FFXIV Dawntrail reviews are out on Metacritic

Ah, the scored dipped below 6 for a good while, and now magically a 100 good reviews have reappeared. Dawntrail appears to be very divisive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RabendaShin

Ah, the scored dipped below 6 for a good while, and now magically a 100 good reviews have reappeared. Dawntrail appears to be very divisive.

---

The story is written poorly, some still enjoy it but can't accept it that the writing is not praised as much as they would like. The fights have been universally praised as far as I could see.

That's mostly the whole debacle.

Added 7 more critic reviews, updated Metascore and User Score.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HighlanderClone

Frankly they should just filter all reviews with a NLP model, you either write it with substance or your review gets cut. We have the tech, CS majors literally are capable of doing this as an intern after their first year, there are so many NLP packages on Python and Python is a braindead language every first year learns nowadays.

This isn't a hard problem to solve, I hope they are not seriously doing this with manual labor.

---

I kinda wonder if Metacritic uses a system where user ratings are automatically held if they exceed a certain number of ratings in a given timeframe and then an actual employee has to manually review the ratings to see what's legit and what's not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RabendaShin

Ah, the scored dipped below 6 for a good while, and now magically a 100 good reviews have reappeared. Dawntrail appears to be very divisive.

---

While there is a minor problem with some people being unable to articulate their feelings, and unable to provide an honest review score that coincides with their criticisms, the unfortunate reality is that review aggregators often run interference for these media companies. They have a history of manipulating review scores of both games and movies.

Quote:

---

I could actually see myself replaying Dawntrail in its entirety just to pore back over this adventure and look for missed details and re-experience the highs and lows. That’s a first for me, nearly a thousand hours in.

---

It's really hard to take reviews like this seriously. I have like 6 alts. I've played up through ShB like 4 or 5 times and never get tired of it, and have done Endwalker 3, almost 4 times. DT is the only expansion I have really no desire to do again on my alts, especially the 1st half. I can tolerate the 2nd half.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OliverQ

It's really hard to take reviews like this seriously. I have like 6 alts. I've played up through ShB like 4 or 5 times and never get tired of it, and have done Endwalker 3, almost 4 times. DT is the only expansion I have really no desire to do again on my alts, especially the 1st half. I can tolerate the 2nd half.

---

Really feels like the usual "We got paid for this review" jargon, doesn't it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OliverQ

It's really hard to take reviews like this seriously. I have like 6 alts. I've played up through ShB like 4 or 5 times and never get tired of it, and have done Endwalker 3, almost 4 times. DT is the only expansion I have really no desire to do again on my alts, especially the 1st half. I can tolerate the 2nd half.

---

Yep and will 100 percent skip the cutscenes when I do it again on an alt and never did it for any expansion beforehand from Heavensward to Endwalker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swordsman

Added 7 more critic reviews, updated Metascore and User Score.




I kinda wonder if Metacritic uses a system where user ratings are automatically held if they exceed a certain number of ratings in a given timeframe and then an actual employee has to manually review the ratings to see what's legit and what's not.

---

Well it is the same company that owns Fandom.com so I can easily see them doing this stupidly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OliverQ

It's really hard to take reviews like this seriously. I have like 6 alts. I've played up through ShB like 4 or 5 times and never get tired of it, and have done Endwalker 3, almost 4 times. DT is the only expansion I have really no desire to do again on my alts, especially the 1st half. I can tolerate the 2nd half.

---

Between places like Twitter that encourage even non players to go and review a product positively or negatively and the fact that corperations pay review sites for good reviews I don't even bother to look at them anymore. At this point they are there for the investors, not the customers or the potential customers. So I judge a product on my own experiences. And when it comes to DT all I have to say...

