SaysWho?

We had a neighbor who worked with -- brace yourself, the sight of this company will age you -- Adelphia Cable. *back gives out* He would call his company many times when we told him that SEGA Channel wasn't working!

SEGA Channel. I got way too excited to see the intro screen to that when I arrived home from school. Sucked when there was something wrong with the cable. Guess I’m not playing that either since it’s not 95/96 anymore.

Okay, I laughed. You happy?

Due to this being budget reconciliation since Republicans oppose a good bill, they could pass and sign it today and AFAIK we won't feel any effects until late March.

Full story of the woman in my second post:

There's quite a bit, but a sample includes: Myst Gunstar Heroes Panzer Dragoon Orta FreQuency Braid Aladdin (Sega Genesis version) Twisted Metal Black Online (can't play this) Mario Teaches Typing Mr. Mosquito Screamride White Night Robocop Wheel of Fortune (NES version) The Sims Kakuto Chojin: Back Alley Brutal Genji: Days of the Blade: Steel Battalion Final Fantasy V NFL Gameday 2001 Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem Rogue Trip Vacation 2012 Probably missing a few, and there are some which I may avoid playing in general, but there are only so many hours in the day, you know?

DOJ to ask Trump-appointed US attorneys to resign WWW.CNN.COM The Justice Department, as soon as Tuesday, is expected to ask US attorneys appointed by former President Donald Trump to submit their resignations, a turnover expected to spare two top prosecutors in Delaware and Connecticut overseeing two sensitive Trump-era investigations, a senior Justice Department official said. This follows up some of the changes here:

'Era of small government is over': Democrats upsize Covid package with more cash relief WWW.NBCNEWS.COM Democrats are proposing monthly cash payments to families with children, the latest sign of the party embracing a larger safety net despite the price tag. This goes a little more into the strategy behind the monthly cash payments.

I had to read this again because before realizing it was a tyop, I thought you really meant, "It's NOW how I personally score games," and all I could think of was, "Say it ain't so, skillz." EDIT: Leaving the bold unedited for the lulz

You call stuff in my posts cherry-picked and hand waving and you don't even read them, so it's a big ask to make me believe you read past the numbers.

Did you get a graphical glitch or missing textures in the tunnel? Because I had some textures that failed to pop in and took some great photos of PS4 Deacon by a PS1 car and tank!

No, I'm reading the reviews, which you should probably do instead of the number on OpenCritic. Then you can read exactly what they think, how they view the positives and negatives, and go from there. And then you'll see things like "5 - Mediocre" and see how people actually use the range of numbers to quantify their review. Crazy concept, but it works!

I think TLOU2 is a better game overall and does everything in a stellar way, BUT it's not really a knock on Days Gone. For me, they're not just two zombie games; they each offer something unique in their own way. I think Days Gone being a bit more hammy and not as self-serious is good for what it's doing, and I think TLOU2 being a very serious game is good for what it's doing, especially considering the riveting story. There were a billion times I went, "Oh God, Oh GOD!" to a story beat because so much felt earned. I'll second the design of camps; it's more than just bushes, and while I had plenty of fun clearing Witcher 3 camps or Horizon camps and think both games excel in other areas, Days Gone does do a good job giving you good level design for each camp and some REALLY great level design for horde migration areas. And a big lol at the last criticism because my gf actually enjoys watching me take on hordes even though when they race at me, it freaks her out. And I was trying to get to one but accidentally rolled my bike over a spot where I was supposed to meet someone. I watched as the time of day changed, then had to exit out of the mission, but now it was daytime so the horde was elsewhere and I didn't know where the cave was. I apologized and told her I'd let her know when I found it later. Not a dealbreaker, but something simple like that feels weird considering how polished Sony's games tend to be. The game is carried by a sea of great ideas and some addictive gameplay, so the glitches are way easier to overlook. I think a lot of it has to do with how the quests aren't just things to level up even though they give you experience. Side missions help you gain trust, and that'll help you get better parts for your bike or better weapons, which will help you with missions or clearing out hordes, which will help you gain trust, so everything you do will likely help you in another area past the skill tree.

