Game review media, as the name suggests, rates games.
However, this scoring is not simple.
Different from the ratings among players, the ratings from the media will more or less affect the sales and reputation of the game.
Once a certain game is given a high score, in addition to its excellent quality, the next few days are spent preparing to win awards. Because sales will definitely be high!
And if a game is given a low score, in addition to being ignored by everyone because of poor quality, the sales volume will probably not meet the publisher's expectations.
Therefore, when this kind of rating behavior gradually affects the market and sales, money transactions will arise.
Do you want to rate your game if it sucks?
It doesn't matter, the money is in place, I will give you high marks, black and red are also red.
Do you want to rate your game?
Do you know what I mean? (Rubbing fingertips)
What? You do not understand?
Sorry, you are not good at this game.
Your game is average and you want to rate it?
Do you understand the rules? (crazy hint)
What? Not enough money?
I'll give you a low score first, and when the money comes back, we'll make up a reason to change it to a high score.
Don't worry, don't worry about no one buying it. There are many players and there are many injustices.
...
As a result, there have been many cases in the history of games where good games were given low scores, or low-scoring games were changed to high scores midway.
As for high scores on bad games, they are rare.
Obviously, they, the media, want some face.
In other words, act it out and don't be so obvious.
Then, when this industry was born, media organizations began to appear one by one.
Make money, don't be embarrassed.
Therefore, the number of evaluation agencies is overwhelming worldwide.
But if we classify them in terms of 'professional' and 'authoritative', then there are so many things that they become nothing.
And this part is almost all from foreign evaluation agencies.
There is only one in China, and it is in the form of self-media. Its status is in the category of "too many".
Therefore, no matter how objective and professional this self-media evaluation agency is.
It's not enough for players to have a reference.
However, CA, the world's largest and most trafficked America evaluation agency, is the primary reference for the player community.
Of course, that was once.
Today's CAs no longer seem so professional.
Because they have repeatedly overturned in recent years.
There were even two industry jokes about 'interns being wrongly graded'.
In fact, everyone knows that the so-called intern grading is just an excuse.
The real situation is that the money was not available and the score was low.
However, even if it is a joke, CA still relies on its own qualifications and connections to firmly hold the world's number one authority, and its position has not been shaken to this day.
Even if players gradually stop using their ratings as a reference, that's fine with them.
For business, as long as you have money.
Players don’t care, can they give me money?
Therefore, with the increasing number of CA overturns (not enough money), the saying "CA is a joke" has been widely circulated among domestic gamers.
But now, players are still looking forward to what the major media will think of the game "Containment Breach".
After all, they are very concerned about this domestically produced game that is going global.
After all, the previous "Sky Mountain" had achieved double success in terms of word-of-mouth and sales.
So compared to the previous game, who has a higher rating for "Containment Breach"?
Therefore, as the vanguard of game information, the Fourth Natural Disaster Club posted the reviews of major media organizations that night so that players could see them at a glance.
The first is CA, who will never be absent. They gave "Containment Breach"...a score of 5.9?
Al?
How fat! ?
Not even 6 points?
Previously, "Sky Mountain" scored a high score of 9.8!
Why does "Containment Breach" only have a score of 5.9 this time?
The players were stunned and quickly looked at the specific review content.
advantage:
+The picture quality is very cutting-edge
+A tense and unsettling atmosphere at all times
+Super high and incredible freedom
+The performance of the characters is wonderful
shortcoming:
-Monster AI is a headache
-The map is too wide and not very explorable
-The presence of the weapon does not demonstrate its importance
-Random events are frequent and tiresome
-The element of stealth is greater than the element of survival
-Easy to get lost
Rating: 5.9
(generally)
Ah this...
No way?
The only game that crashed?
The game crashed?
NO!
Players who did not believe in evil scrolled their mouse and looked down at CA's comments.
Sure enough, below the ratings, there are also long-word comments.
Simply put, it means:
The game is well done, but I'm tired from playing it.
The monster AI is too high and the whole game is tiring.
The atmosphere is well rendered and the entertainment experience is boring.
The roads lead in every direction, and exploration is stomach-churning.
There are many types of firearms, but all have the same effect.
It was originally a survival gameplay, but in the end, only body skills were left.
The plot is dull and obscure, and the experience is too hopeless.
The essence of the game deviates, and you should pay attention to feelings!
Wow——!
I didn’t expect CA to comment like this. Is the game really a failure?
Or did Infinite Entertainment, the only publisher of the game, not pay enough?
Wait a moment!
Will the game really crash?
Because this time the production team’s trailer is a CG trailer instead of a live trailer, is it really too bad to release it?
But this shouldn't be the case...
They were the development team that dominated the horror market with "Sky Mountain". How could they fail in "Containment Breach"?