I have been here since the beginning, I have 5 characters and each and every expac I go through the story at least 3 times before the big influx of content, then level my other 2 through it when I have down time but always have them through the .0 msq before .1 drops. The expac however, instead of doing the story on my alts, I went back and started a new character on WoW in the Pandarian remix so I have it ready for the War Within. I never thought, in the past 14 years I have been playing this game, that I would ever prefer spending time in WoW over FFXIV becausee WoW had the more engaging game (and to be quite frank the more engaging and welcoming community)

Still sitting at an 80. IGN dropped an 8. I foresee it hitting 882 or 83 tops at this point. The lowest rated xpac.

And deserved imo. It was an xpac I finished in spite of its flaws.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turtledeluxe

Still sitting at an 80. IGN dropped an 8. I foresee it hitting 882 or 83 tops at this point. The lowest rated xpac.

And deserved imo. It was an xpac I finished in spite of its flaws.

---

I honestly don't trust media outlet reviews anymore. It is clear they are either biased/paid, or they do not have enough time on their hands to properly experience a game/expansion of this scope. Considering the latter, it does seem the journalists spent ample time playing the MSQ since the reviews are only coming out now.

Which makes me wonder - did we experience the same MSQ? I've found maybe only the last 5% of the MSQ worthwhile, namely the parts when we are not babysitting Wuk Lamat. Anything before that seems meaningless fluff we were forced into doing because G'raha pushed us to 'chase adventure'.
(In hindsight: What adventure? The adventue Estinien got to have without us?)

Meanwhile plenty of journalists shower praise upon Wuk Lamat, writing, and story beats we experience/suffer while cheering her on. However, going into any other space than Twitter I find players agreeing on the low quality of the MSQ writing, pace, and its voice acting, making me feel less disconnected from reality.

Sure, there's a confirmation bias, but right now I'd rather trust a passionate 0/10 user review than a soft 8/10 with only minor criticism about the pacing. It doesn't help I've been keeping an eye on the Metacritic ratings for the PC version, where it appears as if every two hours or so a 100 positive ratings get deleted and promptly added again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RabendaShin

I honestly don't trust media outlet reviews anymore. It is clear they are either biased/paid, or they do not have enough time on their hands to properly experience a game/expansion of this scope. Considering the latter, it does seem the journalists spent ample time playing the MSQ since the reviews are only coming out now.

Which makes me wonder - did we experience the same MSQ? I've found maybe only the last 5% of the MSQ worthwhile, namely the parts when we are not babysitting Wuk Lamat. Anything before that seems meaningless fluff we were forced into doing because G'raha pushed us to 'chase adventure'.
(In hindsight: What adventure? The adventue Estinien got to have without us?)

Meanwhile plenty of journalists shower praise upon Wuk Lamat, writing, and story beats we experience/suffer while cheering her on. However, going into any other space than Twitter I find players agreeing on the low quality of the MSQ writing, pace, and its voice acting, making me feel less disconnected from reality.

Sure, there's a confirmation bias, but right now I'd rather trust a passionate 0/10 user review than a soft 8/10 with only minor criticism about the pacing. It doesn't help I've been keeping an eye on the Metacritic ratings for the PC version, where it appears as if every two hours or so a 100 positive ratings get deleted and promptly added again.

---

It's not because the reviewers are paid or anything. It's because there's severe grade inflation in video games. A mediocre game in today's scoring system starts at 8.

They only reserve 6 and below for catastrophes.

WhErE's YoUr ViSiOn ItS tHe StArT oF a NeW eRa hur dur!

The whole it's a new arc argument I see online is redundant, when they keep rehashing the same story beats.We literally got Amaurot 3 with a repeat of Endsinger too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HighlanderClone

It's not because the reviewers are paid or anything. It's because there's severe grade inflation in video games. A mediocre game in today's scoring system starts at 8.

They only reserve 6 and below for catastrophes.

---

Which means the user rating choice between 'reasonable 6/10, not as good as usual but ok' and 'I'm giving a 0/10 just to show I don't agree with the grade inflation' becomes just that much simpler.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RabendaShin

Which means the choice between 'reasonable 6/10, not as good as usual but ok' and 'I'm giving a 0/10 just to show I don't agree with the grade inflation' becomes just that much simpler.