It is nothing in this conversation. Would you recommend a game that's "OKAY?" You might, you might not, but many won't. RT is all about recommendation. Its average rating, and Metacritic's average, are all about the degree of praise/criticism. An actual review and the words the person use are the only way you can actually ascertain what said person thought about a game. The idea that you need an aggregate to determine what the numbers mean instead of the person who wrote the review and gave it a number is quite a weird leap of logic. So you have to actually read the reviews and take in the words. Take AllStars: IGN: "Destruction AllStars can provide fun bursts of frantic car combat action, but never adds up to much more than that." That's a 6. Clearly not teetering on "utter failure," as you're saying. Metro: "A fun, uncomplicated romp that's a great way to relax for 20 minutes or so. Beyond that though it struggles to entertain, especially given the grubby approach to microtransactions." That's a 5. Does utter failure mean it's at least a fun romp and a great way to relax for brief periods? No, but it clearly does mean it has its charms but has a lot working against it. Wcctech: "Destruction AllStars certainly has its charm. It exudes personality, thanks to a varied cast of characters that - despite having zero story - seem to have something about them that makes you want to learn more about them, such as their name. You're here for the cars, and they are fun. The smashing, or destruction, of other cars, is a genuinely fun experience that's made all the better by each character having their own ability to mix things up. The game modes do keep things ticking over, though It needs to be said that the game needs to add more in the future to keep things fresh. This isn't a bad start for Destruction AllStars, but it's also one that needs to focus on the strengths and drop the weaknesses - particularly the abysmal on-foot gameplay - to make this game the online draw it could be." This is a 6.5. Does it sound like it's reaaalllly close to utter failure? It sounds more like the reviewer is using the entire scale, sees a fun gameplay loop in the game in vehicles, but also sees drawbacks in on-foot and the amount of content. Lords of Gaming: "So while Destruction AllStars has the potential to be greater in its post-launch life, it is going to be a steep hill drive up. The game looks and runs fantastic on Sony’s newest console, but that does not detract from the obvious shortcomings. A poor progression system and microtransactions are just surface-level problems." This is a 6. The review talks about the game's potential and positives but thinks its microtransactions are holding it back heavily. Shacknews: "As far as gameshow/sporting event-style games go, Destruction AllStars is maybe some of the most fun I’ve had in a while. I love the pageantry when a match starts and my character does their intro before kicking things off. The visuals are smooth and pristine throughout the fast-paced action and the gameplay in different modes is absolutely delightful. I would like the foot game to be boosted a bit, and it desperately needs some better cosmetics and an easy-access Mute All function, but there’s an absolutely enthralling foundation here in Destruction AllStars. I want to see more characters, more arenas, events… I want to see where Destruction AllStars goes in the long run and I’ll be happy to keep playing as we work our way there." This is an 8. This isn't just a game that's OK or kinda good. This person is having a ball and sees a lot of potential. And it's possible the potential isn't met, but follow his review, and this isn't just one point above a C- for the dude. Just about every review follows this. 5 is mediocre. 6 is OK. These conversations would be much easier if people just read reviews instead of jerking off to numbers.

OpenCritic also says the 6ish average is "fair." That's clear cut, again, that 5/6 are mediocre/OK. Recommended tells me nothing. Take this 6.5 review of Destruction Allstars. But whether or not that's considered recommended to OpenCritic is irrelevant. The closest thing we have is the review itself. And the 6 reviews on your own link, top to bottom, are not teetering on failure.

Then it should be easy for you to actually show how most reviewers think below six is utter failure. Because honestly I could’ve gone on but it’s responses like yours that lead me to believe going on will just fall on deaf ears.

Except they do as has been demonstrated.

It should say a lot that 60% is still considered to be recommended. Because that meter is strictly based on whether the movie is recommended or not. It’s almost like 60% means it’s OK.

The average would be 5 if most reviewers thought most games were mediocre and gave them a 5. You're more than welcome to actually show that.

3 is MEGA bad, 2 is ULTRA bad, 1 is SUPER BAD But that's not really using the whole scale. You and I aren't one of the reviewers, and we're talking about what Allstars averaged based on reviews. I said the reviews were OK, around a 6, and that's what the consensus was. That also means some found it much better and some found it bad, and it averaged around 6.

The average would be 5 if most reviewers considered most games mediocre, which they don't as I've pointed out. You have to look at individual reviews because the actual review tells you if they consider a 5 "utter failure" or mediocre, and we've seen that it does not mean it was a failure, as you thought. All the average shows me is that there are many good games out there, but maybe not games I'm rushing to play. And 7 seems pretty much in line with that. Why they're better doesn't really change that they're better. Which is my point lol.

