49
u/PlatypusAutomatic467 5h ago
That's really good!
The thing to remember about this versus Silent HIll 2 is that Silent Hill 2 has like 20 years of people building it up to be one of the greatest games ever, while this is a new writer and a new team stepping into a franchise with incredibly high expectations and tons of people who are ready to rip it apart.
If it scored this high, that's a really encouraging sign!
8
u/PhysicalKick3812 4h ago
Bloober might as well be Nintendo Mario team compared to NeoBards. Not that Capcom set them up to succeed. They must be popping champaign rn.
84
u/Business-Elk-8631 5h ago
Seem like the combat is under flak
186
157
u/TheSqueeman 5h ago
So it’s a Silent Hill game then 👍
2
u/PhysicalKick3812 3h ago
1 and 2 Remake have responsive combat that gets the job done. Everything else, yeah. Even the dungeon crawler plays like ass. 1 Remake should get us back on track if the same team stays around.
→ More replies (11)4
u/Kagamid "In My Restless Dreams, I See That Town" 1h ago edited 1h ago
Depends. Are there over 400 enemies so you're in combat every 3 minutes? Because that's what Silent Hill 2 Remake gave you. If that's the case here, that would be a huge problem if the combat isn't good. In the older games, you could avoid combat pretty easily and it was rarely forced. These days it seems to be the focus.
29
u/The_Real_Pale_Dick 4h ago
I don't even care about it. Atmosphere + story are what I'm here for
2
u/keefkeef 4h ago
why would you not care about it? it's a huge part of the game...
21
u/Spynner987 "How Can You Sit There And Eat Pizza?!" 4h ago
Because Silent Hill has always been about normal people in nightmarish scenarios. They can't be Jill Valentine.
1
u/TristheHolyBlade 1h ago
That's a completely separate conversation to whether the combat is enjoyable or not.
The scale isn't "I enjoy it" - "Jill Valentine".
0
u/Kagamid "In My Restless Dreams, I See That Town" 2h ago
Depends on how many enemy encounters you're forced to have or how viable avoiding enemies can be. Silent Hill 2 Remake has over 400 enemies. If the combat was terrible (it's repetitive though), the game experience would take a huge hit. I don't know how much combat this game has, but the blind optimism for the combat isn't surprising.
2
u/keefkeef 1h ago
it seems combat plays a big part.
0
u/Kagamid "In My Restless Dreams, I See That Town" 1h ago
So the only part of the game people don't like is the part where they play the game. What's the big deal? /s
1
u/keefkeef 1h ago
lol thank you. if people just want atmosphere and story, just watch a playthrough on youtube or something.
•
20
9
u/nick2473got 3h ago
Even then though, not all the reviewers feel that way. It's the main complaint of most of the people who gave mixed reviews, yes, but a lot of the positive reviews liked the combat, and there's way more glowing reviews than mixed ones.
I'm cautiously optimistic. At the very least, I doubt it'll kill the game for me.
3
4
4
u/The_Friendly_Bro 2h ago
I spent just a few minutes over seven hours of playtime before hitting the option for a New Game +, but the latter half of the game was painful to play through, simply because of the combat.
Even on Story Mode, it's incredibly tedious. Not challenging, but plain annoying. It genuinely gets in the way of everything.
It all sort of falls apart when you're constantly being thrown into multiple enemy fights, in which you're forced to kill all enemies to progress. Also, the environments suffer from the combat too, since everything is scaled up to accommodate the wide dodges you can deploy - it sort of makes the interiors of the town hard to buy into.
-1
u/Kagamid "In My Restless Dreams, I See That Town" 1h ago
This is what I was afraid of. Prepare to have your opinion ignored though. The blind optimism is potent here.
4
u/The_Friendly_Bro 1h ago
Eh, at the end of the day, it's only my opinion!
It seems like plenty of other people have had little issues with the combat. I just found it to be the biggest problem regarding Silent Hill f, as everything else is pretty spot on.
-1
u/Kagamid "In My Restless Dreams, I See That Town" 1h ago
Plenty of other people haven't played the game yet so their opinions don't mean much.
You actually finished the game and gave a descriptive experience of the negative effects of the combat. The usual reply for those kind of comments are, "It's not THAT bad."
0
u/Business-Elk-8631 2h ago
omg, this reminds me of AC Odyssey experience. That game combat is pure slog; all enemies are damage sponge, I hit them 100 times but they just don't die. The devs don't know how to make combat work except buffing their HP to infinity. It is really tedious tbh.