---

I had this issue when ff16 came out. People were giving it a 0/10 out of spite. Or a 8 even though they will admit it wasn't great but it doesn't crash or have that many issues,

IMO Rating should be treated as: (put in some examples)
0- Game doesn't work constantly crashes completely unplayable, these come along rarely
1-2 Game can be played but is very buggy lots of missing assets and glitches (The Gollum game)
3-4 Game is not good, there's many issues, bad design choices, story inconsistent/gameplay loop is bad in either design or implementation (FF16, 3-5 this section of rating is tricky it's the most subjective part)
5 Acceptable games ok, not amazing not bad just a decent game(FF16, 3-5 this section of rating is tricky it's the most subjective part)
6-7 Game is good, direction was good, Was a very fun game to play, I would play it again. (Monster Hunter rise)
8-9 Game is great absolute brilliant example of their genres (Witcher 3, Hades, Halo, Gears of War, God of War)
10 - Come along rarely, define genres and are truly outstanding, usually spawn a myriad of copy cats. (Eldenring - Personally I don't enjoy these games but can recognise their impact and success, BG3)

An RPG with a bad story, not personal taste bad but actually written to a poor standard, can't really score more than a 4-5. Imo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malthir

I had this issue when ff16 came out. People were giving it a 0/10 out of spite. Or a 8 even though they will admit it wasn't great but it doesn't crash or have that many issues,

IMO Rating should be treated as: (put in some examples)
0- Game doesn't work constantly crashes completely unplayable, these come along rarely
1-2 Game can be played but is very buggy lots of missing assets and glitches (The Gollum game)
3-4 Game is not good, there's many issues, bad design choices, story inconsistent/gameplay loop is bad in either design or implementation (FF16, 3-5 this section of rating is tricky it's the most subjective part)
5 Acceptable games ok, not amazing not bad just a decent game(FF16, 3-5 this section of rating is tricky it's the most subjective part)
6-7 Game is good, direction was good, Was a very fun game to play, I would play it again. (Monster Hunter rise)
8-9 Game is great absolute brilliant example of their genres (Witcher 3, Hades, Halo, Gears of War, God of War)
10 - Come along rarely, define genres and are truly outstanding, usually spawn a myriad of copy cats. (Eldenring - Personally I don't enjoy these games but can recognise their impact and success, BG3)

An RPG with a bad story, not personal taste bad but actually written to a poor standard, can't really score more than a 4-5. Imo

---

Your scale is pretty nice, but for me personally, a game instantly scores a 0 as soon as it causes me to stop playing due to how bad it is. Now, I'm not counting things like super hard games that make me quit out of frustration. I'm talking, I reach a point, where I literally cannot handle continuing, due to how absolutely miserable the experience is. And DT gave me three of those moments. I had to step away. Because I reached a point where continuing would have been a detriment to my mental health.

You're never going to get a universal metric, as what people value in the game will differ from person-to-person, and the content they dabble in. Regardless of what kind of game it is.

Like for me personally, story I would give a 5 or 6, at best, and a 6 only if feeling really generous, and a 4.5 at worst.

However, the actual combat portion of the game I would rate much more highly. Dungeons and trials aren't difficult but they require paying a modicum of attention, and if you don't then you can very easily die, which is how it should be, as it puts the casual content at a much more healthy balance. Crafting and Gathering were the same, but crafting the Level 100 recipes offered a little more resistance than the previous ones at Level 80, and 90, which is a good indicator of things to come.

The dungeons and trials I would easily rate between a 7-9. This takes much more precedence over story for me, even as a casual player, as it is the content released with the expansion which will dominate the majority of my time. Story-wise, we have, what? 15-18 hours of story collectively left across 7.1-7.55, and the content will easily consume hundreds of hours potentially, so how that plays is much more important. Even levelling the classes alone through dungeons etc., will consume more than the collective story.

The graphics update I easily rate at 8, personally, and the zones as well. Getting used to my new character took a little time, but absolutely love her look at the moment.

