I'd give it an 8.5 too but I completely disagree with your "logic." How can you possibly dictate what score other people "should" have given it? Whether someone gives it a 10 or a 5, who are you to say they're wrong?

Someone gets it

So what is 1-3 for then?

1 = Terrible and broken
2-3 = Poor but just about playable
4 = Below average
5 = Average
6 = Above average
7 = Good game
8 = Very good game
9 = Brilliant game
10 = As close to perfect as you're going to get.

It's really not that hard to get your head around.

If you're able to acknowledge that it's not a game for everybody...why the antagonistic response when you see proof of that?

"The reality is that some of the biggest names in the industry are praising the game."

Cool. Are you suggesting the thoughts of industry veterans should dictate the subjective thoughts of everyone else?

"Do we need that studios try something diferent beside racers and shooters? Yes."

Agreed as well. But, if you think that's the case: wouldn't you ding some points against Kojima & co. falling back on dumb shooting galleries occasionally, rather than holding steadfast to the delivery-sim core?

1.) But a game receiving 4/10 doesn't translate to a broken mess either, especially from the site's methodology. I mean...I follow in respect to graphical fidelity, but listing off everything else is just overselling it. Hiring big-name actors doesn't suddenly mean it's in an echelon all its own, especially when the dialogue seems so listless. Norman Reedus could be switched with anyone else for his gruff protagonist attitude during most of it. I guess by "style" you mean design, which I don't see why that shouldn't be a critically emphasized.

2.) Woah, woah. Which industry veterans are you talking about? Because you painted such a broad brush, I figured you were including Cory Barlog (employed by Sony-owned Santa Monica Studios), Keighley (literally IN the game), film directors (who are often also good friends of his anyways), etc. etc. Like...what the heck? Are we supposed to disregard THAT potential positive bias as well?

And I'm not really following the timing portion. If it's late...that's just the case of it being late. Would it seem less contrived being submitted a couple days after TGA's?

3.) Hey, I can sympathize with the idea of something more abstract or intangible making said deliveries somewhat cathartic. Like, mentally I could follow along with someone else's reasoning (to a point)...but it's in direct conflict with my own personal experience that left me so bored. Just as someone can it's "not a game for everyone" it's not that hard to say "and I'm not one of them."

4.) "...thousands and thousands went to metacritic when it was possible to make «reviews» destroying the game"

I mean...fine. I don't see the purpose in meta-bombing (aside from stances against micro-transations or the like), but that's kinda the nature of the internet. It's annoying, but that shouldn't cloud out those with more genuine frustrations with it.

"Do we need that studios try something diferent beside racers and shooters?"

You're aiming that gun at the wrong reviewer. Check his other reviews on the site. Get an idea of what games he plays overall. I mean, there's a penchant there for playing bad games, but we can't fault him for that.

"Deal with it."

I'm fairly certain coolbeans doesn't get paid based on whether or not people agree with his opinion or how few awards it wins.

Story is interesting. Gameplay is absolute shit.

The gameplay is great. Even after the story I am doing all the side missions which I never do unless the gameplay is great. Last time I did that was the original inFamous on PS3.

It ain't easy, but with enough consideration one can reach said conclusion.

-one of the most obnoxiously designed games in respect to its delivery-sim template
-overwhelming sense of tedium at fetch quests
-shoe-horned shooting galleries & annoying boss fights that are rarely engaging
-incredible lengths taken to waste your time
-one of Kojima's worst stories (not bereft of good qualities like the world-building though)

These and smaller frustrations add up to make the gaming equivalent of a root canal--a quality one at that though. How'd the score happen? Kojima's avant-garde nature found a way.

On your other question:

"Is it the readers or the sites fault that we got to that mentality though?"

The chicken-or-egg scenario for this has always been a dicey one because both sides crave hype for different reasons. I'd LEAN towards sites any day b/c corporate like Gamespot was willing to fire Gertsmann for a tepid 6 and game publishers used to buy out the VAST MAJORITY of ad space back in the day.

I just think the best solution lies forward by creating some momentum and carving a (slightly) different path. Simply treating games similar to that of movies where you don't see tough criticisms without a corresponding score BACKING it.

Not sure it's worth discussing the finer points of the subjective matter within the game itself. That's been done elsewhere, so I'll just say I can agree with some of those points, but not others, and personally feel the negatives add up to a below average game given the technical quality and online depth that the game aspires to, and mostly achieves.

In that vein, I concede that yes, there are times when really well made games on a technical level, are not necessarily above average when taken as a whole. However, I tend to look at how I rate games with the technical achievements built in, and feel that DS holds some level of above average execution.

On to whose to blame.:)

I think personally the sites are more to blame. 7 and above being worth one's time is a time honored tradition that dates back to print magazines. I recall that being a thing back in the NES days. Not sure how it got to that point, but I think publications knew that games that didn't get good scores would have trouble in the market, and they may not have personally felt they should hinder a games success just because it wasn't more than average. Over time, I feel that just raised the standard, so reviews now are like they're graded on a curve. But, that only makes average games that don't stand out, or have some other silly politics attached to it, stand out more as bad, because the scales have been tipped.

Overall, the readers probably still go with 7 and above as being the only one's worth considering. At least in a very broad general sense. Probably a carry over from the days of old.

I feel review scores have become pretty much useless, and have felt that even before the internet took off. The content of the review is now more important, but nowadays, with the lack of what I'd define as respectable and proper reviewers, I feel that even the content of the reviews are less than useful. Exceptions exist, but those good reviewers can't stand out in the sea of mediocrity.

I don't think there's any real solution in today's news market. It's not even just gaming, but the media is all about being incindiary, and this is to drive traffic, hence money, to make a 24/7 news income, from a world that doesn't have 24/7 worth of news to report. Even in the regular news, they just report on the same thing over and over again, despite there being tons of stuff going on in the world, so incendiary commentary has taken the place of proper news for the most part. Like the regular news media, the gaming press has gone from informing the readers, to trying to influence the readers on a grand scale. It's no longer just relaying news, even with some slant that leans towards how the news is presented, to just outright telling people what they should think.

All that has also led to a lower editorial standard, a lack of ethical behavior(as the case you cited, and many others could be noted), and a complete degregation of worthwhile news and commentary within our community.

On the positive side though, it has helped sites like N4G thrive, because now instead of having maybe one or two articles a week to get some news, you get hundreds of articles a day, 10-15 of which are good at getting people riled up so they want to come and visit, and because of the proliferation of outlets, aggregate sites are more useful to get that little bit of news that actually does happen. Just have to suffer through the swill....which is where most of the discussion actually happens anyways.

If you truly love Kojima then get the game. Death Stranding doesn't have that hard Kojima Metal Gear gameplay but it has its own identity and very much retains the Kojima magic that persists through all of his games.

So in short if you are expecting Metal Gear then you need to tame your expectations. If you want " Kojima Magic" then this game has it in spades. It is truly a landmark moment in gaming.

Rent and try it out yourself. Guide your own will.