Sonic Frontiers - Review Roundup.

[Dummy Bear]

And even if the scores were biased, at least those people actually played the game and based their views on that.

The other side is doing it based on what a cartoon donkey said.

[Detective Kaito]

 

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

Just now, Detective Kaito said:

Yeah, we already touched base on Dunkey's flimsy excuses. He's doing a pretty poor job of trying to cover for himself. lol

Like, why on earth would fans of Sonic Frontiers en masse and majority, sabotage their own user score just to supposedly make his fans look bad, when there's already a long history of his fanbase acting insufferable?

And yeah, I call bull on that bit with the user score at the end of his video. He's not stupid. He very much knew what showing that off to his fans would trigger.

[azoo]

Aye, that bit I said before about personal beefs.

[DaBigJ]

While I agree to not really have personal beef over Dunkey, I also doubt he'll care about what someone from a Sonic Forum he probably doesn't even know that exists says

[Ryannumber1gamer]

At the end of the day though, why is it on Dunkey to decide what a fair metacritic score for Frontiers is? That's like if he went to any of the numerous JRPG games he didn't like, and said 'this score is way too high' and caused the same shit to happen. At the end of the day, the same way there's no way of being able to go into reviews and tell which ones are genuinely people who played and hated it, and who are ones bombing it for the hell of it, the same goes for positive reviews. Maybe a lot of people just did enjoy it and weren't bothered by the bigger issues? From what I've seen, the buzz around Frontiers has been pretty positive in general. It's not the first time, there's plenty of products that have gotten eh critical scores, only to end up being widely enjoyed by the community. It is something that actually happens to the degree Critical Despondence exists. 

We really shouldn't give a shit about Metacritic metrics, and there's been nonsense on both ends of the spectrum here, but it doesn't really change the fact Dunkey is not remotely stupid. He knows the size of his fanbase, he knows what would happen if he decided to bring up the metacritic score - which for as fair as his opinion and video could have been, it was just unneeded. Regardless of the review bombing itself, to me, it just feels unnecessarily petty. Like, 'I hate this game, why does so many people enjoy it? There's gotta be something afoot here!".  

[Wraith]

When the consequences to this 'review bombing' are a lower decimal point on a user score that most people disregard anyway, I have to wonder how big of a deal this is. This doesn't even have the consequences a normal review bombing has. The score is still green and notably higher than the actual metacritic score. 


What is wrong with Sonic fans? Where does this inferiority complex come from? Sonic Frontiers is a safe sequel in a multimillion dollar series, not some indie title that has careers resting on it's success. 

[Detective Kaito]

You can't really sit here and tell me that Frontiers deserves the same score as something like Mario Odyssey. The latter has so much more polish and quality put into it, while Frontiers is a janky game with tons of cut corners and unrefined ideas.

Not saying Frontiers is a bad game, but it's completely fair to feel baffled that a game like that could even approach the same score as a 3D Mario game, and Dunkey was just pointing it out. I don't think he did it on purpose to lower the score, and no he shouldn't abstain from giving his opinion in fear of his fans *checks notes* review bombing a video game?

[Ryannumber1gamer]

8 minutes ago, Detective Kaito said:

You can't really sit here and tell me that Frontiers deserves the same score as something like Mario Odyssey. The latter has so much more polish and quality put into it, while Frontiers is a janky game with tons of cut corners and unrefined ideas.

Not saying Frontiers is a bad game, but it's completely fair to feel baffled that a game like that could even approach the same score as a 3D Mario game, and Dunkey was just pointing it out. I don't think he did it on purpose to lower the score, and no he shouldn't abstain from giving his opinion in fear of his fans *checks notes* review bombing a video game?

So to be clear - we shouldn't care about Frontiers' user score because it's meaningless, but on the other hand, we should care that said meaningless user score that doesn't matter just happens to be on the same level as other meaningless user scores for other games we perceive to be better?

Also, no one said anything about Dunkey needing to keep his review to himself. I even said his review could be balanced, fair, or whatever, and it would have been a fine video (I'm admittedly not a fan of Dunkey's content, but again - it's his opinion, and he usually keeps it to just that). But again, you can't really sit here and go on about why people shouldn't care about the meaningless review score of the game when the whole thing was literally sparked off by Dunkey feeling the need to comment on why said meaningless review score made no sense to him.

