72 réponses à ce sujet

[stevej713]

DA's latest reviews have been in the low 90s, so I suppose that's my prediction.

[dragoager]

I have no idea.



Optimistically - low 90's

realistically - high 80's



I agree that rubbish critics will bring down the overall score, and that there will be a discrepancy between console and PC scores.

[Sornin]

Role-playing games tend to polarize gamers due to their slower, more ponderous gameplay and complex plots and game systems. Some reviewers tend to let this bias their reviews both positively and negatively.

I have found that RPG fanatics overlook evident flaws and spin them ("The quests are not poorly explained, they are challenging!), while RPG haters label features intrinsic to the genre as flaws ("The plot takes too long to develop!").

So, you usually find reviews too forgiving or too harsh, and seldom both unbiased and fair.

Anyway, I suspect that Dragon Age: Origins, being a high-profile and hyped release, will generate a lot of unfair criticism for the aforementioned reasons as well as a lot of undeserved praise as well.

As for the ever-useless Metacritic score, I am guessing a 92.

By the way, the most important part of a review is not the score but the rationale for giving it, which is only found by reading the actual review. The numbers mean very little, particularly an average. It is better to find a few reviewers/sites that match your preferences and use them as a guide.

Modifié par Sornin, 19 octobre 2009 - 09:11 .

[H8Cr1me]

Sornin wrote...

Role-playing games tend to polarize gamers due to their slower, more ponderous gameplay and complex plots and game systems. Some reviewers tend to let this bias their reviews both positively and negatively.

I have found that RPG fanatics overlook evident flaws and spin them ("The quests are not poorly explained, they are challenging!), while RPG haters label features intrinsic to the genre as flaws ("The plot takes too long to develop!").

So, you usually find reviews too forgiving or too harsh, and seldom both unbiased and fair.

Anyway, I suspect that Dragon Age: Origins, being a high-profile and hyped release, will generate a lot of unfair criticism for the aforementioned reasons as well as a lot of undeserved praise as well.

As for the ever-useless Metacritic score, I am guessing a 92.

By the way, the most important part of a review is not the score but the rationale for giving it, which is only found by reading the actual review. The numbers mean very little, particularly an average. It is better to find a few reviewers/sites that match your preferences and use them as a guide.

I basically posted this for fun and just to get a general Idea of what the community thought. Overall, I have agreed with a majority of the metactritic scores FOR GAMES, give or take. Unlike the movie scores, which are all over the place. I mean, Drag me to Hell has a score of 83, and that movie was so freaking lame it's pathetic. I think metacritic needs to have a system in place where you can build your own score based on sources you prefer. I guess you could average them out yourself, but that sounds like work.

Modifié par H8Cr1me, 20 octobre 2009 - 06:33 .

[HestalaRorshock]

88-92

[Fodder007]

I think about an 88 or 89.

[Halfcab]

H8Cr1me wrote...

Anybody care to predict a final Metacritic score? I am going to guess a 92, with a user score of 9.6

I have a feeling that graphics will be an issue for some reviewing parties.

I'd say thats gonna be the score, give or take two percent for the metascore and plus or minus .2 for the user score.

[Halfcab]

H8Cr1me wrote...

Sornin wrote...

Role-playing games tend to polarize gamers due to their slower, more ponderous gameplay and complex plots and game systems. Some reviewers tend to let this bias their reviews both positively and negatively.

I have found that RPG fanatics overlook evident flaws and spin them ("The quests are not poorly explained, they are challenging!), while RPG haters label features intrinsic to the genre as flaws ("The plot takes too long to develop!").

So, you usually find reviews too forgiving or too harsh, and seldom both unbiased and fair.

Anyway, I suspect that Dragon Age: Origins, being a high-profile and hyped release, will generate a lot of unfair criticism for the aforementioned reasons as well as a lot of undeserved praise as well.

As for the ever-useless Metacritic score, I am guessing a 92.

By the way, the most important part of a review is not the score but the rationale for giving it, which is only found by reading the actual review. The numbers mean very little, particularly an average. It is better to find a few reviewers/sites that match your preferences and use them as a guide.

