Guess the game's metacritic Critic/Reviewer score after 2 weeks of release

Got the idea from the Sale thread and people's arguments for buying.

-

Please note:

• release v1.0 will have the single player campaign in it; procedural generated galactic war
• release v1.0 will have the custom server support (probably)

-

Disclaimers: I hate scores. I hate/dont-use metacritic. I don't like reviewers very much either; including the new breed of "self proclaimed non-reviewers" youtube reviewers. I only created the thread since metacritic score and the general reviewer opinion (both on review sites and sites as youtube) will affect the game's long term success. And because it's interesting to see if the community can guess right.

Between 8 and 9. Possibly 7, but I doubt it.

I'd personally give it a 9 - 10, but I realise that not everyone will enjoy the game so much and there will be protest votes and trolls.

I bet everyone in this forum will vote "less than 6"

Considering how incomplete it will be at release (and people will judge it based on that) I expect very low scores.

You just lost your bet. Gimme money, but hyperinflated currencies are not allowed.

Haha, I guess i lost when i voted between 9 and 10.

9 - 10 IF they do implement all features. Also performance improvements.

I question the purpose of this thread.

To be reasonable it would be around 7, if it can reach what it looks like in the initial kickstart trailer.

I think it's too early to tell.
This is just starting to turn into a real game, there's still much to do for Uber.

I mean if Uber released this next month, then I'd expect a 7-8. If Uber instead worked 2-3 more months on it, then we'd might see a real gem in gaming history, and I'd expect more like a 8-9.

It depends on whether they manage to fix performance, lategame issues (slow lategame, too much micromanagement), better balance, and make for a better UI. If they manage to do that, then I believe that this game will get very nice scores and that it will be very successful.

Greetings

The game will be mostly complete at release. What are you talking about?

They are wrapping up the process. I'm expecting release in June or July

you must have set a new distance record with how far you jumped to that conclusion.

It will be finished enough that Uber are happy calling it a mostly "complete" game.

I'd say about 8-9. Uber made a lot of promises when kickstarter started. Time has shown them that they simply cannot meet all of that at release (I have no doubts they will be met later). That with the fact that there are bound to be some bugs in the release (I'm hoping far fewer than in initial gamma release) and let us not forget that a lot of metacritics opinions are either bought or very subjective I think a scope somewhere from 8.1 to 9.0 Is pretty realistic.

To replace Metacritic with a slightly more informed group consensus

Sorry what? The game runs . . . pretty well, tbh. More will always be welcomed, but it's definitely playable right now.

Actually uber themselves have claimed release to be a milestone they want to reach and that they will continue on it afterwards. It's my understanding of their messaging that it will be "more complete" then it is now, not that it will be "complete" in the general sense. This is also inline with their development practices, they have very firmly states they use an agile workflow, release as a "final" state is not compatible with agile practices and thinking.

If the features in question are actually worthy to be called complete by a neutral 3rd party is questionable. A reviewer may look at even existing "complete" features like the system generator and refer to it as broken and unpolished with how many bugs it has (planets poping out of orbits, orbits colliding easily, etc) and the difficulties in setting some things up such as planet velocity.

Also, I would expect a lot of reviewers to actually not even try the game for too long (as with every other game), so if they play on a earth planet expect "meh graphics" to be the general opinion and if they spend their time on volcanic planet expect the graphics to get some praise; I would be surprised if nobody actually bitches in a review about the mountain biome for example.

There are many things about the game that are "excused" due to the early-access/beta tag, but expect it to easily thrown under the bus and in the same pile as say Citadels if it doesn't meet "release standards." This is especially likely considering how the kickstarter imaging doesn't match up, some reviewers may excuse that, some likely will cling to it and call for tar and pitchforks.

now we are arguing semantics. Uber saying they want it "more complete" to me is "mostly complete" given what they have said they want in at launch. i.e. galactic war, polish, offline mode. I forget where gas giants are in there, but I wasn't counting them, along with unit cannon.

I don't know, I would expect most reviewers for reputable sites to play the game for a good 5-10 hours, which would give them a fair amount of time to try a couple of different biomes, multi./single planet systems and most of the mechanics in the game.

Only games like Dark Souls and Final Fantasy and such actually have the prestige to force them into the "5-10 hours" treatment, and even then it's iffy—being part of a franchise or some spiritual successor to a beloved franchise doesn't actually earn you any brownie points with reviewers sadly. Reviewers aren't in the business of providing an accurate picture, they're in the business of drawing eyeballs to their site/channel/whatever and because they get everything for free they have little to no investment or desire for anything. If they'll shameless claim that they spend 1h or less on a 3rd person title with a story and skill progression system how much do you think they'll think appropriate for a RTS game with out either? =P

I would say 1-2h at most if they're making a video about it in the process, if even that; and I don't mean making a 1h video of course.

It's fine if you think like that; it's very likely a reviewer will do too.
I feel I explained it enough in my previous post and don't really have anything to add.

How "promises" and "results" will get judged will be interesting.

Unless the unit variety increases some, expect that to be a big mark against it.

Esp T1, it's bland an unimaginative. At least some of to have more interesting variance, if only by a little.

Unit models also need an update. But thats more an art thing.

I would rate it a 7 unless they do some major ui overhauls and add some more units. Then an 8.

This gAme has a lot more development until 9 territory. I don't think umber is aiming for 9 territory on release. Don't. Think they have that kind of budget or staff.

Hey at least it won't be as bad as it was when PA was first released to Steam.