Heheh thanks, But I happen to be one of the lucky ones... To me this is a great game And thats all that matters( MEEEEEE no really say it 2-Caps)

All kidding aside I have also been in the past very disappointing with a game (mE-3) and well do feel for the people that found this lacking, the real ones you know (all games have trollish types, not many here thankfully) I really hopes Mods will be able to salvage it for them.

edit (to be honest i had some big problems with me 2, and it was a good game just not a great piece of a trilogy humm)

On metacritic, is it possible to look at the individual reviews that make up the average? If the game is torn between perfect 10s and 0s or 1s, it's obvious that the average score is ultimately kind of meaningless. But I find a 6/10 review where the writer isn't blatantly being butthurt or petty is a pretty insightful read, although I can disagree with a lot of it.

Just accept that a lot of people are really unhappy with F4. Is that so hard to fathom for some of you? If the user score was higher, I guarantee everyone would be using that in their argument as to how F4 is GOAT but since it doesn't lean the way you want it to lean, you disregard it as troll-spit.

Same with GOTY awards, it used to be such a big deal when Beth would win the most, but the first year they don't it all of a sudden became meaningless.

Either way, I can see why people are really upset with F4, I myself, enjoy it to an extent, but I just know it could have been much better.

Everyone knows it's a troll set up

I think spending a lot of time on here and in various Fallout groups on Facebook has painted a somewhat skewed picture of the consensus on this game for me. A lot of people come here to complain about the game, and a lot of people go to the groups on social media to complain about it. There are aspects of the game that I don't like and there are aspects of the game that I think could certainly be much better, but that hasn't stopped it from unquestionably being one of the best games I've ever played. I think the people that are complaining about this game to really high degrees are really just a very vocal minority. The very vast majority of people seem to be incredibly happy with this game and having a blast with it.

^this

Everyone sees what they want to see.

FO4 is a terrific game.

It's just not quite the 'new shiny' that some were hoping for.

That certainly doesn't mean it svcks,

it's just that expectations have to be set back a notch or two...

Not really. A lot of reviews clearly name what they didn't like which is perfectly reasonable. Just because they didn't like something doesn't mean they are trolls. There quite a lot of bad reviews on amazon as well. Even some of the 4+ reviews have grain of salt in them. These people basicly complain about the same thing that the 3- reviewers complain about. It's just personal preferences whether a review ends up good or bad in that case.

Fallout 4 is really not as good as it could have been. Still a good game though. A solid 6 - 7 for me. One or two good DLC that improve the main game could really push the game to an 8 or even a 9.

Edit: You should never forget that amazon reviews are not 100% legit as with all reviews. You have to look for the common points in the reviews and use the average points and extremes as indicators to what is amiss here.

Opinions are like [censored]s. Everyone has one.

I think part of it is also that they made some really big changes to the gameplay, like with the SPECIAL system and the dialog. Good or bad, there is always a group of people that do not take change very well.

on the PS4 reviews 760 of the 834 reviews are 4/5 or 5/5. So if you translate that into the Meta score it means over 91% of user reviews are 8/10 or better. Explain that, should be an interesting reply lolol

A different crowd obviously. I think one of the main reasons for that is that console players tend to forgive the strong focus on fighting and explore. They are also offered a fairly unique and fun feature in form of building your own settlements. I can't remember a game on console that allows that as well. I also heard that the controlls work far better with a controller compared to the port to pc.

Edit: I apparently cannot see a reasoning behind these votes so the average is only an indicator at best. Look at what kind of games these people also play. I can see what gameplay they favor and what they like in Fallout 4.

Metacritic can be useful. Just ignore anything that's 10's and 0-1's. Also ignore anything that doesn't have more then a few sentences.

Since this is a Steam game:

- on Steam people can only write reviews if they actually own a game,

- on Steam the reviews aren't completely anonymous, you can look up each user profile for info like hours played, other games played, etc,

- on Steam people aren't obliged to award arbitrary ratings, just a thumbs up or a thumbs down.

Personally I find the user reviews on Steam to be very useful. Off course there's loads of people who are butthurt for some reason on Steam as well, same as on any other place where people can vent. Steam also has a pretty neat curator function so you can track reviews given by whichever curator(s) you'd deem trustworthy.

Before buying a game I also tend to look for user review videos by some of the more insightful Youtubers. I also tend to look for streams on Twitch by some of the less obnoxious streamers.

I agree to a degree.

There's generally a few different types of people with negative reviews who I tend to ignore completely. There's the people who still piss on anything Bethesda because they're still butthurt that it's not FO1, even FO3 until fairly recently was still getting negative reviews on Metacritic by these people. F:NV got these people to a lesser extent because for some reason slapping an Obsidian sticker on it made the mostly FO3+mods gameplay alright for a lot of those people. There's the people who will piss on anything they feel has to much hype. Then there's the people who just had to high expectations. Etc, etc.

That said, yes, there's a lot of people who will value a game on it's own merits in a balanced manner. Those reviews can be positive or negative. The majority of those (80-90%) are still positive though. So the game does seem to do a few things right.

With regards to the GotY awards (there's quite a few these days). I'd say that a better game out this year. That game got most meaningful GotY's: The Witcher 3.

