Wut.

He/she did. Witcher 3 won 124 GOTY awards to the second place finisher's Fallout 4 which had 29.

OH GAWD! Megafailcritic's user reviews

TL;DR: TW3 has won 124 GOTYs from both Critics and Reader's choices, FO4 sits at 29.

Nah, not angry. Kinda disappointed I guess? People here seem to be unable or unwilling to grasp basic concepts because they have blinders on. Any criticism gets dismissed as trolling outright without any valid counter-arguments. People claiming that more sales/popularity=better quality etc.

It's really not Bethesda's lowest rated game. If you pay attention to user score on metacritic maybe but this is also taking into account user reviews on metacritic amount to nothing because metacritic doesn't have anyway to track if the reviewer has actually played the game or not also it's worth mentioning you can continuously make new metacritic accounts for the sole purpose of astroturfing which yes, people are petty enough to do that.

Even so when totaling critic and review score (the thing you should look at) it comes to Fallout 4 with an 84, 84 being the same score New Vegas got. So if 84 is their lowest score that's a freaking really good low score to have.


Hey, how about you follow your own advice, pal.


Again, user reviews on metacritic, not trustworthy.

Nah, I'm good. I'm not the one dismissing percentages of positive/negative reviews when trying to gauge customer satisfaction. Lmao.

It's a great game, but you just can't win GOTY with an engine this old, this many bugs, and this many oversights.

For example: Raiders, Supermutants, and the mobster-esque thugs in the streets of Goodneighbor all have alternate lines for when you're wearing PA.

THE BoS DO NOT. If there was only ONE group of people who'd notice/appreciate an upgraded, customized suit of PA, it'd be them.

I'm sorry, but you'd lose GOTY for that oversight alone IMO.

And if you read the reason critics cite for downvoting FNV, it's the bugginess which is down to Bethesda's poor QA.

User reviews do reflect gamer sentiment. FNV has 8.5, Witcher 3 has 8.9 and Fallout 4... 5.4. Dismiss that if you like but you're just whistling in the dark.

I personally gave it 3/10. I would return it if I could but I waited too long.

Guess what, video games shouldn't be a dike waving contest and GOTY awards mean LITERALLY nothing but an opinion, like reviews.


Nah you're just the person going "THIS GAME IS GARBAGE BECAUSE I SAID SO AND BECAUSE OF FLIMSY EVIDENCE AND EVERYONE SHOULD PAY ATTENTION TO MY FAVORITE GAME OF THE YEAR"


You would have a point if metacritic had any kind of quality control, which it doesn't. Users are free to make as many accounts as they want and user reviews barely ever get looked into or moderated. There is literally no way to know how many of those people actually played the game or if some of them are nothing but duplicate accounts for the purpose of astroturfing.


Raiders and super mutants make comments to show fright or that they aren't scared, the thugs in goodneighnor show concern or are astonished, BoS wear power armor all the time and seeing heavily armored troops is nothing new for them. I don't get what you wanted out of that.

Quote me saying that this game is garbage please.

I never said FO4 was garbage, if I believed that I wouldn't have bought it (or kept it) and I certainly wouldn't have played it as much as I have. But apparently your brain can't fathom liking two things and liking one of those two things more than the other.

Oh and the obligatory: I'm not the one dismissing percentages of positive/negative reviews when trying to gauge customer satisfaction. Lmao.

You made my day man. I seriously laughed so hard when I read your "percentages don't matter post"

....wut?

So Morrowind, Oblivion, Fallout 3 shouldn't be GOTY because they also have oversights like these, nevermind to a degree even worse than Fallout 4?

Not going to bother to mention Skyrim since that game pretty much doesn't acknowledge anything you do.

Because they really don't matter, Fallout 4 still has more user reviews in general on steam then Witcher 3. When it comes to this numbers matter over percentages.

Go cast your fancy magic someplace else.