I genuinely don't care if Dunkey's review is negative or not. Again, it's his opinion. I'm sure he made good points and it was a fine review until the very tail-end where the whole mess kicked off. But again, I sincerely doubt Dunkey isn't aware of the scale of his fanbase, nor is he unaware what tends to happen when you draw attention to something you perceive to be wrong to said massive fanbase. 

[McGroose]

Dunkey's take on the game is fine and I mostly agree with it, I don't think the game is good. 

The people who review bombed the game with zeros however are part of the reason why I don't bother taking review scores seriously anymore, too many morons that don't care about why a score system exists in the first place. Really low scores are understandable as long as there is solid rationale behind it. Even DigitalTrends, despite their rationale being pretty dumb, gave an attempt for justifying their poor score that at least made some sense. I can't find any rationale for giving the game a 0/10. Anyone giving this game a 0 has never played a game that genuinely deserves a 0 or is braindead tbh. Shit like Big Rigs Over the Road Racing deserves a 0. You expect me to lump Frontiers with that category? Some of the guys giving it a 0 even said they liked a few parts of the game... then why tf are you giving it a 0? Idc about the guys giving it a 2, a 3, a 4, whatever. That at least implies they can understand there are some parts of the game that are least passable. A game shouldn't be a 0 just because you don't like it otherwise a bunch more games should deserve that rating lol think about what that number actually means. You'd have to have really, really specific tastes to think that Frontiers is a genuine 0/10.

I hate review bombing like that in general, I'll call it out for being bullshit even for games I don't like. It's such sheep mentality, play the game and actually think about what it really deserves and don't just follow a trend.

[ZinogreVolt]

The user metascore is high because most people seem to enjoy the game. There is really nothing to be baffled about there.

[Dummy Bear]

19 minutes ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

So to be clear - we shouldn't care about Frontiers' user score because it's meaningless, but on the other hand, we should care that said meaningless user score that doesn't matter just happens to be on the same level as other meaningless user scores for other games we perceive to be better?

Also, no one said anything about Dunkey needing to keep his review to himself. I even said his review could be balanced, fair, or whatever, and it would have been a fine video (I'm admittedly not a fan of Dunkey's content, but again - it's his opinion, and he usually keeps it to just that). But again, you can't really sit here and go on about why people shouldn't care about the meaningless review score of the game when the whole thing was literally sparked off by Dunkey feeling the need to comment on why said meaningless review score made no sense to him.

I genuinely don't care if Dunkey's review is negative or not. Again, it's his opinion. I'm sure he made good points and it was a fine review until the very tail-end where the whole mess kicked off. But again, I sincerely doubt Dunkey isn't aware of the scale of his fanbase, nor is he unaware what tends to happen when you draw attention to something you perceive to be wrong to said massive fanbase. 

I, too, am confused by this.

And I get 3D Mario games are polished, but Jesus do people get so defensive over them.

Seriously, why is it a big deal if someone liked, say, Crash 4 more than Odyssey?

I'm aware Sonic fans are no better in this regard but still 

[Whatever the WhoCares]

1 hour ago, Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon said:

No. Just no. Again, you express fear over the indie games getting review bombed, but deem that it'd be okay for this current case, because of the belief that it was being review bombed initially for praise.....despite their not really being any concrete evidence to that.

All Dunkey did was show off the userscore. Didn't have any proof that Frontiers had an artificial boost for positivity akin to a review bomb; he just compared scores, and his fans assumed the rest from that.

So, no, this review bombing wasn't some act to try and cancel stuff out like you claim. Again, by that logic, if the games in question were supposedly "overrated" with alleged positive review bombs, supposedly that would make review bombing them negatively, okay.

This is honestly the main point of worry for people, and for good reason, given SEGA's knack for panicking and ditching stuff at a moment's notice. Still, based off of Kishimoto's statement, and the actions that have been taken at Sonic Team, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt that they're not going to scamper at the slightest bout of negativity.

As for the Dunkey idiocy, well, enough people have called Dunkey out, that SEGA should hopefully notice the source of any sudden uptick in negative reviews.

Not that such means they should disregard any negative reviews. Sadly, they may just have to wade through the trash to find the actual helpful reviews from users, even in the red.

Did I say that Dunkey did this with positive intent? Or are you just trolling me at this point?

[DaBigJ]

Y'know, I was expecting The Jimiquition's review to spark xebates like this....not Dunkey.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

2 minutes ago, Detective Kaito said:

You can't really sit here and tell me that Frontiers deserves the same score as something like Mario Odyssey. The latter has so much more polish and quality put into it, while Frontiers is a janky game with tons of cut corners and unrefined ideas.

