PC scores, for consistency. There are plenty of better games out there, but most AAA studios would kill for that kind of consistently good-but-not-quite-legendary track record.

[–] picassowary 4 points 1 year ago

oh yeah the metacritic scores are good but i was referring to audience reception about characters, narrative, etc

fallout 3 in particular is a fun one because once people started beating it there was a general upswell of “what the fuck was that?” that was loud enough that we got a changed ending in DLC :)

[–] beefsack 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Morrowind scoring lower than Oblivion and Skyrim is a travesty.

[–] LetMeEatCake 1 points 1 year ago

After a certain point, scores are as much based on hype as quality.

That's not even a malicious choice, either. Hype influences our experiences and perceptions of whatever is being hyped. It's intuitively obvious that people will enjoy a good thing that they are hyped about more than a good thing that they are not hyped about. Hype is strongest just before release... which is exactly when reviewers play and assign a score to a game.

A sequel to a well received game is going to have more hype than the predecessor in most circumstances. Morrowind sold something like 5-10x the copies as Daggerfall and came about at a time when there was a lot of upheaval in the industry from a target-audience standpoint: a lot of potential Morrowind players (and reviewers) would have not played Daggerfall.

In essence, Oblivion was reviewed more positively because of the positive reception of Morrowind. The positive reception of Oblivion in turn boosted Skyrim.

This is not to say people would hate the games without the prior game before it or hype, just that there is a "hype boost" for games.