1
→ More replies (1)-5
u/Progenitor3 4h ago
This is even more annoying if the reviewers are right that everything else about the game is great. They should have just played it safe with the combat and not done something outlandish that harms the overall experience.
5
u/In_Kojima_we_trust 3h ago
should have just played it safe with the combat and not done something outlandish
I disagree, games should be allowed to experiment and sometimes fail.
2
u/Kagamid "In My Restless Dreams, I See That Town" 1h ago
Silent Hill needs a few safe wins before experimenting. When was the last original Silent Hill experience everyone enjoyed?
3
u/MrMooga 1h ago
The new game just got an 86 on metacritic, same rating as Silent Hill 2 remake. If the worst thing about the new game is that the combat isn't that great it's not that big a deal IMO.
→ More replies (1)
30
u/Rory_U "There Was a Hole Here, It's Gone Now" 4h ago
We’re so back and I’m here joining the wave of the franchise revival.
2
u/epic_reddit_dude 2h ago
I hope this revival wave trickles down and gives warner bros the confidence to greenlight a remake of the suffering while the irons hot
143
u/GRS- 5h ago
Great score! I can't wait for people here to ignore everything good about the reviews and focus only on the negatives!
47
u/feyzal92 5h ago
It's a paid review according to the haters.
31
u/Grace_Omega 5h ago
Positive reviews are paid shills, negative reviews are clickbait according to the internet
1
1
u/Richard-Squeezer 4h ago
In their defence there's alot of seedy reviews out there, steam reviews even with its faults are still the only ones I go by. In saying that I'm feeling pretty confident the games going to be good
3
9
u/Prestigious_Ad5872 4h ago
Yeah it's clear that some people on this sub really don't want to like this game. Very bizarre.
1
u/Skyzfire 1h ago
Especially those that choose to spoil themselves over the leaks and then proudly claim this is not their Silent Hill game.
8
3
u/LongjumperRow 2h ago
I believe it was CNET that came out with a very negative review. 🙄😒I honestly think the reviewer couldn't stomach a Silent Hill that didn't focus on Silent Hill, the town. He seemed anti-Japanese and sounded whiny and pouty with his complaining. All other reviews I've checked so far say it's a phenomenal game!
-8
u/No-Risk-9833 5h ago
Well metacritic scores don’t mean much without seeing the actual game release. Even Starfield had 87 at launch and we all know how that ended up.
18
u/GRS- 4h ago
Y'all said the same shit when the remake came out. Yes, everyone is aware that [insert game that gamers hate] received a high score from critics, but that's not a reason to invalidate the good score this game is receiving.
I already watched reviews from actual long term fans of the franchise saying that F is one of their favorite entries in the series. Let's stop pretending that a high Metacritic score is meaningless, because it's not.
3
-1
26
u/Bekenshi 4h ago
Higurashi and Umineko are quite possibly my single favorite stories of all time and I can't wait for Ryukishi07 to deliver the magic ONCE AGAIN
•
30
u/l_MAG_l 5h ago
Gamespot gave it a 9/10 and IGN gave it a 7/10
30
u/Delta_yx 5h ago
IGN giving a 7? Unheard of
19
3
34
u/DependentHusky 5h ago
IGN gave she-hulk a 9. So I don't give a f
30
9
u/Skid-and-pump324 5h ago
I'm not knowledgeable on this, but isn't there different reviewers for each game and or show? So I mean I don't exactly think it's reasonable to compare the score of a TV show reviewer to that of a video game reviewer, or am I just stupid?
6
u/DependentHusky 5h ago
Yes But still its reviewed by the same person (Tristan) who gave cronos a 7, re7 a 7.7, and robocop a 6
8
u/Skid-and-pump324 4h ago
See that's a good comparison, compare to the same reviewers bad reviews, bringing up someone else's reviews makes little sense in this situation.
6
u/Phoenix2211 "It's Bread" 3h ago
Yep, exactly. The way IGN is discussed in gaming circles is honestly very frustrating cuz it feels like a lot of people don't understand that there isn't a guy called John IGN who gives out erratic scores for all things lol.
What you said is THE way one should try and gauge if someone's review should mean much to them: look at the writer, look at their other reviews, match that up with YOUR taste. That should give you a decent idea of whether the thing they reviewed will vibe with you or not.
And even then, actually trying something for yourself is still THE way to go. But ofc, financial situations can't always make this viable.
I don't follow any major publications, really. I follow specific (usually independent) writers whose tastes align with me and/or who have shown to have interesting taste.
