177
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2024
177 points (79.0% liked)
Games
32724 readers
367 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Can't see bad reviews for any of those from critics.
https://www.metacritic.com/game/artifact/
https://www.metacritic.com/game/counter-strike-condition-zero/
https://www.metacritic.com/game/counter-strike-2/
https://www.metacritic.com/game/counter-strike-nexon-zombies/
Artifact has good scores from critics, as does CS2, nothing from Zombies. Not sure one game from 20 years ago says much when it's just 1.6 with bots. The game isn't bad, people just expected more than that.
And why is critics' opinion more important than the opinion of the actual players?
Because, as I said, it is the same game with bots on top. The game isn't suddenly bad because of that, so look at reviews of 1.6 instead of cherry picking convenient information. Artifact was review bombed, which I also mentioned.
You're also cherry picking only critics reviews and ignoring the majority of people playing and actually paying for the games.
Again (third time), it was review bombed. Steam reviews, if you actually look at them, are generally positive, except for people who "played" it for 0.1 - 0.3 hours, or over 100 and jokingly clicked to not recommend. CS was 1.6, and thus obviously not a bad game.