So personally overall I would personally rate it as a 7-7.5-ish. Potentially higher if they manage to follow through with their promises in the long-term.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaurhz

So personally overall I would personally rate it as a 7-7.5-ish. Potentially higher if they manage to follow through with their promises in the long-term.

---

It is also increasingly hard to rate a game that has a developing story. What score would show the developer team you were unhappy with the story part of the content, but enjoyed the actual gameplay? A 7.5 does not send a message of 'please do better in the story department next patch/expansion' to me. The devs might feel chuffed that they got a passing grade while delivering a story of this caliber, and not course-correct.

I would also argue that the story at launch is far more important than story content added in patches. The MSQ (and quality) we got is now forever grafted onto the experience of playing FFXIV, a game often lauded for its story. You only get one chance for a first impression, and Dawntrail ruined my trust in the people behind its state of release.

Metascore and User Score updated. User Score appears to be leveling off at 6.5.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swordsman

Metascore and User Score updated. User Score appears to be leveling off at 6.5.

---

That's actually really close to where I would rate it, citizen. A silly and forgettable story deserves such a score.





Forge's glow watch over you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Malthir

10 - Come along rarely, define genres and are truly outstanding, usually spawn a myriad of copy cats. (Eldenring - Personally I don't enjoy these games but can recognise their impact and success, BG3)

---

I like how you picked the two worst examples (IMHO).

Those are the culmination of a decade of dev experience, sure. On that front they are at least 9/10 games.

But ambition creates bloat and genericness. Those two are ambitious games, but they shedded a lot of their identity for mass appeal charm.

Elden Ring is one of the most unenjoyable and bloated FS game I've ever played. It's a huge letdown after Sekiro and unironically feels much like a Ubisoft game. Copy-and-pasted assets everywhere, samey objectives, and an open world that is too bloated and spammed with uninteresting "points of interest". They did this because open world is in vogue and because of their ambition.

BG3 is not a bad game but Larian's charm is very much absent from it. DOS1 is one of their first forays into CRPG and despite it being not so polished you can very much see the charm in that game, with a lot of humor and the classic Larian style of not taking itself too seriously. Importantly DOS1 is also pretty focused and isn't bloated with too many sidequests. The sidequests that do exist all tie in to the main plot too. Unfortunately BG3, despite its polish, is extremely unfocused and feels more like a theme park where you wander around instead of having a gripping narrative. As a result the story is one of the most forgettable ones I've ever played through from Larian.

Also I'm really just tired of the MA2 formula. It's everywhere these days. It's like none of the RPG studios know how to develop characters without using the MA2 formula anymore. It's a very inelegant formula that worked well back in 2010 but not in effing 2024 lmao.

Metascore, User score, and Steam score updated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WeebPolice

That's actually really close to where I would rate it, citizen. A silly and forgettable story deserves such a score.

---

I'd say low 6's is even more appropriate, but yeah, your point still stands.

User scores nowadays are more and more difficult to take at face value imo. If a product generates controversy, a lot of people will go and tank the score because they want the agregate score to reflect their opinion, and won't give a fair grade to the product (other way around works too, but angry people tend to express themselves more, so the inverse trend is usually less prominent).

Like, Dawntrail is currently rated lower than ARR. Whatever your feelings about DT, I think it's hard to argue that it's worse than ARR in every aspect (especially writing, 2.0 has hardly any character writing aside from Cid). Yet that's what the score reflects. And looking at the written reviews, there's a lot of chuds going at 0 for kicks for example. So eh.

These platforms need to rethnk how they approach user score, because now not a lot of people express actual opinions, they usually try to influence the overall score. Which is dumb.

(For information, I'd give 7.0 a 7.5/10)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sekundessounet

User scores nowadays are more and more difficult to take at face value imo. If a product generates controversy, a lot of people will go and tank the score because they want the agregate score to reflect their opinion, and won't give a fair grade to the product (other way around works too, but angry people tend to express themselves more, so the inverse trend is usually less prominent).