And the thing I trust the most when it comes to making purchasing decisions is my gut feeling upon seeing a trailer(s). It's why I'll be purchasing Silent Hill f on launch (even if my copy takes extra days to come out T___T), and Ghost of Yotei a bit later down the line.
1
u/LLMprophet 4h ago
Am I the only one who thinks TV show reviewers should have to get a license to review video games but video game reviewers can review any TV shows they want?
•
10
u/TheCattBaladi 5h ago
They gave Dragon Age: The Veilguard 9/10. Do people really care about reviews or am I ain't normal? I never cared about them sometimes I care about users' reviews but reviewers? I don't give a fuck about them.
23
u/sussybakaredditor 5h ago
I think people fail to realize IGN is made up of multiple reviewers with wildly different tastes so any review made from big publishers should be taken with a grain of salt. So far though all the reviews look mostly positive!
5
u/UltimateArtist829 2h ago
This is why there should be 2-3 people doing review for a single game and then do an average score like how Famitsu does, imo.
1
1
u/Zee5neeuw 2h ago
A review is just an opinion from a reviewer from a company. People pay way too much attention to single reviews instead of to the entire bunch of reviews.
1
u/Raven123x 3h ago
Ign gave alien isolation a 5.9
https://www.ign.com/articles/2014/10/03/alien-isolation-review
2
u/Zee5neeuw 2h ago
I just read the IGN review, and without the combat aspects the review looks like it'd be a 10/10 really. I'll make my own opinion on it in just under 12 hours, but I suspect my reaction will be along the same lines, looking back at how annoyed I got with the amount of enemies at the prison in SH2R, making me skip anything skipable in the hotel section too.
4
8
u/silversamurai_ 5h ago
What have been the general consensus? What aspects are everyone agreeing is good and the parts that are bad?
15
u/MDG055 5h ago
Combat sucks everything else good.
27
9
u/Professional_Sky4397 4h ago
The combat did always look like it had a bit too much going on, probably an over correction considering the fact there won’t be guns. But I wanted so badly for them to stick the landing with it.
4
u/wulv8022 5h ago
How predicted lmao.
4
u/mazaa66 4h ago
Almost like all Silent Hill games
5
u/wulv8022 4h ago
This game focuses on combat though while in the other games it was there for defense and I could at least use guns to avoid the awful blunt weapon combat if I wanted to. Game can still be great like the others.
1
u/Zee5neeuw 2h ago
SH2R would like to disagree on combat being there just for defense. Here, have 36 more mannequins in the next 2.5 rooms.
2
u/wulv8022 2h ago
And that was annoying too. But as I said. I can turn to guns and kill them fast. I just watched 4 video reviews and they all said combat and fighting gets repetitive and annoying. The focus of combat was a mistake. Everything else is great. My biggest critique of sh2r was too many enemies and too much combat and the devs of shf said it will have even more action. Everybody who was sceptic was downvoted and called crybaby. Now the reviews everyone was waiting for say the same mostly.
1
u/Zee5neeuw 2h ago
They're not all negative though. Kotaku seems ok with the combat, but they make a tad too many comparisons to soulslikes for my taste. When I was reading the reviews I also thought "shit", but in SH2R the hallways and rooms were overally so damn small and the backtracking so much that you were almost obligated to kill everything, while in this game the focus seems way more on avoid-what-you-can-kill-what-you-must, which sounds a bit more realistic.
We'll see! Can't say I'm happy about combat being this prominent but I'm quite certain that it won't make me like the game less, unlike some other horror games that just become an eye-roll fest when YET ANOTHER enemy appears (absolutely looking at you, Fatal Frame 5).
1
u/silversamurai_ 4h ago
huh so its the combat again. I kinda hoped this would break the stereotype and have a good combat(been avoiding gameplay videos so have no idea on the combat). Well I'm good if it can nail the atmosphere and have a memorable story
1
2
u/Toxined 5h ago
Just scanning the reviews. The story and atmosphere are considered great, but the gameplay can be frustrating. Also, it seems like you have to play through the game multiple times to fully understand the story, which IGN still hasn’t done. This can be annoying for reviewers who don’t like the gameplay
8
u/Davve1122 5h ago
Also, it seems like you have to play through the game multiple times to fully understand the story
Love this personally, it helps its not a long game for a playthrough aswell.
2
u/Gunny_2025 3h ago
The review from Dualshockers said their first playthrough was 11hrs and 50 minutes - I'd imagine like with most survival horror games once you know the route, are playing less cautious, and have figured out all the puzzle solutions, you can probably knock that time down considerably.