Could it be that the management is in disarray?
Or is the development process blocked?
In short, some players who were not sure immediately rolled the pulley and looked at the next media review.
As a result, this directly disrupted the players.
The second organization is JM, which is as famous as CA, but has lower traffic.
They once gave "Sky Mountain" a high score of 9.7.
Now I gave "Containment Breach"...10 points?
ah?
I am not wrong, right?
The players in front of the screen immediately rubbed their eyes and took a closer look.
That's right, 10 points!
JM, who is as famous as CA, actually gave "Containment Breach" a perfect score of 10!
In other words, this is actually a masterpiece!
Players immediately read below for JM’s detailed comments.
advantage:
+
The VR picture is so real that it feels like you are actually there
+ Very modern industrial science fiction scene design
+Any item you see can be picked up
+The monster's AI logic is so smart that it's unimaginable
+The map has various details and is highly explorable
+Very eye-catching random events
+Perfect and realistic character plot performances
+The presence of firearms is not strong, reflecting the importance of survival
+The radar map is very useful and makes it difficult to get lost
+Stealth mechanism makes the game more terrifying
+The music style is very suitable for the occasion and can mobilize people's hearts
shortcoming:
-The abilities of wandering monsters are unknown and they are easy to die when you first encounter them.
-The introductory document of the control room seems a bit professional and esoteric, and is not easy to remember.
-The synthesis formula of a certain mechanical equipment is unclear and there is no detailed explanation.
-Too many key cards
-The backpack capacity is too small
Rating: 10
(Masterpiece)
Brief comments:
'By far the most mind-blowing horror game I've ever played. '
'I've never seen a game that got me so into it that I forgot about my work. '
'Although the game has some shortcomings, they are harmless, just not that convenient. Compared with its advantages, it is completely negligible! '
'The game's various mechanisms are also very complete, indicating that the developer has extremely rich experience in game production. '
'In terms of gaming experience, I felt like I was really in the game world. I was attracted by the real environment inside and even forgot about getting off work. '
'The difficulty of the game is moderate and it didn't make me feel too desperate. Monsters all have ways to deal with them, you just have to find them yourself. '
'Like I said, this is a masterpiece that I will never forget! Giving it full marks is not too much! '
Ah this...
Players are confused.
Who is telling the truth?
Why do the shortcomings mentioned by CA become advantages when it comes to JM?
Especially the monster AI.
The former said it was a headache, and the latter said it was unimaginably smart.
So what does this mean?
What is the monster like?
Players don’t know, but to be honest, players have different opinions on the shortcomings mentioned by CA.
It is originally a horror game, focusing on the fear of the unknown, the depression of the atmosphere, and the rendering of the environment.
If you use the whole gun and make it so awesome, is it still called a horror game?
Therefore, it is natural that the power of firearms becomes weaker.
Also, how come the random events that people talk about so much in "Sky Mountain" have become "boring" in CA?
Is it possible that the random events in "Containment Breach" are not as interesting and rich as those in "Sky Mountain"?
Not to mention stealth, many players rely on stealth to hide from ghosts and monsters in horror games.
Without stealth, life is not guaranteed!
As for getting lost...
It can only be said that benevolence is in the eye of the beholder!
Therefore, under these two severely polarized ratings, players continued to look at other ratings.
PO: 9.8 points
Comment: The game gives common save/load settings a "justifiable" meaning, which adds a lot of immersion when playing.
KL: 9.6 points
Comments: Very interesting random events that won’t make you bored, the monster settings also reflect the developer’s creativity, and the plot is pretty good.
UC: 9.4 points
GA: 9.2 points
SB: Ratings are not out yet.
...
...
understood.
Players finally get it.
Amid the applause from the media, only CA Maverick gave it a low score.
So the meaning is already obvious.
Just two reasons.
1. The money is not in place.
2. The reviewer is also an 'intern'.
It's just like using "temporary workers" to blame someone after something happened in China. It's just an excuse.
But as an 'authoritative' and 'professional' media evaluation organization, is CA so 'obviously' shameless?
Will the points be changed again in a few days just because the money is available?
Players couldn't guess it, so they went to the Internet to find the CA reviewer who reviewed "Containment Breach" this time.
Then I discovered that he had been criticized and complained by overseas players on the Internet.
After a detailed understanding, I discovered that this time the CA reviewer.
He is a person who mainly plays FPS games.
He gave a high score of over 9.5 to "Battlefield Gunsmoke", an FPS fast-food game that comes once a year...
The players suddenly realized.
This is an irresponsible review!
So, they followed the overseas players in the YouTube review video to condemn this CA reviewer who gave random scores!
－－－－－－Digression－－－－－
I... have something to do tonight... I wish everyone a happy Chinese Valentine's Day!
Bookstore