Some found them bad and gave them lower scores than a 5, which is why the average score they received is on the lower end. The 5s and 6s weren't from people who thought they were bad and thus gave them a score that wasn't bad.

It's not that they're making 7 an average; it's that 7 is good and the average game is at least decent and hovers around there. There are very few offensively bad games I play that I can't think of a single thing it does correctly. Second sentence I already showed isn't really true. Another example: Marvel's Avengers received a 6 on IGN. "Marvel's Avengers' campaign is fun and endearing, but the loot-based post-game meant to be the meat of this meal is unrewarding and overly repetitive." And it says OKAY. Dualshockers gave Werewolf: The Apocalypse - Earthblood a 5. "In Werewolf The Apocalypse Earthblood, every advantage is neutralized by a disadvantage, leading to a totally mediocre experience." Not an utter failure of a game. Just mediocre. Habroxia 2 got a 5 on this site. "It feels like someone put a lot of heart into Habroxia 2, but heart only goes so far. It’s a decent enough attempt at a side-scrolling shooter, but lacks the polish I’d expect from a game these days." Twin Mirror from Dontnod got a 4/10 from The Digital Fix. "Whilst it has a lot of interesting ideas and some nice mechanics, none of them feel fully realised. Twin Mirror is bursting with potential, which is why it feels so disappointing." Godfall received a 5/10 on Gamespot, which is 'Mediocre' using their scale. "This is a shallow game bolstered by decent combat that struggles to bear the weight of an entire game. Uninteresting loot mixed with a monotonous and grindy structure is not a good combination, and for as satisfying and fun as it can often be to hack your way through one battle after another, there's not enough here to sustain that enjoyment for more than a few hours." I'm sure some sites rate using the meme pic I showed, but 5/6 clearly aren't failures/teetering on failures for most review sites. And if that's someone's scale, then they should likely alter it to make the score match the content of the review. That's what I'm saying: 6 was and is "Okay." I don't really catch your logic on the licensed game. We're not getting rushed releases on capitalizing on a trending IP.... yes, a trend that leads to better games, among other factors. What am I missing?

It's a hugely enjoyable game, but definitely buggy. I had defeated a horde earlier in the game that the game didn't declare I defeated. I thought, "Huh, weird." Apparently it was part of a story mission LATE in the game, so once I got to that mission, I was required to ride past there to get to another area. Usually, you'd just fight the horde at that point and clear them out. But since I killed them already, the mission was basically me riding west for a while, and then Deacan shouts exasperated, "OKAY! PHEW! That's... that's all of them," and I'm thinking with more polish, they would have written that into the story quest, something like Deacon going, "I actually already defeated the horde so let's GO!" I'm really glad you're enjoying it because despite its glitchiness, there's so much good in the game. I was bummed that I couldn't find more people to talk about this game with pre-release because a lot of hardcore gamers were calling it a B-Game, or said "Of all the IPs you could tackle it's just another zombie game," and I always thought there was so much going for the game if people gave it a chance. Before the game released, they talked about no place feeling safe on the map, and between the hounds that run as quickly as your bike, the hordes and their migration patterns, the ambushes that trip you off your bike, that's what happened and it makes you vigilant. They talked about every freaker in the horde doing its own thing and not just being one big mass coming your way, and that's how it happened. They talked about every side mission feeling as if it had something to do with the main story, and I think the infestation zones, ripper camps, NERO checkpoints, camp jobs and trust, and hordes all tie into the overarching story in their own way (they're not, "Hey, this woman can't find her fryng pan," which I honestly don't mind as a side mission lol). They talked about the number of objects that you could use to craft items, and into late game, you're continuing to accumulate crafting recipes, whether you're using car alarms, airbags, or bottles. The hordes are obviously the showpiece, but they really deliver. I love that they have migration patterns because they may be in a different spot one night to the next, and they may be traveling up a dirt road that you're using, and you'll run into them and then, especially early game, haul ass out of there. And there are some especially big hordes that they put in well-designed locations that allow you to slip through cracks in doors so you can whittle down their numbers -- until they break down the door, and they'll be explosives littered around and environmental objects that you can use to slow down their progress. So yeah, buggy, but there's so much it does very well so I hope they really nail down the polish on the sequel. And I can't wait to see why a PS5 horde is like.