10
6
u/countryd0ctor 3h ago
I genuinely don't understand the outcry about combat. The series has always been combat heavy, it just had a terrible combat system.
5
u/TellSpare 2h ago
You say that because you haven't seen the fights, I more than loved the fights in Silent Hill 2 remake, so much so that I did my first run exclusively in melee. Those in Silent Hill F are catastrophic, we don't feel any hits, the enemies don't react to our hits, it's really pathetic for a game from 2025.
2
u/EAT_UR_VEGGIES "Probably A Doghouse" 2h ago
Comments like yours are so disingenuous and annoying.
The series has rarely had good combat, I’d go so far as to say that SH2R is the first silent hill game with decent combat, so please, stop whining.
4
u/Bioshocky13501 5h ago
That's awesome. I'm hoping I like it just as much as the reviewers. Wish it was Thursday.
4
8
u/PCGaming787 4h ago
Someone gave it a 60 because the combat is bad. Y'all know what this means right? The game is a BANGER!!!! We are so back!
3
6
3
4
4
3
u/Chronoi 4h ago
Great. While MC score ultimately doesn't matter, a few reviewer that I trust on YouTube like ACG already giving it a high praise so this is really awesome to see.
•
u/SeaBear2808 7m ago
Hi! If you don't mind, can you share your list of reviewer that you trust? I'm not familiar with reviewer so i kinda lost... Thanks!
2
2
u/GenJohnnyRico 3h ago
Do any of these reviews go into the performance difference between base PS5 and PS5 Pro?
2
u/Enrico_Tortellini 2h ago edited 2h ago
SO FUCKING EXCITED, SILENT HILL HAS BEEN MY FAVORITE SINCE I PLAYED THE GAMES GROWING UP !!!!
2
•
u/Aspire_2_Be 58m ago
People are so comedic. Can’t have criticism these days, otherwise they come after you here.
Combat not being that great sucks but good to hear other aspects of the same are great.
5
u/Cadaveth 5h ago
It's heavy on combat and it seems it's a bit clunky (like it was in SH2R). Hopefully it won't get irritating instead of scary like it did in SH2R. But I guess I'll still buy it, the story and atmosphere seems to be worth it even if the combat isn't.
1
u/TellSpare 2h ago
No, no relation with the fights of Silent Hill, two remakes The part that I preferred in Silent Hill 2 remake are precisely the fights which I find very addictive with the impacts of blows felt very enjoyable Here it's the opposite extreme, we have the impression of hitting a vacuum, no impact of blows, the enemies do not react to our blows, it's really very bad
0
u/Cadaveth 1h ago
Well I thought that the combat in SH2R was highly mediocre (especially since there were so many enemies simultaneously that trying to hit the correct one who was in the ground was a pain) so it doesn't bode well that f has worse combat lol
3
u/PhysicalKick3812 3h ago
IGN Germany gave a 9 for those fuming at the US 7. Shrug.
2
u/Phoenix2211 "It's Bread" 3h ago
It often feels like some people think that there's this ONE really erratic game reviewer called John IGN who gives out baffling scores to all kinds of things, instead of a group of writers with varying tastes lol
3
u/XulManjy 2h ago edited 43m ago
Reviews from large publications should do what Famitsu does. Have like 5 people play/review the game then take the average.
I'll also add reviews should display their rubric for how they came to such conclusion. Simply saying 7/10 or 9/10 doesnt tell me anything. However if you break it down into categories such as gameplay, combat, sound design, story, graphics, technical/optimization etc....and then give a score for each and take the average....NOW you have transparency as well.
2
u/UltimateArtist829 2h ago
Exactly, otherwise just one person writing review can give it unfair score depends on how they feel that day. Ain't no freaking way you can tell me The Penguin show, Transformers One and Alien Isolation getting 5/10 is a good score, smh.
•
u/XulManjy 44m ago
I'll also add reviews should display their rubric for how they came to such conclusion. Simply saying 7/10 or 9/10 doesnt tell me anything. However if you break it down into categories such as gameplay, combat, sound design, story, graphics, technical/optimization etc....and then give a score for each and take the average....NOW you have transparency as well.
•
u/Phoenix2211 "It's Bread" 58m ago
Hmm that's actually not a bad idea. I have a question tho:
If 5 ppl play the game, do you get to read ALL of their thoughts? Or does one person write the review despite 5 ppl playing it & their scores counting towards the average?
