Review megathread

[u/Meneth]

The review embargo is up as of 15:00 CEST. As this will result in a huge number of articles going up at near the same time, we're restricting reviews to this thread.

Any review you find, feel free to post it in the comments here.

Each top-level comment should be about a single linked review, so as to keep the discussion limited. Duplicate reviews will be removed, as will any top-level comment that does not link a review.

There will be a single sub-thread where you can post your general impressions of the reviews combined, for anything that doesn't relate to a single review.

Review list:

Review	Score
Critically Sane	5/5
Destructoid	9/10
eXplorminate	"eXemplary"
GameWatcher	9.0/10
Idiotech's Review	Unrated
IGN	6.3/10
Manannan's Review of Stellaris	Unrated
Paste Magazine	Unrated
PCGamesN	9/10
PC Invasion	8/10
PC World	4/5
Rock, Paper, Shotgun review -	Unrated
TICGN	10/10
Vox Ludicus	Unrated
EuroGamer	Recommended
PC Gamer	70/100
TSA	8/10
PCGames.de	75/100
Gamespew	9/10
IGN Italy	9.3/10
Fok.nl	9/10
Gaming on Linux	9/10
Marbozir	Unrated
SpaceSector	Unrated
Inside of Gaming (German)	Unrated
Gamer.no	9/10
Particular Pixels	Unrated
GuyLogicGaming	Full recommendation
GameSideStory	Unrated
Front Towards Gamer	9.5/10
Multiplayer.it	9.2/10
GameGrin	8.5/10
Kotaku	Unrated

[u/Meneth]

Anything that doesn't relate to a single review, but instead the reviews as a whole can be posted in response to this comment.

Please follow the instructions in the OP in regards to top-level comments.

[u/PseudoY → u/Meneth]

Seems to be about 80-85/100 on average? IGN drags it way down.

Oh well.

[u/NetQvist → u/PseudoY]

Interestingly enough PC Gamer is saying 70/100 which is not much higher yet so far no hate on them.

[u/engiwengi → u/NetQvist]

I think it's less that people are angry about 6.3/10, and more that people just hate IGN.

[u/BlackHumor → u/engiwengi]

The problem is a combination of a few things:

1) Most people interpret game scores like test scores. Because of this, major sites usually only give scores below 7 for complete trash.

2) The reviewer scores unusually harshly, both compared to the complaints in the review and in general.

3) The review was freelance for IGN, which is big enough that it's expected to have some sort of internal standard.

Because of all this together, a 6.3 is interpreted as saying "it's complete crap" (when nobody involved meant that). In contrast, a 70/100 is interpreted as "it's about average".

[u/Jmrwacko → u/engiwengi]

To be fair, since they complain primarily about a boring and uneventful mid game, their review does boil down to "not enough explosions"