Like, Dawntrail is currently rated lower than ARR. Whatever your feelings about DT, I think it's hard to argue that it's worse than ARR in every aspect (especially writing, 2.0 has hardly any character writing aside from Cid). Yet that's what the score reflects. And looking at the written reviews, there's a lot of chuds going at 0 for kicks for example. So eh.

These platforms need to rethnk how they approach user score, because now not a lot of people express actual opinions, they usually try to influence the overall score. Which is dumb.

(For information, I'd give 7.0 a 7.5/10)

---

Dawntrail deserves to be rated lower than ARR. Dawntrail is the culmination of a decade of MMO experience, and still put out a worse experience with more knowledge, technology, and resources. The voice acting alone is somehow worse than ARR. The story, writing and pacing are worse than ARR. 2.0's world building, as lacking as it was, is miles above the feeble attempt 7.0 made.

We're not "chuds", or whatever slur you want to fling at us, for feeling that Dawntrail fully deserves its low rating. I would personally give it a 0 on my own scale, which I explained earlier. Any game that actually forces me to step away from playing it through how terrible it is, deserves a 0. And DT had three of those moments for me. I would have quit several times over, if it were not for the friends I promised I'd run Savage with. Sure, there are good parts to DT, but they are so grossly overshadowed by the main course of the expansion, the MSQ, that I cannot, and WILL not, give the game credit that the appetizers are somehow better than the main course.

I'll give you a great example of another game that I've played that deserves a 0. Superman 64. The multiplayer in that game is actually a fairly enjoyable, if not stupid, experience. I had more fun playing that than the actual game. But the core of the game is its absolutely miserable single player experience, that frustrates you with how terrible and broken it is to the point where you want to quit. It deserves a 0. And that is where DT sits for me. I would not have gotten to the points of the game that were remotely enjoyable, if I didn't force myself to for friends. The game actively chased me off multiple times. 0/10. Would not play again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Isala

Dawntrail deserves to be rated lower than ARR. Dawntrail is the culmination of a decade of MMO experience, and still put out a worse experience with more knowledge, technology, and resources. The voice acting alone is somehow worse than ARR. The story, writing and pacing are worse than ARR. 2.0's world building, as lacking as it was, is miles above the feeble attempt 7.0 made.

We're not "chuds", or whatever slur you want to fling at us, for feeling that Dawntrail fully deserves its low rating. I would personally give it a 0 on my own scale, which I explained earlier. Any game that actually forces me to step away from playing it through how terrible it is, deserves a 0. And DT had three of those moments for me. I would have quit several times over, if it were not for the friends I promised I'd run Savage with. Sure, there are good parts to DT, but they are so grossly overshadowed by the main course of the expansion, the MSQ, that I cannot, and WILL not, give the game credit that the appetizers are somehow better than the main course.

I'll give you a great example of another game that I've played that deserves a 0. Superman 64. The multiplayer in that game is actually a fairly enjoyable, if not stupid, experience. I had more fun playing that than the actual game. But the core of the game is its absolutely miserable single player experience, that frustrates you with how terrible and broken it is to the point where you want to quit. It deserves a 0. And that is where DT sits for me. I would not have gotten to the points of the game that were remotely enjoyable, if I didn't force myself to for friends. The game actively chased me off multiple times. 0/10. Would not play again.

---

My man, it's kinda funny that you assumed that I was pointing at you as one of those chuds. I said there's a lot of chuds going at it, not that every one of the 0 were one. But okay.

You hate DT ? That's fine, I enjoyed it a lot personally.

Although I'd invite you to NG+ ARR, because pacing even after the rework is still miles and miles more horrible than anything we got since then, DT included. The same goes for voice acting, come on now. At launch, 2.0 even had voicelines that were badly cut off because the sound mix had to be rushed. Let's not be too reactionary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sekundessounet

My man, it's kinda funny that you assumed that I was pointing at you as one of those chuds. I said there's a lot of chuds going at it, not that every one of the 0 were one. But okay.