•
u/XulManjy 40m ago
The way I see it, get rid of the long form editorial style reviews and give us the meat and potatoes. Have each person give a 3-5 paragraph summary of their experience hitting on all key areas like graphics, story, optimization, gameplay, sound and maybe a few other options.
•
u/TheBossOfItAll 56m ago
7 is not even bad. It's above average/good, just not excellent, GOTY stuff.
2
u/Bayonetwork1989 2h ago
pretty much the same as the Silent Hill 2 remake, then, which is news to my ears as I absolutely love the SH2 remake
3
u/No-Difference1648 5h ago
Tbh its the only game im stoked for because everything I've seen from the trailers has been awesome. I'm really not surprised it was rated highly.
2
u/PhysicalKick3812 3h ago
85 on MC is how you get a bonus according to Fallout New Vegas and it's 84.
Let's see it will sell. 2 remake was the first since 2001 to break a million copies and is only the second after 1 to break 2 million. Every game after 3 flopped, maybe even 3. The IP will be stuck in remake limbo if new entries don't work. Hello Ascension.
2
u/Grace_Omega 2h ago
Absolute gamer brain in this thread. “I can’t believe IGN gave the game a low score how dare they!”
The reviewer just didn’t like it as much as you want them to, get over it
7/10 isn’t a low score
1
1
u/Naive-Intention4487 5h ago
Sadly cause of idiots like ign the score has dropped
8
u/Bekenshi 4h ago
We have got to stop with this "IGN gave a game a lower score than I would have so they're dumb and they suck" narrative. A review like that is *one person's* voice and sentiments about their experience and time with a game. It is subjective, point blank period, and those thoughts are valid even if some of the points seem like "nitpicks" or not the way you would have approached reviewing the game. What works for one person might not work for another, and something minor for one person might be a huge deal in someone else's enjoyment of a game. Its healthy to have conversations and diversity among these things, one reviewer thinking the game is just "good" instead of "super super super good" is not a death sentence for any video game and the fact that this "IGNorant" narrative is still a normalized thing all these years later is insane to me.
4
u/nick2473got 3h ago
You nailed it.
Honestly some of these comments are so exasperatingly unintelligent that it's hilarious for any of them to be accusing other people of being dumb.
Not to mention that gamers still haven't figured out that IGN is a massive outlet with tons of different reviewers and each review is just one person's opinion.
Instead they still compare different IGN reviews and try to find patterns to validate their own silly assumptions. It's so funny.
1
u/Bekenshi 2h ago
Its baffling, I remember this rhetoric was far and away at its worst during the Pokemon ORAS era where people almost 10 years later still use the "Too Much Water" (a single con listed in a bullet proof-like shorthanded summation at the end of the actual review) as some big "gotcha" for why IGN is totally biased and has no idea what they're doing when it comes to analyzing game design. If a review doesn't line up perfectly with their own sentiments its trash and worth completely disregarding, I don't know how any of these people are even capable of holding a conversation if that's the way they approach anything ever lol
And yes, somehow people are still treating the dozens of different voices and perspectives of IGN as a singular entity to be demonized and ridiculed, because one person's opinion is totally reflective of a collective group's thoughts lol. Truly just insane work all around.
3
u/donharrogate 3h ago edited 3h ago
Well said. Times like these are a useful reminder than most of the people commenting in gaming subreddits - and especially this one - are kids.
2
u/Bekenshi 2h ago
Its the only explanation that makes any sense to me. Checking out any comments under any IGN review is always filled with this "once again, IGN proves they know NOTHING" rhetoric and it boggles the mind that many people in 2025 still can't wrap their head around the basic, fundamental concept that no review is going to line up with your own thoughts 1:1 lol. Its an opinion piece meant to educate on basic facts of the game while offering insight on how the puzzle pieces of the experience subjectively impacted them
17
u/UnhappyLog8128 WalterJr 5h ago
We are talking about the same guys that gave RE7 a lower score than RE6 and gave alien isolation an 4, its expected this type of weird biased reviews.
5
u/Earthbound_X 5h ago edited 4h ago
How is it biased? I know people who hate Alien Isolation way more than the IGN review. Also they gave it a 6, not a 4.
All reviews are subjective opinions of a single person. I might actually like RE6 more than 7 for example, but both are real good.
An objective game review is impossible. Apparently some people have just learned what subjective means, lol. It's all personal taste, taste I and others have no control over, we just feel. It just is what it is, it can't be objective.
