@Jaz007 I appreciate what you're saying and I am aware that reviews should be written with objective opinion first.
The objectivity element best describes the technicalities, performance, optimisation, content etc, some of which were covered on this review. The subjectivity is best used to describe the excitement, pace, learning curve and general feeling of the game.
However, what seemed to come out of it all was a general feeling of the game being annoying, with tracking issues and long wait times. It then gets a lower score due to possible future player numbers.
@debbio1642 Luckily, we seem to entering an age of where professional game critics are mearly offering their opinion that no longer has any objective weight to it.
Maybe we're wrong and once all the reviews come out a 6/10 is the average, but I doubt it.
@get2sammyb I was exaggerating. I will change it to: You make the game sound like a mediocre FPS with some little cool elements regarding gestures in VR but unfortunately you spend too much time in lobbies etc...
I have made some valid points and you respond to this part?
Most other people that have played it are saying that although it has some things that need tweaking/patching, what they have done right is absolutely brilliant and the whole experience in VR has been done really well making is one of the best VR titles available.
@get2sammyb No, I don't know better than somebody who has played the game. That's not the point I was trying to make and didn't and mean to give that impression. However, my point still stands in that you have rated a game much lower than pretty much everyone else that has played it so far. Every single snippet of feedback I have seen has commended the game for its efforts, and VR gameplay.
What I do know is that your opinion is both polarising and also what appears to be in a tiny minority. As a reader this concerns me, especially when it comes to making an informed decision based on what the critics think.
So, with that in mind (and being aware that I don't know any better than you) I am best to avoid getting it because you make it sound bad.
Thanks for the review, the game sounds like a complete nightmare. I might see what the other reviewers say first though, just in case.....
@Rudy_Manchego My point being that Counter Strike has very simple gameplay and limited game modes yet it is considered to be one of the best online only FPS games ever created, and is reviewed as such. I can't be certain, but I'll hazard a guess that it doesn't get pulled apart based on its future player base and it's lack of modes.
On another note, you could argue that the VR element is that significant in Firewall that all other non-VR FPS games are really shallow and lack immersion.
I'm not a journalist, but it's obvious to me that the developers here have taken a step forward to help with VR growth and should be commended. Every multiplayer game has the risk of a dwindling player base hanging over it. This is another review that doesn't give the VR component enough appreciation. In this case, the VR component is everything. People getting this game want a tactical, immersive FPS. Pretty much everyone who has played it seems to think it does.
I'm losing faith in mainstream critics. I honestly believe that some critics just don't seem qualified to review certain games. VR is a separate platform and should be reviewed as such by people who are fans of the medium. It seems that Pushsquare are only one step away from the 'I suffer from motion sickness in VR so it gets a 2/10' group of critics.
6/10 is really going to drag down the Metascore for this game, which unfortunately is a measure a lot of people use at a glance. I believe Pushsquare are aware of this and have scored the game knowing it will create attention. Going by your review standards, a 7/10 would have been more reasonable. Hiding behind the excuse that it's 'subjective' shows that you don't understand the balance of subjective/objective opinion that a review requires.
PS. I don't own the game, so my reaction goes to show how far off from the general response your opinion is. A review site should give the reader insight into making an informed purchase. I came here for that information and it’s left me wanting to look elsewhere because you have completely missed the point. I hope you find that important balance readers need to have confidence in what you write.
Comments 10
Re: Review: Firewall Zero Hour (PS4)
@Jaz007 I appreciate what you're saying and I am aware that reviews should be written with objective opinion first.
The objectivity element best describes the technicalities, performance, optimisation, content etc, some of which were covered on this review. The subjectivity is best used to describe the excitement, pace, learning curve and general feeling of the game.
However, what seemed to come out of it all was a general feeling of the game being annoying, with tracking issues and long wait times. It then gets a lower score due to possible future player numbers.
Re: Review: Firewall Zero Hour (PS4)
@TrickyDicky99 Isn't it also a professional opinion?
