Because critics don't battle back and forth, giving a game dishonest 1's and 10's. I mean, I get your point…. I'm more likely to put stock in a particular reviwer's score (who I trust) than in an aggregate score pulled from all over. But user scores are another level of useless, imo.

Agreed again, but I still consider Elex to be a pretty rare case of a studio that releases consistently "just-above-average" RPGs, and yet every new game seems to be highly anticipated. You have studios like Bethesda that consistently release pretty damn good RPGs, and people are ready to bring the pitchforks down on whatever smallest flaw the games have.

I feel it's some kind of "underdog bias", like when in a sport a big important team plays against a small modest team, by default most people will cheer for the small modest team. That sells well in movies too, plenty of them with a plot of the like.

I agree. For example, the writing and voice acting in Bethesda games is consistently belittled. And don't get me wrong, I don't think it's the best writing around, not by a long shot. But it's better than the writing in a PB game! But PB gets a pass. Maybe because it's a smaller studio, maybe because English isn't the native language of its developers. Maybe something else I'm not thinking of.

To me though, none of those things explain the discrepancy. There are translated games that are much better written, many of them originating from similarly sized devs.

I think it may even be the case that a game like Elex ends up being championed to the degree it is in part because of its inadequacies. Usually deficiences in writing and/or voice acting in such games gets attached adjectives like "charming." Small digression, but I feel like it's a similar phenomenon to how some people call every damn game with pixel art "beautiful", just for being a game with pixel art.

(I'm currently playing and reasonbly enjoying Elex and don't think the writing makes it unplayable… some of it is actually quite fun. But there are definitely different standards applied)

Why would a game from a developer whose past games were greatly enjoyed by their fanbase not be highly anticipated? It's really that simple, but you still seem unable to grasp that for some reason, or you simply refuse to since their games don't appeal to you personally.

Pirahna Bytes doesn't make games that are going to appeal to a lot of mainstream gamers or critics. However, the people who do like PB's games tend to like them a lot, and that's because they're extremely good in the areas that are important to them.

That's some major projecting there, but it's pretty much pure bunk. :)

If you actually believe that, then perhaps you've been spending a little too much time here and not checking out other forums. While PB's games are very much appreciated here at the Watch, that's certainly not the case everywhere. They get bashed plenty for their jankyness in most forums.

As far as the writing goes, that's completely subjective. I think Bethesda is much better at writing lore, but PB does quests just as good if not better. Voice acting is entirely dependant on which characters we're talking about. Thing is, it shouldn't even be close considering the difference in budgets between those developers.

Nah PB get a FREE Pass due to RPGWatch's past RPGDot site was loyal fanboys of the company. Some of those past members are still around to carry the old torch.

Like Nereida said their mediocre to average RPGs that have a loyal cult following.

@JFarrell71

I agree Bethesda games always get belittled on this site. Same with BioWare's.

We're agreed on this part. A lot of the voice acting in Elex is quite good, with spot on line readings. I hate when actors clearly didn't understand the line from the way they read the dialogue. In fact, the Elex voice actors often elevate dialogue beyond how it reads on the page. And yeah, Bethesda needs to hire more than like 6 people. It's ridiculous how little they prioritize that part of their games in their budgets.

HiddenX I love how you held back approving my comment on the 1st page until an irrelevantly later point, seeing as it was my 1st post and needed to be approved (wtf why?).

I'm sorry but PB peaked with G2 and has regressed with each of their new games. I guess Risen was a slight outlier after the disappointing G3, and then Risen 2 happened :jester:

I guess you think that by repeating something you can make it true. ;)

Some of PB's games have scored fairly high among more than just the fanboys. Gothic has an 81 critic score and 8.8 user score, Gothic II is 79 and 9.0, and Risen is 77 and 8.1.

You sound butthurt though that they happen to be popular here.

Also, Bethesda and Bioware games are not always getting belittled on this site. Bethesda is one of the more popular devs around here. Bioware not so much, but that's understandable given their more recent titles.

It is not that I refuse. RDR, GTA, Battlefield or FIFA are games that don't appeal to me, but are quality games for their target audience and I can see and understand that. I can tell how the next RDR or Battlefield game would be highly anticipated for some people.

I am the target audience of PB games. They are just not good enough. Their quality is subpar in all fields when you compare them to other similar games. Graphics and animations are dated by a decade. World is bland and dull. Combat is repetitive. You can like it, though, that is something nobody can tell you being wrong about.

Hey, if that's your opinion, that's cool. You're allowed to like what you want.

Thing is, when you try to state your opinion like it's fact, you just look foolish. You're better off just saying that their games aren't for you instead of trying to project like that.

The whole point is that I'm not stating my opinion as fact, the only thing I am stating as a fact are the metrics that define the game, and evaluate it collectively. Unless you don't believe or accept the collective evaluation of the game, which I am fine with too.

Personally, however, I feel it's the contrary, I'm trying to understand what makes average games be anticipated. IE, why a studio that consistently delivers 7/10 games gets better rep than one that consistently delivers 9/10 games. I have a kind of personal interest in it, and I don't mean to offend you or your tastes, or incite any animosity. I'm genuinely curious and it only helps if I hear it from those who like the games to start with.

I keep hearing "what Elex does, does it well", but no details or anything in particular that it does better than other games, it's as if a mystical floating force that PB games apparently "do well", and I still don't know what it is.

My logical thinking tells me it has to do with some sense of loyalty for the makers of Gothic who brought so good times back in the day, together with the "underdog bias" and the "Good enough for their budget" that make a portion of RPG players "content" with what is delivered, but again, hard for me to know without being in the position to feel either of those things.