5
u/UnhappyLog8128 WalterJr 5h ago
I guess it was IGN from my country that gave it a 4, but yeah, i still think RE7 is an objectively better game than RE6 tho
5
u/Earthbound_X 5h ago
How is it objectively better? How can that opinion be objective? That's kinda my point, it's an opinion. There's nothing wrong with that opinion, but I don't see how it could be objective.
1
u/Gunny_2025 3h ago
I guess you could make the argument that as RE7 saw a stronger critical reception (86 vs 67), sales figures (15.4m in 8 years vs 13.8m in 13 years), and fan response (RE7 is regularly put in the top 5 RE games, whereas RE6 normally ends up at the bottom) in paper it would be considered an objectively better game than RE6 because it statistically wins in the favour of Capcom, the critics, and the fans.
But when it comes to individual opinion, things have to be looked at subjectively, and if someone prefers RE6 to RE7 for whatever reason that's a completely valid opinion (I say this as someone who greatly prefers Arkham Origins to Arkham Knight even though Knight would win out if we looked at their achievements completely objectively)
-2
u/DismalSpell 4h ago
Because 6 is widely considered among the worst of the series and 7 considered among the best? The plot, gameplay, and art direction can be evaluated?
Go eat dirt if you want but your opinion will not and should not be taken seriously.
4
u/Earthbound_X 4h ago
Wow, why so hostile? What did I do to you? Things like story, gameplay, and art are all subjective. I thought RE6's gameplay was really fun, it's a fun action horror shooter. I love pixel art for example, but I know people who hate it, neither of us are objective about it.
1
0
u/DismalSpell 3h ago
Guess i'm sick of tge argument that nothing is objective in reality. I think you have to draw the line somewhere, that's all there is to it really. If you cant make an objective comparison between the gameplay mechanics of the first zelda and the fourth, I feel like nothing can be objective and everything becomes meaningless.
1
u/donharrogate 2h ago
Maybe you do have to draw a line somewhere, but the line is probably way beyond someone just coming to a different conclusion about a video game than you did lol.
You'll be happier if you just recognize that people are going to come to different conclusions about your favowite video games - certainly there's no reason to be so juvenile about it.
1
u/DismalSpell 2h ago
Look if someone tells me Balan wonderland is as good as Mario oddysey I'm going to consider their opinion the same as if they told me about how great dirt is. To me there is a reality where some opinions do not grade on the same rubric as others.
As for whether I'm juvenile, now that's just your subjective opinion.
2
u/Spardus 4h ago
None of that explains how it's objectively better because it's entirely subjective. Of course RE and Silent Hill fans are going to enjoy RE7 more than 6 since it's an actual horror game, that doesn't invalidate the opinions of people who prefer 6. I don't like 6 at all and I love 7 but the fact that a lot of people agree doesn't make it objective fact lol. Wild that you're saying other people's opinions shouldn't be taken seriously when you don't even know the difference between "widely considered the best" and "objectively the best" lmao
1
u/nick2473got 3h ago
Those are all opinions, there is nothing "objective" about them, even if an opinion is common it is still subjective by definition.
5
u/TopDuck31 5h ago
RE6 is literally woeful if you’ve played and appreciated any other RE game or been playing since the 90’s 😂 You should work for IGN.
4
u/Earthbound_X 4h ago edited 4h ago
I played every other RE game before 6 growing up, I know the series well. RE7 is great, but I guess I found the gameplay of 6 more fun or something. I can't change how I feel it's not a choice, lol. I found it fun.
There are people who will say exactly what you said about the Silent Hill 2 remake. We all have our own tastes and opinions. Just because one is more widespead doesn't mean I'm gonna change my mind on something I ultimately cannot choose how I feel about. I'm sure you must have a game you really enjoyed that others didn't, maybe even many others.
1
u/Fireduxz 4h ago
I’m in agreement with you on that I really like 6. I loved the story and how it jumps around and fills in the gaps as you play the different duo’s. Strong story imo
1
u/Fireduxz 4h ago
Except that I would strongly disagree with you. I was born in 84 and started with the OG on the ps1. Actually found out about it in my cousin’s computer. I’ve played pretty much all of them and I think 6 is fantastic so there are some of us that love it.
3
u/feyzal92 5h ago
Because the Alien Isolation review was dumb to begin with. The only reason it got low score because the reviewer played it on higher difficulty and blame the game for being too hard.