With all due respect, who actually decides what score Frontiers "deserves"? If people had a good, or even amazing time with the game, and rate it as such in user scores, how is that really hurting anyone? And just as much, the critics have a right to their own opinion. Not like we go on about needing to correct them either.

Each bout has their own lane. None of this excuses review bombing.

if people enjoyed a game good enough that it gets that high a user score, fair game. What isn't just is artificial inflation of one side of reception. Whatever it is, the metascore is best left decided by actual genuine trajectories of opinion. Not a sudden mass flooding of half-baked interjections that aren't even really genuine to begin with.

9 minutes ago, Detective Kaito said:

Not saying Frontiers is a bad game, but it's completely fair to feel baffled that a game like that could even approach the same score as a 3D Mario game, and Dunkey was just pointing it out. I don't think he did it on purpose to lower the score, and no he shouldn't abstain from giving his opinion in fear of his fans *checks notes* review bombing a video game?

No one's really saying that Dunkey had to keep his opinion or review to himself.

[Ryannumber1gamer]

12 minutes ago, DaBigJ said:

Y'know, I was expecting The Jimiquition's review to spark xebates like this....not Dunkey.

Because their review - while negative - was clearly their review. Unless I'm mistaken, Steph doesn't really send people towards the way of games' user scores, or what have you, unless it's something actually scummy (IE - Asset Flips, Cheap pieces of shit on Steam, etc), and only really has a problem when people try to give them shit for having a review score they perceive as too low (See the bullshit Steph had to go through during BOTW's release). For all their cynicism on the game's industry, I can't really recall a time where Steph tried to say something they disliked was being enjoyed too much, and I doubt they would when they've been at the other end of the stick so often from fanboys who dislike lower scores than 9/10s. on top of the fact Steph's far more concerned with the bigger issues of the gaming industry, rather than getting into arguments over the user review score on a Metacritic page.

And it's why trying to act like most people have a issue with Dunkey's review in of itself is going to fall flat here. There's been no shortage of negative reviews. There's been probably even more negative than Dunkey's, and those haven't sparked this argument. The point of contention here isn't Dunkey having a negative take on the game, the point of contention is Dunkey basically going 'why do so many people like this game' when he dislikes it (already a little petty), and then his fanbase taking it upon themselves to do the rest. 

[Rabbitearsblog]

2 hours ago, Ryannumber1gamer said:

At the end of the day though, why is it on Dunkey to decide what a fair metacritic score for Frontiers is? That's like if he went to any of the numerous JRPG games he didn't like, and said 'this score is way too high' and caused the same shit to happen. At the end of the day, the same way there's no way of being able to go into reviews and tell which ones are genuinely people who played and hated it, and who are ones bombing it for the hell of it, the same goes for positive reviews. Maybe a lot of people just did enjoy it and weren't bothered by the bigger issues? From what I've seen, the buzz around Frontiers has been pretty positive in general. It's not the first time, there's plenty of products that have gotten eh critical scores, only to end up being widely enjoyed by the community. It is something that actually happens to the degree Critical Despondence exists. 

We really shouldn't give a shit about Metacritic metrics, and there's been nonsense on both ends of the spectrum here, but it doesn't really change the fact Dunkey is not remotely stupid. He knows the size of his fanbase, he knows what would happen if he decided to bring up the metacritic score - which for as fair as his opinion and video could have been, it was just unneeded. Regardless of the review bombing itself, to me, it just feels unnecessarily petty. Like, 'I hate this game, why does so many people enjoy it? There's gotta be something afoot here!".  

I agree that we don't necessarily have to rely on Metacritic to find out if Sonic Frontiers is enjoyable to play or not.  At the end of the day, if you are a Sonic fan, you are probably going to buy this game anyway because you love Sonic the Hedgehog, no matter what.  Also, the whole "critics vs the audience" debate has been around for years.  I'm honestly not surprised that the critics rated Sonic Frontiers lower than the community did.  There's always been a major gap in scores between the critics and the community, such as the Rotten Tomatoes score for She-Hulk is very divided as the critics gave it an 85% while the audience gave it a 33%.  I do think that some fans need to stop getting so wound up whenever a negative review pops up for a Sonic game.

2 hours ago, Wraith said:

When the consequences to this 'review bombing' are a lower decimal point on a user score that most people disregard anyway, I have to wonder how big of a deal this is. This doesn't even have the consequences a normal review bombing has. The score is still green and notably higher than the actual metacritic score. 