You hate DT ? That's fine, I enjoyed it a lot personally.

Although I'd invite you to NG+ ARR, because pacing even after the rework is still miles and miles more horrible than anything we got since then, DT included. The same goes for voice acting, come on now. At launch, 2.0 even had voicelines that were badly cut off because the sound mix had to be rushed. Let's not be too reactionary.

---

I'm currently playing through ARR on an alt. I'd rather have that slow burn than the train wreck of everything happening all at once that DT gave us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Isala

I'm currently playing through ARR on an alt. I'd rather have that slow burn than the train wreck of everything happening all at once that DT gave us.

---

Sure, you do you. I'll keep disagreeing with that tho

Its sitting around 78/6.4 right now and I think thats a fair score.

6.4 still feels a bit high for DT... But not by an excessive amount. But it most definitely notable that the game dropped from ShB and EW being a 9 to DT being a 6.

Slipping from one of the worst rated xpacs to one of the worst FFs all time. Yikes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainLagbeard

6.4 still feels a bit high for DT... But not by an excessive amount. But it most definitely notable that the game dropped from ShB and EW being a 9 to DT being a 6.

---

That's expected given that ShB and EW were the culmination of a decade-long story, while DT is something new. I like to use the baseball analogy that not every batter can hit a grand slam, because doing so first requires three other batters to get on base. Similarly, not every installment of a series can be a 10/10. Those are the end-product of a much longer build-up. DT is the start of that new build-up, and a future expansion that ends up being another ShB or EW will be able to do so precisely because of installments like DT. Me personally - I'd rate DT a 7/8. Yes, that really means 7/10, but from a practical perspective, I feel an "8" is the highest it could even hope to attain given where it lies in the series.

Quote:

---

Slipping from one of the worst rated xpacs to one of the worst FFs all time. Yikes.

---

So, we know a certain element of the gaming population is out in force review bombing. Good to know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Striker44

That's expected given that ShB and EW were the culmination of a decade-long story, while DT is something new. I like to use the baseball analogy that not every batter can hit a grand slam, because doing so first requires three other batters to get on base. Similarly, not every installment of a series can be a 10/10. Those are the end-product of a much longer build-up. DT is the start of that new build-up, and a future expansion that ends up being another ShB or EW will be able to do so precisely because of installments like DT. Me personally - I'd rate DT a 7/8. Yes, that really means 7/10, but from a practical perspective, I feel an "8" is the highest it could even hope to attain given where it lies in the series.



So, we know a certain element of the gaming population is out in force review bombing. Good to know.

---

I wasn't aware critics could review bomb. For a mainline release, the 70 range is pretty bad for FF.

This is officially scoring worse than FFXIII and FFXV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Striker44

So, we know a certain element of the gaming population is out in force review bombing. Good to know.

---

Almost hit like on your post until this last part. Fuck off.

Dawntrail just has too many issues for the good bits to win people over, such as in Endwalker. And it caught an incredible amount of flak and scrutiny because it had the misfortune of trying to live up to Shadowbringers (which is a 9/10- 10/10 Expansion depending on who you ask) EW only real stumbling bit was the inferior post-game content.


As for Dawntrail it earned its 6.4:

-Story is C+ at best.
-Art quality with the "Graphical update" is all over the map. Some things being flat downgrades, or forcing players into strange fixes because of their new graphics systems fighting each other
-Questionable design choices in terms of gear (1st raid gears is uh.. something) Amputating Tail/ears on some gear, but then remembering to add them to other random gear pieces
-Incredible eye strain issues for a lot of players due to the graphics issues and heavy over usage of flashbang style FX with new spells/abilities. Excluding bosses, they funnily enough are actually toned down! Preferring to use darker color palettes to show off the new graphics
-Ancient core system putting up extreme social roadblocks (Can't make new toons on 99% of NA/EU realms, forced to go to the effectively abandoned ones.) Server hopping bars to you from important and major features (FC/Mail/Retainers)
-Controversial Job changes for some jobs, heavy neglect for other Jobs, and "You clearly didn't test this"
-MSQ that has Death Stranding levels of Polarity (You either enjoy it, or you hate it with every fiber of your being"
-English VA was all over the map on quality "yells in lowercase"


Square/CBU3 don't get to hide with blinders on with is one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaptainLagbeard

6.4 still feels a bit high for DT... But not by an excessive amount. But it most definitely notable that the game dropped from ShB and EW being a 9 to DT being a 6.

