covered in diarrhea.
---

https://www.ea.com/games/starwars/battlefront/battlefront-2/news/pre-launch-update?utm_campaign=swbf2_hd_na_ic_soco_twt_swbfii-prelaunchblog-tw&utm
---

Delirious_Beard posted...

boy you really do argue like a /v/ poster

just go back there and stay there

I've been on GameFAQs longer than you've been alive, fuck off
---

And still haven't learned not to be inflammatory. What a shame.
---

>Paid off
>75 score

Do people live off of hyperbole nowadays or what
---

Link HT posted...

Banjo2553 posted...

Link HT posted...

The version of the game reviewers played had the heroes cost significantly less, which is just hilarious.

EA truly is the cancer of gaming.

Isn't that the final version? I thought EA used the beta to balance things before release.

"During the review event EA had lowered the prices to allow reviewers the chance to play with most of the heroes. The in-game cost is not representative of the final game cost."

https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/7cm1lq/star_wars_battlefront_ii_hero_price_reduced/

Lol wtf
---

thompsontalker7 posted...

>Paid off
>75 score

Do people live off of hyperbole nowadays or what

The game deserves much lower than a 75 and most big review sites are soft balling it out of fear of upsetting EA and getting blacklisted.
---

ZombiePelican posted...

The game deserves much lower than a 75

For what

Have you actually played the game long enough to determine what it actually deserves

Hmm

If you don't have to play a game to determine its score does that mean I can judge a book by it's cover

A movie by its trailer

A show by the first episode?

If you're gonna send BF2 into oblivion at least do so based on objectivity and not principle
---

Game reviews are joke anyway
---

thompsontalker7 posted...

Calm down mr. marketer

apolloooo posted...

Game reviews are joke anyway

Only from gaming "journalists", reviews from consumers are the only reviews that matter
---

ZombiePelican posted...

thompsontalker7 posted...

Calm down mr. marketer

apolloooo posted...

Game reviews are joke anyway

Only from gaming "journalists", reviews from consumers are the only reviews that matter

Reviews from consumers are just as much of a joke as any other kind of review.
---

gamers are such whiny nerds
---

GeneralKenobi85 posted...

Reviews from consumers are just as much of a joke as any other kind of review.

Not at all, They're the only reviews that matter, as they aren't paid by publishers to to give 9 and 10s to mediocre and flat out bad games
---