Easy Allies Reviews Now on Metacritic


  • admin

    Today we're happy to announce that Easy Allies reviews are now featured on Metacritic. Since we recently finished the update on our reviews page, I got in touch, and after a quick phone call, they promptly started adding our reviews. I was surprised to find out that not only was it unnecessary to explain who we are, but the team at Metacritic already has a lot of respect for our work. It was really just about reaching out and making that connection. They also work closely with Game Rankings and are in the process of having our reviews added there as well.

    Thanks to all of our patrons for your continued support in allowing us to keep making reviews at the same high standards we always have. You can see our Metacritic profile page at the link below.

    http://www.metacritic.com/publication/easy-allies?filter=games&page=0

    -Bloodworth



  • Great news, Blood! Congratulations! I just watched this week's EZA podcast and saw you talking about that with Kyle and the others. Hopefully this means even better tidings for you guys in the near-future like Kyle predicted.


  • Global Moderator

    Thats amazing! well done! saw this being mentioned in the twitch chat! You really deserve it with your quality reviews! :D



  • Congrats!

    This great because you'll get more exposure as well, so it's not just a feather in your cap.



  • Awesome news!

    Like it or not Metacritic is a huge gatekeeper in the industry, this can only be a good thing for EZA going forward.



  • Literally the SECOND option for TLG on Metacritic. I hope this brings EZA exposure at the least and hopefully Patron's too. Maybe give an awful review to a new release to get at the bottom of the list as well :D KIDDING! (unless the game deserves it)

    alt text



  • @GoTaco sadly EZA gloss over the control and camera issues and don't mark the game score down because of it, so ill not be putting any faith in future reviews from the reviewer.

    EZA should check out the Gameinformer talk about the game to see why it's not 5 stars.



  • @yungstar said in Easy Allies Reviews Now on Metacritic:

    sadly EZA gloss over the control and camera issues and don't mark the game score down because of it, so ill not be putting any faith in future reviews from the reviewer.
    EZA should check out the Gameinformer talk about the game to see why it's not 5 stars.

    Are we really doing this again?

    A review is someone's opinion on a game. It's not something objective.
    For example some people can be more sensitive to camera issues than others, as in one person can be more forgiving about it. They could also value certain elements of a game more (like say a deep combat system) over the other reviewer. Who is right in this instance according to you?
    The entire point of a review is that it is a person's experience and opinion on a game in written (or video) form. You read reviews to get a better understanding of a game. The more reviews you read the better.
    You fixating on the score of all things is beyond silly. But hey if that's how you roll then by all means.



  • @yungstar

    I don't think you get the concept of personal values. They actually do touch on that. It didn't resonate as a major flaw.

    Different people value different things.



  • @yungstar L&R despite differing opinions, however did you notice the part in the review where a hidden camera option that's not listed on the game controls screen was mentioned? I feel like other people reviewing the game missed this, and that's why they have had trouble with the camera. Control issues also possibly have explanation in the way the devs intended movement and interacting with a wild creature to feel. If you've ever had a pet, you know they don't always do exactly what you tell them to.



  • @suplextrain said:

    @yungstar said in Easy Allies Reviews Now on Metacritic:

    sadly EZA gloss over the control and camera issues and don't mark the game score down because of it, so ill not be putting any faith in future reviews from the reviewer.
    EZA should check out the Gameinformer talk about the game to see why it's not 5 stars.

    Are we really doing this again?

    A review is someone's opinion on a game. It's not something objective.
    You fixating on the score of all things is beyond silly. But hey if that's how you roll then by all means.

    you appear to be confused on what i said. try reading it again. i'd then suggest you take a look at the latest Gameinformer Show and Podcast Beyond where they discuss the problems with the game and why they could not give it 100% like EZA have done.

    and those problems they talk of is why the game is not a worthy 5* review. as i say EZA will not be a trusted review source for me when they fail on the obvious.



  • This post is deleted!


  • This post is deleted!


  • @yungstar Making three separate posts replying to three separate people only saying to watch some video you agree with really isn't the best way to prove whatever point you're trying to make.



