You're going all out over a sentence. Talk about finding a hill to die on.
I'm simply defending my point. Meanwhile he's the one attacking my point. In a debate you need to have a thorough, rocksteady defense and an equally thorough counterpoint that the argument is flawed. So really, I don't consider that even '1/3rd the effort needed' myself, as I could have gone more thorough if I was 'going to find a hill to die on'.
Holy shit, way to get hung up on the minutia, if you don't get I was being hyperbolic with terms like everyone, no one, or anyone, you need to just recognize it, because clearly I'm not speaking for every person ever, but I am speaking about the vast majority of what you saw. This is a normal way that people express such thoughts, really confused why you're getting so hung up on it.
Anyway, again, you say it was regarded as 5 star experience just like Cyberpunk here, but no professional reviews out here reflect this at all, and I'm looking like crazy. Conversely, when the first Cyberpunk reviews came in (only for the PC version), they were given many of these 5 star reviews from various outlets despite some bugs. And only when the console versions released did the whiplash set in of it also being a god awful experience depending where you play it. Considering Fallout 76 did not release to any situation remotely like that, I just continue to not understand how you can claim they're the same situation.
I don't enjoy 'hyperbolics', my mind does not work in a way that appreciates them due to how my mind developed. The meanings of words lose their meaning because of people playing 'hyperbolic' with the definitions of words, and eventually it will reach a point where nothing means anything. It is through attempting to dismantle the worth in the meaning of a word by claiming one is being hyperbolic with it that creates arguments in the first place, whether through malice (the intent to lie, manipulate, etc) or laziness (the lack of effort to be truthful).
You claim it is a 'normal way', but I do not entirely agree with that, as usually when one uses the phrases in question, they speak in the meaning of the term, as absolutes. Or, admittably as you seem to have been, they're attempting to apply societal pressure to manipulate individuals to believing in those absolutes, while claiming the 'hyperbolic' when confronted when individuals would come forth feeling offended. Because what easier way to gaslight than to use an absolute in a non-absolute manner?
Anyway, again, you say it was regarded as 5 star experience just like Cyberpunk here, but no professional reviews out here reflect this at all, and I'm looking like crazy.
I've already addressed this:
2: You also forget that I am saying these were opinions BEFORE the launch of FO76, much the same as of Cyberpunk2077. BEFORE CP2077, everyone thought it was 5 Star, as the guy I quoted said everyone thought it was. CP2077 was clearly not "5 star" and a large majority agreed such on launch.
You speak of professional reviews, which is odd, as from what I've seen over the last ~3 years, few people who bother to believe in professional reviews who are actual gamers due to the fact that the professional reviews are manipulated and often paid for to be significantly higher than what the consumer base tends to believe, are manipulated higher due to pushing an agenda, or significantly lower if they do not push the narrative the consumer base would agree to.
Case in point: TLOU2 vs Ghost of Tsushima being a perfect example of this disconnect between the "Professional Reviews" and normal individuals. TLOU2 got multiple 10/10 and 5 stars. Ghost of Tsushima was all 9.5/10s and 4.5 stars and and below by professional reviewers. But we all know the players voted for Ghost during the Game Awards.
I think a better example here is in order: Anthem. A large majority of people believed that Anthem was a 5 star game before the beta and the Jason Schreier articles. Flying Destiny people called it, a massive 'living' world where animals and all sorts of advanced randomly generated events would occur in. What we got was a shell of the promise.
By your statement, we'd be ignoring the fact a large if not majority of average people viewed Anthem at 5 star worthy simply because the reviews, things made after people got their hands on the title, were horrendous. That is a point I'm making. That is the point I've made all along. You keep going for people's views after the game reached their hands, but not once do you acknowledge the opinions of people before the point of the game reaching people's hands, before the revelation of the horrible development cycles of some of these games. In that, you continue to silence voices simply because you cannot find them. You continue to be absolutist over how people felt/think about FO76 (and likewise, using this same example, Anthem) because you simply can't find reviews before the game reached people's hands.
Source