---

I think 6 is fair.
The combat content is pretty darn good, like a solid 8/10. Jobs are very hit or miss, soundtrack is half forgettable, reused old themes or new bangers, so I'd be comfortable in giving either of those 6ish/10. I like the new zones and I think the graphic update is pretty good (even if very incomplete).
It's really the 2/10 msq that drags everything down. Unfortunately, it's a lot of the available content during the DT release, but I like the new dungeon and trials/NMs so much, I'd begrudgingly agree that a 6/10 is a fair score for DT so far.
Though I'm spiteful enough to dock a point for the murdering of BLM :>

Steam score updated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Turtledeluxe

I wasn't aware critics could review bomb. For a mainline release, the 70 range is pretty bad for FF.

This is officially scoring worse than FFXIII and FFXV.

---

Not looking at the critics, but the user scores. Critics that rated both ARR back in the day and DT now seem to be rating them as rather equivalent, which makes sense given their nature as the start of a new storyline. The user score started as 8.6 and then as soon as that became known, it magically plummeted. Classic sign of review bombing.

Quote:

---

Almost hit like on your post until this last part. Fuck off.

---

Great attitude there :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Striker44

snip.

---

Kinda copium ngl, given how in every outlet/channel people are mixed, slightly leaning negative on DT.
Especially when it's about XIV- I spent tens of thousands of hours in this game and I still genuinely enjoy it, but man it has this weird "cult" following (in the literal sense) that crawls out to defend it, even when an expansion is middling in many areas.
You also seemed to have missed the threads of people complaining their negative/average reviews were being deleted for days, and only started getting undeleted like 10 days in, leading to the score wildly swinging either way for a while.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Striker44

That's expected given that ShB and EW were the culmination of a decade-long story, while DT is something new. I like to use the baseball analogy that not every batter can hit a grand slam, because doing so first requires three other batters to get on base. Similarly, not every installment of a series can be a 10/10. Those are the end-product of a much longer build-up. DT is the start of that new build-up, and a future expansion that ends up being another ShB or EW will be able to do so precisely because of installments like DT. Me personally - I'd rate DT a 7/8. Yes, that really means 7/10, but from a practical perspective, I feel an "8" is the highest it could even hope to attain given where it lies in the series.



So, we know a certain element of the gaming population is out in force review bombing. Good to know.

---

Are you saying that people who don't like DT are transphobes or something? Lmfao, what a puny intellect if so. It's the same thing Disney says about people who hate, rightly so, on the butchering of the new Star Wars being "misogynist" lmfaoooooo. Nah dawg, we don't give a damn about that, we care about the trash heap of a story this is. They are capable of doing better. If we thought they were incapable, we wouldn't be criticizing. We just wouldn't play xD. Screw off with this nonsense. There are plenty of Grass Touchers that despise this story too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aurelius2625

Are you saying that people who don't like DT are transphobes or something? Lmfao, what a puny intellect if so. It's the same thing Disney says about people who hate, rightly so, on the butchering of the new Star Wars being "misogynist" lmfaoooooo. Nah dawg, we don't give a damn about that, we care about the trash heap of a story this is. They are capable of doing better. If we thought they were incapable, we wouldn't be criticizing. We just wouldn't play xD. Screw off with this nonsense. There are plenty of Grass Touchers that despise this story too.

---

shhh, it's okay, the woke cat boi can't hurt you.