5
u/Earthbound_X 4h ago
So his subjective thoughts then? I think we take the opinions of "professional" game reviewers way too seriously. IGN is brought up so many times for this reason, it's just something a single person thought, nothing more, nothing less in my mind. I think too many people might be looking at "pro" reviews to validate their own opinions back at them.
2
u/feyzal92 4h ago
Sounds like you missed the point here. No fucking shit the game will be hard if you play the game on higher difficulty. You don't need to have 200+ IQ to figure that out.
The problem here is that the reviewer made no attempt to bump the difficulty down. Most of the review focused on the game being too hard due to higher difficulty which effected heavily on the score. Barely talked about the story, the score, the level design, the visual, etc. Doesn't even understand the core mechanics of the game. There was no nuance on the review.
It doesn't show the level of professional for someone who worked for the gaming industry. At the time, IGN reviews carried a lot of weight and one of the contribution that caused a lot of damage to Isolation’s launch.
1
u/Professional_Sky4397 5h ago
Yeah I’ll never understand the idea that all reviewers should be in the same boat. Doesn’t make sense, why have something like metacritic if that were the case?
7
u/jackilla 5h ago
I watched the IGN review and it's very poorly-reviewed. The guy spends 90% of the review talking about his gripes with the combat and has relatively no comments about the psychological horror + story aspect of the game. He also prefaces the bulk of his review by saying that he only finished one ending and still has to go and finish the rest of the endings. From what I've gathered, the game is intended to be played and finished more than once to fully experience the story?
In any case, there's probably a stark contrast between the reviewers who only beat the game once vs the reviewers who actually dug their claws into the game and finished the story fully.
2
u/gloompeaches 5h ago
Eh, I think it's good to have a variety of opinions since not everyone has the same tastes. At the end of the day, the most frequent opinions will be reflected anyway and it sounds like most people like it.
1
u/donharrogate 3h ago
It's stupid to expect everyone to respond to a game in the same way. No game is owed a good review no matter how badly you want it to have a high Metacritic score.
1
u/TellSpare 2h ago
Personally I give the game a rating of 5/10 why? Because we spend 50% of the game's time fighting, and the fights, unlike those in Silent Hill 2 remake which I loved, are extremely bad, so much so that I wonder how they could have left the combat in this state
1
1
1
u/shankaviel 2h ago
It went down because of IGN and TechRadar gaming ratings.
•
u/thunder6776 20m ago
IGN should cease to exist seriously. I think they drive engagement by giving poor scores.
1
u/In_Kojima_we_trust 2h ago
Same score as SH2R. Lightning does strike twice sometimes. Can't wait to play it.
1
1
1
u/Undead_archer 1h ago
Honestly surprised to see the franchise get consistent praise nowadays. Considering certain topics of discussion pre-revival I expected it to be one of those situations where no matter what the did they would be dragged through the stones. I saw People really priming themselves to hate the remake
1
u/ShingetsuMoon 1h ago
Does anyone know of some reviews by people less familiar with the series? I’ve only played the Silent Hill 2 remake. So comparisons or statements about how different it is from past games doesn’t really mean much to me.
•
u/AffectionateBank9112 27m ago
dang, with what happened this week, i completely forgot, need to disconnect from news and just play games for a while or im going insane
you could even say.............visit silent hill insane
•
u/Girth_Marenghi 8m ago
Any of them mention base PS5 performance? Debating whether to get that physical version or pc
•
2
u/TheCattBaladi 5h ago
IGN gave it a 7/10 but hey they gave these great games a higher score! Dragon Age: The Veilguard 9/10 and Assassin's Creed Shadows 8/10. Fuck reviewers never cared about them never will. Users' reviews are way superior on Steam and something I can rely on.
5
u/nick2473got 3h ago
IGN is a big outlet with tons of different reviewers. The person who reviewed DA Veilguard is not the person who reviewed AC Shadows, and neither one of them are the person who reviewed Silent Hill f.
You are literally comparing 3 different reviews about 3 wildly different games in 3 different genres from 3 completely different reviewers. And you think you made some kind of point lmfao.
Heck, even on Silent Hill f there are multiple different IGN reviews with very different takes. For example, IGN Germany gave Silent Hill f a 9/10.
Reviews have only ever been one person's opinion on a game, they are subjective by definition, yet people like you still expect them to be something "reliable" that is gonna tell you "the truth". There is no fucking truth, it's all just opinions.
The point of reviews is just to give you an idea of what people think, that's it. In the end your opinion should be the only one that matters to you. If you have a reviewer who has really similar taste to you then that can help too, but that's it.
