Elden Ring Review Discourse Explained

thegamer.com:

There is a lot to unpack with the Elden Ring reviews. The short version is that the game reviewed very, very well. On top of our perfect score, the game is the highest reviewed game of all-time, and while that's a precarious position that could slip away slightly, it's clear Elden Ring will go down as one of the all-time greats. You'd think then that all of the chatter around the game would be positive, but I suppose you'd only think that if you had no idea of how the internet works. For anyone getting a little confused by all of the discourse, we're here to break it down gamer style.

First off, there's the issue of those perfect scores. What makes a perfect video game, and how does one accurately review a game. I have always been of the opinion that a review score needs to be your own personal opinion of a game merged with critical examination. For example, I love Pokemon Legends: Arceus. It's the best Pokemon game since HeartGold, and adds so many new flourishes to the stale Pokemon formula - we gave it 3.5 stars, and I stand by our score. Despite how great it is as a Pokemon game, most of its best elements are things other games have been doing for a decade. So when our reviewer gave Elden Ring a perfect ten, it was a mix of "I adore this game" and "this is FromSoftware's methodology refined and a significant upgrade on open world games."

Related: I Can't Wait To Be Bad At Elden Ring

That first part is crucial. Just because our reviewer adored it does not mean everyone will. Though you can apparently roam much more freely and skip out on difficult battles, it's still a FromSoft game. It's still hard. It still features very long battles where a high level of skill, precision, and endurance for dying over and over again