I love that game (The Witcher 3), but it does have it's shortcomings. Same as I'm loving FO4, which also has it's shortcomings. I've been gaming since the early 80's and I'd have to dig really deep to find a handful of games which I'd consider (or considered) perfect. But I think that's very reasonable. How a game can be "better" seems to be highly subjective to me.

Luckily though Bethesda games are very modable. Any gripe I have with a Bethesda game tends to be ironed out within a reasonable amount of time. I never expect Bethesda to give me a perfect game, I expect to mod their games to hell to get a near perfect game.

Your reasoning suggests that you think the reviews of both sites come from the same people. I doubt that's the case. Different samples yield different results.

a lot of people are unhappy with it? hahaha, its more like the trolls on metacritic haven't actually played the game and they spammed a ton of lousy reviews, its no big secret the old rpg fans are upset because bethesda owns and develops the fallout franchise, so "the people unhappy with it" for the most part aren't people who play it, they did the same with fallout 3 and comments like "obsidian should make it" or "it doens't have branching quests" or "its not a real rpg"...these aren't people who play the game, these are people who hate bethesda and their ownership of the fallout franchise, the people who like it are all playing it, on steam, youtube, twitch, there is tons of people playing fallout 4, game sales and activity is a real reading of if people like the game, its rating is almost 9 across the board, which is very good, metacritc user reviews DON"T COUNT, since those clowns just spammed low score reviews because of their hate for bethesda, simple as that and if you're not happy with it why are you on here?, maybe you don't have the game either, anyone can post on some forum without having the actual game, most of the worst negativity i would say are people who NEVER played the game.

Yeah the dfference is the Amazon ones are 100% genuine from verfied buyers of the game, these are the reviews that matter.

You are still always turning it like you require it. Fallout 3 still got a far better user review then F4 did on metacritic, did the trolls lost interest there or what? Fallout 4 plays a lot on twitch, and? Every damned new AAA title does that, independent if it′s good or not. Diablo 3 played more then 4 months actively even that the most known twitch streamer told in the first week that the game lacks on dozents of problems and design mistakes.

Fallout 4 has a 50:50 rating on metacritic, on Steam it "looks" better for the first, but if you start reading tons of positive reviews are written like "it′s a good shooter, but not a good fallout". This might still be a meaningful description but also shows that something "might" actually be going wrong in the designstyle bethesda is doing.

All this....distortion (i refuse to say hate, hate is just another catchword to defame criticans) does not come out of nowhere.

You need to actually read the reviews. Even verified buyers still have the same complains as the as many of the bad ones on metacritic when people actually bothered to write a real review. Look at the Steam reviews. It the same thing there.

And if having lower expectations doesn't work, you can try to lower your standards.

Some people are trying so hard to convince themselves it's a great game... Even without calling anyone who disagrees a troll or seeing the reviews as some sort of conspiracy, this is quiet pathetic.

Not all of those are verified reviews though. Assuming you're using Amazon UK's PS4 reviews, as I gathered from this:

There's not even 760 verified purchases for the PS4 version. Only 717 of the 835 reviews are verified purchases. And even then, not all of them are 4/5 or 5/5. The second one when ranked by most helpful is 2/5.

You've misrepresented the data to prove your point, trumpeting the notion that only "verified purchases," as in reviews that came from a person who bought the game from Amazon as opposed to Wal-Mart of Best Buy, count, as if where you bought the game invalidates your opinion if you express it on another site (it doesn't,) while simultaneously inflating the numbers to make it seem like there were more verified purchases than there actually were and that 760 of them were positive, despite the fact that there aren't even 760 of them in total.

I think at its heart Fallout 4 is a great game. Exploration, discovery and atmosphere are Bethesda's strong points, and Fallout 4 nails these features like no other game. Its also a very strong shooter - okay, not THE BEST shooter, but very competent, and when you pair that with the other features you've got a really fun game with 80+ hours of entertainment.

Where Fallout 4 falls down for me is in replayability and the dreaded dialogue wheel, two things which can often feed into one another, but are separate problems. This is where I suspect a lot of the dissatisfaction (or 'hate') is coming from. People were expecting Fallout 4 to be better in every way than its predecessors, and it isn't. It got the combat right, it got the exploration, discovery and atmosphere right (it even got the visuals right, regardless of what many people say), but it failed in other important areas - areas that many people think were far more important to get right than including a voiced protagonist, or having Codsworth call you by 1 of 1000 names.

I continue to play Fallout 3 and NV even after all these years, racking up thousands of hours and multiple good, evil or somewhere-in-the-middle playthroughs. With Fallout 4, I played through once and I'm really struggling to continue with my second playthrough. In some respects its the weakest Fallout game Bethesda has made.

Yes, there are certainly people out there just slamming Fallout 4 because its not Fallout 2. But there are also long time Bethesda fans slamming Fallout 4 for simply not being what it should have been. Bethesda borrowed a lot of ideas from other genres and games and put them into Fallout, and those features arguably pushed other more important features out. The end result is a game that has kind of lost its way, and lost its identity.

In short, manipulating data works in both directions.

Sorry I'm having fun?