What is wrong with Sonic fans? Where does this inferiority complex come from? Sonic Frontiers is a safe sequel in a multimillion dollar series, not some indie title that has careers resting on it's success. 

When they say "review bombing," I expected the scores for Sonic Frontiers to go down to like a 50% or 30%.  But, I'm looking at the Metacritic scores and they are still pretty high scores.  So, where's the review bombing at?

But seriously, while I just mentioned that some fans should stop getting so wound up about negative reviews, there are times where I can see how some fans can get upset at certain negative reviews, like the ones by Sterling and Dunkey.  It's one thing to say that you just didn't like the game and leave it at that.  It's another thing to insult both the developers working on the game and the Sonic fanbase itself.  Whenever a critic or a reviewer starts insulting specific people in their reviews, it causes me to question their validity as critics and reviewers at times, because the proper thing to do whenever you are reviewing a product is to focus on the product itself and not go out of your way to insult people who don't deserve it.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Not really surprised with what I’m hearing with Dunkey. Been this way since I first heard of him after he got banned from League of Legends for a trolling teammate (and in legit fairness, the teammate was being an absolute trolling douchebag to him in a platinum-level game, so I do sympathize with his attitude somewhat) in a ranked game that he should get gunned down in the street like the degenerate they were—to which I understand the frustration, but damn bro…

This kinda just seems par for the course, although that still doesn’t excuse his followers review-bombing.

Just…eh…

[Rabbitearsblog]

8 minutes ago, CrownSlayer’s Shadow said:

Not really surprised with what I’m hearing with Dunkey. Been this way since I first heard of him after he got banned from League of Legends for a trolling teammate (and in legit fairness, the teammate was being an absolute trolling douchebag to him in a platinum-level game, so I do sympathize with his attitude somewhat) in a ranked game that he should get gunned down in the street like the degenerate they were—to which I understand the frustration, but damn bro…

This kinda just seems par for the course, although that still doesn’t excuse his followers review-bombing.

Just…eh…

That's the thing that content creators need to think about.  Whenever you have an audience, that audience is likely to do whatever you ask of them to do just because they are following you.  If you tell the audience to review bomb a game or anything else that's horrible, then the audience will do exactly as you say and there can be consequences from that depending on what you ask your audience to do.

[The Deleter]

e

[DaBigJ]

Isn't Xploshi a bad and problematic person?

[The Deleter]

1 minute ago, DaBigJ said:

Isn't Xploshi a bad and problematic person?

I have absolutely no clue, this was fed to me by the home algorithm

Fake edit: >Apparently I searched the username and "groomer" before

welp

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

42 minutes ago, The Deleter said:

I have absolutely no clue, this was fed to me by the home algorithm

Fake edit: >Apparently I searched the username and "groomer" before

welp

What did I miss?

[Rabbitearsblog]

16 minutes ago, Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon said:

What did I miss?

Yeah, this is new to me.

[Rocketjay8]

8 hours ago, Rabbitearsblog said:

I agree that we don't necessarily have to rely on Metacritic to find out if Sonic Frontiers is enjoyable to play or not.  At the end of the day, if you are a Sonic fan, you are probably going to buy this game anyway because you love Sonic the Hedgehog, no matter what.  Also, the whole "critics vs the audience" debate has been around for years.  I'm honestly not surprised that the critics rated Sonic Frontiers lower than the community did.  There's always been a major gap in scores between the critics and the community, such as the Rotten Tomatoes score for She-Hulk is very divided as the critics gave it an 85% while the audience gave it a 33%.  I do think that some fans need to stop getting so wound up whenever a negative review pops up for a Sonic game.

When they say "review bombing," I expected the scores for Sonic Frontiers to go down to like a 50% or 30%.  But, I'm looking at the Metacritic scores and they are still pretty high scores.  So, where's the review bombing at?

But seriously, while I just mentioned that some fans should stop getting so wound up about negative reviews, there are times where I can see how some fans can get upset at certain negative reviews, like the ones by Sterling and Dunkey.  It's one thing to say that you just didn't like the game and leave it at that.  It's another thing to insult both the developers working on the game and the Sonic fanbase itself.  Whenever a critic or a reviewer starts insulting specific people in their reviews, it causes me to question their validity as critics and reviewers at times, because the proper thing to do whenever you are reviewing a product is to focus on the product itself and not go out of your way to insult people who don't deserve it.

Wait, Sterling insulted people in his review?