Like visiting your financial advisor, or taking advise from a car expert regarding a certain model, or even going to your doctor?
When all the other expert opinions are saying the opposite, when would somebody's credibility be questioned?
If it's all 'just opinion' then why even have game critics?
Hey, it's just my opinion.
Re: Review: Firewall Zero Hour (PS4)
@debbio1642 Luckily, we seem to entering an age of where professional game critics are mearly offering their opinion that no longer has any objective weight to it.
Maybe we're wrong and once all the reviews come out a 6/10 is the average, but I doubt it.
Re: Review: Firewall Zero Hour (PS4)
@MajorT It's just an opinion don't forget. It's a good job it's not an opinion that will influence game purchases....... Wait.
Re: Review: Firewall Zero Hour (PS4)
@MajorT It does make you wonder.
Re: Review: Firewall Zero Hour (PS4)
@get2sammyb I was exaggerating. I will change it to: You make the game sound like a mediocre FPS with some little cool elements regarding gestures in VR but unfortunately you spend too much time in lobbies etc...
I have made some valid points and you respond to this part?
Most other people that have played it are saying that although it has some things that need tweaking/patching, what they have done right is absolutely brilliant and the whole experience in VR has been done really well making is one of the best VR titles available.
Like I said, tiny minority.
Re: Review: Firewall Zero Hour (PS4)
@get2sammyb No, I don't know better than somebody who has played the game. That's not the point I was trying to make and didn't and mean to give that impression. However, my point still stands in that you have rated a game much lower than pretty much everyone else that has played it so far. Every single snippet of feedback I have seen has commended the game for its efforts, and VR gameplay.
What I do know is that your opinion is both polarising and also what appears to be in a tiny minority. As a reader this concerns me, especially when it comes to making an informed decision based on what the critics think.
So, with that in mind (and being aware that I don't know any better than you) I am best to avoid getting it because you make it sound bad.
Thanks for the review, the game sounds like a complete nightmare. I might see what the other reviewers say first though, just in case.....
Re: Review: Firewall Zero Hour (PS4)
@Rudy_Manchego My point being that Counter Strike has very simple gameplay and limited game modes yet it is considered to be one of the best online only FPS games ever created, and is reviewed as such. I can't be certain, but I'll hazard a guess that it doesn't get pulled apart based on its future player base and it's lack of modes.
On another note, you could argue that the VR element is that significant in Firewall that all other non-VR FPS games are really shallow and lack immersion.
Re: Review: Firewall Zero Hour (PS4)
@Rudy_Manchego Like Counter Strike right?
Re: Review: Firewall Zero Hour (PS4)
I'm not a journalist, but it's obvious to me that the developers here have taken a step forward to help with VR growth and should be commended. Every multiplayer game has the risk of a dwindling player base hanging over it. This is another review that doesn't give the VR component enough appreciation. In this case, the VR component is everything. People getting this game want a tactical, immersive FPS. Pretty much everyone who has played it seems to think it does.
I'm losing faith in mainstream critics. I honestly believe that some critics just don't seem qualified to review certain games. VR is a separate platform and should be reviewed as such by people who are fans of the medium. It seems that Pushsquare are only one step away from the 'I suffer from motion sickness in VR so it gets a 2/10' group of critics.
6/10 is really going to drag down the Metascore for this game, which unfortunately is a measure a lot of people use at a glance. I believe Pushsquare are aware of this and have scored the game knowing it will create attention. Going by your review standards, a 7/10 would have been more reasonable. Hiding behind the excuse that it's 'subjective' shows that you don't understand the balance of subjective/objective opinion that a review requires.
PS. I don't own the game, so my reaction goes to show how far off from the general response your opinion is. A review site should give the reader insight into making an informed purchase. I came here for that information and it’s left me wanting to look elsewhere because you have completely missed the point. I hope you find that important balance readers need to have confidence in what you write.