IGN didn't say that. TJ wrote that the frame rate can be choppy past 1944. It wasn't as severe for me, but even if it was, mixed performance near the end of the game isn't a reason to make an arbitrary limit on the score.
You confuse "taste" with "overrated". This game is far from overrated.
"Skylines, which is, at least judged by comments made by the fanbase, is the most perfect game ever made."
That's why they're called "fanbase"... of course they praise that game, but it's far from being perfect in my opinion.
It's not perfect but it's much closer to what SimCity should have been.
The limitations of the SimCity engine killed it. That and EAs 'help'.
Witcher 3. They just copied too much content from the books - and not in a very good way. They game looks great and has insanely high production values, but the storytelling isn't that good anymore (not bad not what I expected, was pretty disappointed after TW3). I think they are capable of much better stuff if they created their own IP of just stayed away from content that was written by somebody more capable already...
"but the storytelling isn't that good anymore "
I sure hope that you're just kidding...
>>> "Like I said, my graphics card can run almost every single PC game on the market at a suitable and playable frame rate on high or even ultra"
30fps (like you wrote in your first post) might be suitable for you, but for most PC gamers nowadays that's simply unacceptable, even more in a super fast action game like this.
An Radeon HD 7870 is very low end nowadays, it's according to VideobenchmarkDOTnet comparable to a GTX 480... 6(!) years and soon 5 generations old, heck your 4850 is even older, released in 2008, that's 8 years ago and it's ranked almost #300 on videobenchmark and even slower than Intel Iris Pro 5200 (CPU embedded graphics). You can't expect developers to support such old cards for that long, because then where do you draw the line?
>>> "That alone means it is poorly optimised"
Uh... no.. welcome to the modern world. Look at what Nvidia is going to release soon... the GTX 1070, it's going to replace the GTX 970, one of the most popular gaming cards out there, and it's going to be faster than a $1,000 Titan X. Trust me, if you think that this game is not well optimized, then wait until you see what they have in store for you next year. You simply have to face reality that you need to upgrade.
I disagree. When many games are actually artificially restricted to 30FPS, I would say that it is an 'acceptable' rate. What is more it certainly qualifies for minimum.
The irony is, I have now played the new Doom on my sub-par system with an i3 CPU and archaic graphics card.
I've been running it on High with 30-45 FPS. If I take it down to medium I'm 40-60 and low is 60+.
In other words my spec, while being consistently below the 'minimum requirements' is more than adequate to play.
**edit** and as I said in my first post. I'm running a 7850, not a 4850. I'm very very happy with my 7850 and have no interest, or even a need, to upgrade any time soon.
Except you're never actually forced to buy anything. If you enjoy the games, you will likely buy the DLC because, guess what, you enjoy the game.
As for the recent Steam reviews, you mean the ones that are all "Very Positive" on all recent Paradox titles?