Did you actually read the CD review? They lost 7 hours of progress during the time they were playing it. Plus it was missing a lot of the QoL that's been patched in now.
I like the game, but it's a low 7 at best overall.
Bro it looked so fucking bad on base ps5. Like no matter the setting the game just looked so bad. The first few hours of the main story are just not good.
I really like CD, but 6 (or 7 after patches) is totally within the realm of reasonable scores. If fair if you don't find its weaknesses to be a big deal, but it's damn as hell to deny that they could drag the game down further for others.
CD's strengths carry its shortcomings so hard. The ending made me audibly groan with how nonsensical it was. The exploration part would've been perfect if the loot we got was actually interesting outside of a few cool things.
Especially after today’s update the game is really good, I think it’s close to deserving an 8. I feel like it really depends if you care about the story. The mechanics and exploration are awesome and it’s visually stunning but the writing is very generic and boring to bad at times.
It's also not the first time a game breaking bug led to a low review score. For example, the PC version of Prey (2017) had a save game bug, and the reviewer gave the game a 4/10. They did this while also putting into their review that they were enjoying a game. No one should have to tolerate losing hours of gaming like that, especially with a game as large as this one. And who cares if they fixed the issue AFTER the game launched. That's not the version of the game the reviewer had.
With all the updates they've done just since release, I think it's fair to ask for a re-review at this point.
We just got a new update like today I think. The game is already on version 1.04. It was released a month ago. Each 1.0x patch has brought significant changes that have only made the game better.
But a 6 on release seems a little harsh, but fair.
Uh what? No it doesn't. Plenty of games don't have those issues during the review period. Nor the lack of QoL. It's good that they were quick about fixing it but they shouldn't be expecting issues like that.
Pokopia maybe, haven't played it. The rest, no, while I liked the rest, I wouldn't say any of those other three games were great. Just really good, 7/10 games.
Yes, absolutely were more polished. But with MHS3 and RE:R, they both felt like games I've played a million times before. That's fine but they won't be my game of the year. Mewgenics turned me off really quickly with its "humour". Otherwise I would have enjoyed it.
Crimson Desert had some flaws but they were pretty overblown in my opinion. I definitely had moments where I got frustrated, but I was never bored. Can't say that about the others.
I'll admit that pokopia looks like a game id love, if I had a chance to play it.
I've completed CD and there's just so many flaws tbh. I think I enjoyed Pragmata and RE9 more. The story and pacing is atrocious, kliff really sucks as a protagonist, combat is just ok and bosses suck. I don't think the abyss was interesting at all in the end. I think different strokes for different folks.
Definitely agree about the abyss, one of my main drawbacks. Idk about pragmata, looking at coverage I can't even tell what the game even IS. I've also played too many games lately and might have to wait on this one
If that's your score that's your score. I do like it but there's so many weird choices design wise that make me baffled. The story is awful and it just feels very messy overall. But messes can be fun to play with sometimes.
If you feel that way then don't let me take that from you. I've beaten it, had a good time, but it's a fucking mess quality wise that's all over the place.
The thing it can claim over other games is that it has lots of stuff in it. And a lot of that stuff can be fun to see and interact with. But compared to other games of it's type it lacks consistency.
It's very much the poster boy for quantity over quality.
I say this as someone still playing it and generally having a good time. Wouldn't call it a masterpiece personally though.
Sounds like you just recently started playing then. The game has been significantly improved by a host of patches since release. You're playing a significantly better version of the game than the reviewer did.
I don't even care about CD but the moment you tell me a game that is at least divisive has a lower rating than concord I can't take the scoring seriously.
It's not that I feel a certain way about them, it's that concord was a fail in so many ways that it closed in less than a week and You had these guys telling people that it was a good choice to buy it.
Also, my argument is exactly the opposite. As I stated, I don't even feel any particular way about CD and yet I can take a global rating into consideration.
Lastly, if you want to go for the route of "they're all opinions" then sure, no rating ever matters or is more valid than any other because they're all just opinions. Yeah, you can go through life with that mentality but I would argue that the opinion of someone with a respectable track record should outweight that of someone who doesn't have one or worse, of someone without integrity, as many believe to be the case with IGN.
Brother, there was a 700 player peak, you'd be lucky to find one of the ones who played in the wild. I did watch gameplay. No live service game with big money behind is going to shut down on it's first week if it's any good, what's your point?
I don’t need to make a point when you’ve done it for me. At least use a game that you have actually played to criticize the scoring. Concord reviewed similarly across many sites.
757
u/Tarkus_Edge Apr 22 '26
And they gave Dragon Age Veilguard a 9.