Actually people here have criticised the game and I've done so myself (in this thread even I think) - and my point of view is okay same as anyone else's point of view. Just coming in and gloating on top of criticism is another thing again (adding emotion is no longer being reasonable). And another thing again is throwing around stats to "prove" your point of view is the "most correct" one.

I've also pointed out how once a bandwagon starts, there's no stopping it - people are mostly sheep and like to feel they're on the winning team and that they're not being singled out for having a "different" point of view. I think to a large extent that is what has happened with Fallout 4.

Yea, It's a pity we needed a mod to unlock the dialogues from guards acknowledging that you are anything other than the dude who fetches the companions mead..... especially considering guards are the only ones who acknowledge anything at all.

Raiders and super mutants make comments to show fright or that they aren't scared, the thugs in goodneighnor show concern or are astonished, BoS wear power armor all the time and seeing heavily armored troops is nothing new for them. I don't get what you wanted out of that.

I hear ya, BoS are used to PA. But I doubt they see many civilians wearing a suit, and a better quality one than theirs at that. They don't need to express FEAR per sé, but it warrants a comment.

Maybe I am making a bigger deal than it is, but the fact that the PA faction doesn't remark on my high-end PA, when unimportant NPCs and one-hit-kill goons DO, was shocking to me.

I brought up a pretty straightforward stat, to prove my point. Apparently people here get triggered easily, frankly IDGAF. I stand by every single thing I've posted, feel free to disprove me. If someone decides to act like a moron, I'll respond in kind. If you respond in a proper manner so will I, but I'm sorry I can't take people seriously when they provide popularity and sales as a determining factor of a game's quality (that applies to music and movies aswell) or when that Cider guy claims that the number of positive reviews is more important for gauging customer satisfaction than the split between positive and negative reviews. if you wanna defy common logic, sure go ahead. Don't expect to be taken seriously.

On your point about Bandwagons, all I have to say is that it works both ways.

Yeah man, you keep believing that, Whatever makes you sleep better at night man.

I'm actually quite astonished that Bethesda were able to put that bit of detail in something nearly all the players will miss.

That actually sounds really cool.

The thing to consider at this point, is do you really take GOTY awards and reviewers and a bunch of random gamers yelling at anyone who will listen, seriously?

Bethesda didn't make NV. Also, no user review is trustworthy. I merely linked it because you were talking about user reviews first. FO4 isn't a great example of a BGS game.

Depends on what you mean seriously, I always take reviews with a grain of salt until I've listened/played/seen/tried what has been reviewed myself.

I guess the answer is, I don't dismiss them nor do I swear by them, I think that's the most correct way to go about it. Generally I do have a couple of sites/reviewers that I tend to agree with more often that not.

Again though you're making the mistake of going to where I haven't gone. Literally all I said in the begining was that a larger percentage of players was disappointed with FO4 than with TW3, and that is factual. I said nothing of goty etc until other people brought them up.

Well there's also this attitude thing you presented in this thread -

You are clearly wanting to discuss "quality" and "betterness". Just that you started on a quite aggressive note, which is likely why you're the one people are quoting to argue with.

Well Cider! was using user scores from Steam in which you actually need to own the damn game to be able to rate it and not Metacritic which any hack with multiple accounts and time to kill can bomb the score. And yes there were groups of people who were planning on bombing the score from the very beginning. I won't list those sites and groups though.

Yeah, the attitude comes naturally when people are either pretending to play dumb or blatantly ignoring common logic and/or throwing passive aggressive insults around.

That's what you got from my quote? It literally says to stop equating quality to sales, that's it. Period.

Edit: Just saw your edit, and do me a favor and read the post I'm referring to, that thing made me cringe so bad. It reeks of butthurt, surely you can see that?

You don't need to permanently own the game on Steam however - people will have bought the game, posted a terrible review, then demanded their money back from Steam...slightly more trouble than posting a Metacritic review, but doable if you are the kind who likes to cause mischief.