Synth said: Yea, that's kinda how I see it. I see FM7 finishing lower than FM6's 86, not so much because reviewers find their balls regarding MTs (how often has that ever happened in the past?), but more because the progression itself has altered as a result, so they'd probably juse legitimately have less fun.



GT Sport is probably going to have a rough time due to it's content. Games journalists aren't typically the most competent or competitive of gamers, and so GTS' eSports aspirations probably won't mean much to them in comparison to what it lacks from previous entries. It won't help that both Project Cars 2 and Forza Motorport 7 are releasing at basically the same time, and that the online landscape will hardly be buzzing with energy during a review phase.



I can see both FM and GT scoring lower than their last outings tbh. GTS is basically Street Fighter V again, but in racing form. Click to expand...

watdaeff4 said: I don't necessarily disagree with you but at what point is the line?



UC4 is a fantastic game but had P2W elements in its MP. Should those reviews been affected? Same with many other games that scored well (I consider 80+ as scoring "well") Click to expand...

I agree. Driveclub even got criticised for being "soulless", or was that GT? Either way, it's going to be a hard sell on the content and due to the expectations from past GT's. Even with Kaz/PD dropping the 7, reviewers aren't suddenly going to say "yeah this is fine, it's not really 7". It still costs $60 and it's still taken 4 years since GT6 to be released.The line for me is at least mentioning it. I guess that is a good baseline. Not all reviews have scores anyway. Too many reviewers don't even mention MTs/loot boxes/F2P elements or how they may or may not impact the game. I know half the pubs/devs have them turned off for reviews, but if that is the case then I think that itself should be an automatic admission of scummyness. Worth docking? Well, at least worth mentioning this dev/pub has disabled MTs/loot boxes/whatever it is for review, and this shows cowardice.Actually taking off from the numbered score is completely up to the reviewer. I wouldn't say there is a required deduction. What I would say though is like what Jim said, even if 3/10 is a "protest" review, at this point in this industry, so what? Fans need to be prepared not to get as butthurt over reviews if some reviewers start taking a stance here and docking their favourite franchises. That is neeeeeeever going to happen though. Look at any review thread and the rage an 8/10 brings, let alone a 3/10 protest review. People will be angry if any reviewers dares dock Forza to 7 or 8 out of 10 due to all of this. It's just the way gamers are with reviews. Hence why I hardly take part in many review topics.For me it's got nothing to do with riling up fans anyway, I want the publishers and devs squirming with rage at journalists/reviewers taking a stance against out of control preying monetization. Until this industry gets some regulation, if it ever does, the gamers voices and journalists/reviewers articles/review scores are all we have to pushback. Besides voting with the wallet, but we can do that whilst still voicing complaints.