  • @yungstar said in Easy Allies Reviews Now on Metacritic:

    i'd then suggest you take a look at the latest Gameinformer Show and Podcast Beyond where they discuss the problems with the game and why they could not give it 100% like EZA have done.

    Why should I care about this and how is this relevant? That's the people of Game Informer's opinion. Are you telling me that whatever GI says is somehow objective truth or something? Are you saying that Ben's opinions and experience is wrong because you or GI says so?
    Using your logic I can ask you to present some games you'd give a 10/10 and then I'd come up with criticism to "prove" why those games cannot be 10/10 and that your opinion is wrong. Why? Because I say so.

    You don't understand what a review is. A review is not math where you add or subtract points based on objective facts to land at a correct number. The reason you should read or watch a review is to get a better understanding of a game so you can make an educated purchase. The more reviews you read the better your understanding will be.

    and those problems they talk of is why the game is not a worthy 5* review. as i say EZA will not be a trusted review source for me when they fail on the obvious.

    There is not a single reviewer that should be viewed as "trusted", not even Game Informer that you bring up. Do you know why? Because everyone has different opinions. You seem to think that reviews can be right or wrong, which simply isn't the case. You should remember this for the next time you disagree with one of your "trusted" reviwers.
    I mean if I don't have problems with the controls in game X but someone else does, who exactly is right here? Can you tell me that? Then can you tell me why said person is right and the other is wrong?

    But hey, you do what you want. No point in continuing this discussion for several reasons, one of them being that it's off-topic.


  • Global Moderator

    @yungstar Just removing the extra 2 posts that were essentially duplicates.

    If you're more into how a game performs and feel like that should affect a review score in every instance that's totally fair.

    However I really think you're looking far too much into the actual score and not the content of the review itself. Bloodworth believes the game is a masterpiece for him but he does say in the review that it has technical problems. Seems to be all the informaton that's needed.



  • @yungstar

    They say in the concluding paragraph of the EZA review that the game is not in fact perfect. I believe you're too torn up on the score. All criticisms were laid out and presented just as the GI review. However, the EZA critic did not feel like those problems took away from its "Masterful" status.

    They still outlined how the game plays and operates, and present the viewer with a better understand of the game (which is exactly what a review is supposed to do).


  • admin

    @yungstar Even though in this case GI and IGN had significantly lower scores, you have to keep the difference in scales in mind as well. IGN uses a full 100 point scale. Game Informer uses a 10 point scale with .25 increments. At Easy Allies, we've decided to use a much broader scale - 5 stars with half-star increments. This was done for several reasons, but one of those was the fact that at GT, it felt impossible for any game to reach a full 10. There's always some small issue that would get in the way of that and reserve our judgment to something such as a 9.6 or a 9.8. A half-star is a huge chunk of the scale. This isn't a rule by any means, but for the sake of comparison, I'd say 5 Stars would apply to most games we gave a 9.5 or above at GT. We still intend for 5 Stars to be somewhat rare, but we don't think it's out of the question to see a couple each year.

    As others mentioned, I didn't gloss over The Last Guardian's flaws, I acknowledged them and communicated them. Some of the portrayal others give to its flaws I don't connect with at all. I had a couple of minor annoyances from time to time, but nothing that felt like a significant detraction from the overall experience of what I feel is a historic game, quite unlike anything that's come before it and perhaps anything after it as well.

    This is the first time I've given 5 Stars. I never gave a 10 at GT, and I only gave one 10 at Nintendo World Report. For someone who's been writing about games for 22 years, I think you should reflect on that before simply writing off whether you trust my reviews. We can certainly disagree on the score and the importance of its flaws, but I think if you look at the content of my review, you'll see that everything you need to know has been communicated.



  • I am very dumb when it comes to numbers. What is the difference between 100 point and 10 point systems? Wouldn't both be 100? Or do the increments of .1 vs .25 mean something more important than I realize?

    Again, math, numbers... not my thing.


  • admin

    @GoTaco the increments are the difference. IGN uses every number on the spectrum. So a game could go between a 7.8, a 7.9, to an 8.0. While Game Informer can go 7.5, 7.75, to 8.0. Then for us, we go between 3.5, 4.0, and 4.5. So basically with a larger scale, you're not splitting hairs so much.