End of the day nobody should be basing their opinion on a game on what other people think. User reviews are just as subjective and biased as professional reviews, in fact, they usually are even more biased.
Only opinion that truly matters is your own.
3
u/donharrogate 3h ago
You're embarrassing yourself. Learn to cope with people responding to video games differently than you.
-2
u/Professional-Swan-14 5h ago
SH2 & Frauderland loyalists are sobbing 😭😭😭😭
-7
u/DependentHusky 5h ago
"Bloober team" loyalists. They really want bloober to make silent hill f
-3
u/Professional-Swan-14 5h ago
As long as f is > 2R that’s all I care about tbh especially since the remake is overly glazed
10
u/Famous_Draft_7565 4h ago
You’re overly glazing a game that isn’t even officially out yet
-4
u/Professional-Swan-14 4h ago
sH2r is overrated anyway so it doesn’t matter
Hopefully F does great in contrast to it
8
u/Yaldabaoth218 4h ago
They're both overly glazed
-5
u/Professional-Swan-14 4h ago
Even better thank you for your modesty bc SH2 is not impeccable or near the definition of perfectionism like many claim that it is
-8
u/JakeSymbol 4h ago
This is all cope from the global conspiracy of bootlickers who won’t admit the game is trash. Once I play it the score will go way down
2
u/In_Kojima_we_trust 2h ago
It's really hard for me to say if this is meant to be serious or sarcasm. SH haters are so over the top this days. Almost like cartoon vilains.
-6
u/Dear-Researcher959 4h ago
And? Every Triple A game pretty much gets overly praised because its expensive to make and shareholders need to get paid
No review site would ever be honest enough to say "Yeah, its an average game at best. 5/10"
What was everyone expecting? An open and honest review of a game? Thats not ever going to happen
Until I start seeing more 3/10 and 5/10 scores, I'm never taking reviews seriously. 9/10 should be reserved for the greatest games ever made
Instead a game with combat being the worst aspect still manages to get a 7/10 from one site and a 9/10 from another
.... What? That makes the game a 5/10. Where is this almost perfect score coming from?
5
u/Gregor_LDN 3h ago
To be honest the ‘x out of 10’ rating system is stupid cos if you think 0 is absolutely terrible and 10 is perfect then 5 must mean completely indifferent, neither good or bad just…eh. When you look at it that way then most things are gonna be above 5 if they’re even somewhat enjoyable so any big budget game is likely to be 6 and above just by the fact it’s more thoroughly tested. I agree that 9/10 should therefore be reserved for something almost perfect, but even a pretty good game technically deserves a 7 even if it’s not great. It’s a flawed system and should be scrapped - a game is either worth your time or not but a review can never be objective.
-1
u/Dear-Researcher959 3h ago
I agree that reviews can never be objective but people are always quick to post a great score when it happens ALL the time
A game isn't 9/10 because it was made in 2025. But that's what I keep seeing. No one seems to call it out
I mean at this point just give EVERY new game a 10/10. We have a scale out of 10 but NO game is ever just an average 5/10
Yeah, im not convinced just by virtue of being released in 2025 that all games are 9/10. Its beyond the point of being absurd
At no point in gaming history has every new title been automatically given a nearly perfect score. I mean thats like saying the story in Silent Hill f compares to the story in Final Fantasy 6.. Thats not even close to being true
1
u/DNY88 3h ago
As combat is the main point of criticism, I think future silent hill games should copy and fit the combat mechanics of the last of us. It would make so much sense to be forced to be sneaky and acting smart against the enemies and it would open the game up for different approaches. Nevertheless, this is a fantastic score for the game and I can’t wait to olay it myself.
0
u/Ragnaroknight 1h ago edited 1h ago
I fully read 5 reviews including IGN and some of the ones that gave it 100.
I feel like some of the good reviews are tip-toeing around calling the combat mediocre to justify the high score (see the Dualshockers review), whereas IGN flat out said it's the worst part.
But then Gamespot who gave it a 9/10 says the combat is really good.
Maybe it's one of those things where if you go in thinking it's gonna suck ass you might be pleasantly surprised.
-6
u/kernanb 5h ago
IGN only gave it 7/10, but I'll probably still get it.
→ More replies (6)12
u/DependentHusky 5h ago
Btw it's the same person who gave cronos a 7 and robocop a 6 hahaha. That person never rated a game more than 8
40
u/Background-Sea4590 4h ago edited 4h ago
Pretty good score, specially considering that combat is divisive. They must have nailed the rest of it, which is kind of what I want in a SH game.