That's what it sure seemed like in your previous post, but whatever.

Where do you get that PB consistently delivers 7/10 games? If you're talking about given scores, I've already shown that to be false. Also, I'd love to know what studio consistently delivers 9/10 games because I can't think of a single one.

What do PB games do well? Like anything else, it's subjective, but most people would tell you they're particularly known for their exploration first and foremost and also for their atmosphere and soundtracks.

Your logical thinking needs some work. If it had anything to do with a sense of loyalty for 20 year-old games, I guarantee you Bioware would be held in higher regard around here.

It's hard for you to know because, other than trying Elex for an hour, you've never actually played any of their games.

Something that PB does well is having no level scaling and giving a huge feeling of progress. You start very weak and end up very strong.
I enjoyed Elex and will most probably buy Elex 2 at release.

Well, from metacritic (I know you consider it bull, but it's a valid metric for comparing)

Critic/User score (PC versions only to be consistent, though consoles always get even lower scores than PC. IE Risen 3 in Playstation has 36/39 score)

Gothic (2001): 81/88
Gothic 2 (2003): 79/89
Gothic 3 (2006): 63/75
Risen (2009): 77/81
Risen 2 (2012): 69/57
Risen 3 (2014): 65/58
Elex (2017): 67/70

So it can be said that last time PB hit a 8/10 quality was in 2003 with Gothic 2, that's two decades ago, probably because back then the graphic style matched the time at which the game was released. If any studio/franchise I know delivers 3-4 games in a row that struggle to hit 6-7/10 in a 18 year span, I would consider that to be a massive failure and kind of lose all interest in them.

Opposite examples, BioWare consistently delivered 9/10 games and got bombed to bits for a controversial ending to ME3 and a bit of rough launch of Andromeda, while being in general great games. We get it, they got absorbed by EA, they "sold" their soul. Still great games.

Same with Bethesda, consistently 9/10 games for 2 decades now (not even counting Fallout 1/2 or the old TES which were some of the greatest games in the day, I'm told). Yes I don't like Todd Howard either, he's typical PR guy, just doing his job. They had Fallout76 fiasco, just one mistake in 20 years, and they got roasted.

I'm not even going to mention Larian, that has only delivered 2 masterwork RPGs that are in every "must play" selection of any reputable RPG site, and they get roasted about the third they are making, even before they have actually finished it. It is as if they have to prove that they can make a great game all over again.

Why does PB or its average games get the free pass? Why do they have nothing to prove and their mediocre games are anticipated? Is it because they are a "modest" studio? Is it really just corp hate or is there anything more?

PS: Also note how PB games go in trilogies, and within each trilogy, the second game is always worse than the first, and the third is always worse than the second. And every trilogy started from a lower point than the previous. Just saying because trends are a real thing.

Actually, that would be Risen if you go by Metacritic which seems to be the only thing you have here. The point is, you falsely claimed they "consistently" deliver 7/10 games.

That's not even remotely close to being true, but ok. They haven't had a game that most fans consider great since Mass Effect 2, and they certainly didn't consistently deliver 9/10 games. In fact, they have 3 games: ME:A, DA2, and Anthem, that users score lower than even the lowest scored PB game.

Again, not even close to being true. Fans scored FO3 a 7.8 and FO4 a 5.6.
In fact, the only game that fans scored a 9/10 is Morrowind (8.9). Also, the notion that Bethesda somehow gets treated unfairly is pretty funny. Just look at the critic scores for Oblivion.. a game that no serious crpg fan is going to call great. Same with FO3 that inexplicably got a 91 from critics.

It's amusing though how everything you're saying is centered around Metacritic, which is obviously because you've entered into a debate about something that you have almost no first-hand experience with.

PB has only done two trilogies so far, and it's split 50/50 on which Gothic game is better.

You keep saying things that only reveal how little you know about what you're trying to debate here. Why don't you just admit that and move on? It's like me trying to claim FIFA 2021 is mediocre because it doesn't appeal to me even though I haven't really played it.

It's consistently 7/10 because Risen 2 and 3 get 5.7-5.8/10 score. It is rather fair to say that just because Risen 1 had a 8.1, it can average down for "consistency" to 7, and that's being generous to PB, rather than malicious. A real average would land it lower than 7. Also, the first game of every trilogy seems to be its peak. And in that case, Elex 1 was the peak, at its splendorous 7/10 user score.

I believe you are being purposely delusional on this topic, JDR, and it is a shame because I hoped for real argumentations on what makes PB games good in your eyes. Instead it's just semantics and dodges through the tangent.

Have it your way. I can tell you that if next TES or BG3 have a 7/10 score, I will be very disappointed, and I will be certainly vocal about it. Meanwhile, we all know that Elex 2 will be a 6.5 game at best, as the trend shows, because that's all PB is capable of. But then you can keep anticipating Elex 3, so you got that going for you.

I gave you several examples of what makes PB's games good to me and other fans a few posts back (Post #52 to be exact). Pretending that I didn't seems kind of strange considering it's still right there for everyone to see. Are you sure I'm the one being delusional here?

I think it's cute how you say "we" there as if everyone is going to agree with that. Maybe you should have summoned your imaginary friends sooner rather than relying entirely on Metacritic for a debate. ;)

Well, you know that Elex 2 will be a 6.5 game as much as I. Denial works until the game comes out and the number gets printed down. Do not need to summon anyone, the numbers are there for you to see, I already wrote them down.

It's a good thing to anticipate, I suppose.

While you're at it, can you give me next week's lotto numbers?

If I win, I'm gonna finally get that PS5 I've been wanting as well as 2 copies of Elex 2. One for each of us. ;)