I basically posted this for fun and just to get a general Idea of what the community thought. Overall, I have agreed with a majority of the metactritic scores FOR GAMES, give or take. Unlike the movie scores, which are all over the place. I mean, Drag me to Hell has a score of 83, and that movie was so freaking lame it's pathetic. I think metacritic needs to have a system in place where you can build your own score based on sources you prefer. I guess you could average them out yourself, but that sounds like work.

Metacritic is generally a good predictor of games however if you look at the individual scores you can tell if it should be higher or lower.  For example, Empire: Total War boasts a score of 90, rated by like 3-4 magazines/websites and it ****ing sucks.  If you look at the user score its like 2/10 or something.  Other games that are rated by 20 different sites/mags have like scores of like (100-60) where 90% of them will be 80+ and 2 will be rated a 60 by some no name mags with a bone to pick.

Be careful about metacritic.  The system is flawed.

[Razgul]

Not to mention Torment has 91 and Oblivion 94. That ain't right.



Hopefully DA:O gets around 91-93.

[gethsemani87]

I am with Razgul here, 91-93 seems about where I expect it too land.



Lots of 100's and "Masterpiece", "RPG of the Decade", "Incredible Depth" and "Future classic" from those that like RPGs.

Then there will be a tide of 75-85 reviews where the difficult combat, long and overbearing conversations, main quest that takes too long to start and dated graphics will be mentioned and dissected.



Just my prediction

[Viz79]

94+ guaranteed. Hardly any review below 90 to be sure (except those reviewers that want to seem 'cool' by being different. Yes I believe this game is going to be that good. It will definitely have Oblivion beat at any rate.

[TeleProd]

I'd say 90-93. 92 if I have to be exact.

[Viz79]

There is no way this game is getting less than Oblivion and Oblivion got 94. I am sorry but this game brings way too much to the rpg genre that has been missing since BG. Oblivion did nothing but bring fancy graphics and consolify Morrowind.

[Nic-V]

cyanrabbit wrote...

Well, considering a pile of .... as oblivion reached 94, I do hope it will at least be as high as that.
but come on, more recently Fallout 3 got a 91, so I would even say 112 would be fair in this case.....

Anyway, so that to answer your question 95. I hope a well deserved 9.5.

You are going to hell my friend lol 

I'd say it's probably going to be in the middle 80s. 90 is hard to reach 

[Viz79]

I can't believe the number of people that are saying it will be in their 80s. This RPG clearly towers above Fallout 3 and Oblivion from everything we have seen - and Bioware is 'the' quality cRPG developer (few can say that Betheseda's releases can compare to Bioware's, and of course Bioware has more releases and experience under their belt). And if Oblivion was 94, how can anyone in their right mind see Dragon Age not match it (nevermind fall significantly below into the 80s?)

Madness Previews say its the next coming. And I think it surely is! It is true that 90s is hard to reach but this seems to be the RPG that people have been waiting a decade for.

Modifié par Viz79, 20 octobre 2009 - 07:28 .

[flem1]

Viz79 wrote...

I can't believe the number of people that are saying it will be in their 80s. This RPG clearly towers above Fallout 3 and Oblivion from everything we have seen - and Bioware is 'the' quality cRPG developer (few can say that Betheseda's releases can compare to Bioware's, and of course Bioware has more releases and experience under their belt). And if Oblivion was 94, how can anyone in their right mind see Dragon Age not match it (nevermind fall significantly below into the 80s?)

Oblivion and Fallout 3 were part of well-known brands that warded off too many low outlier reviews.

The only non-sequel RPG to ever hit 94 was KOTOR -- part of the best-known brand in entertainment.  I'd be shocked if DA got over 92.

[Ashbery]

The truly great games are never top of game lists like METACRITIC .So who cares.

[sidion77]

87.

[Paul Emil]

At least 80, but probably not over 96. 89 - 92 would be my estimate.

[Saurel]

I'm gonna guess 83 or 91. Odd choice, but I'm testing my psychic abilities.

[Punahedan]

A number between 0 and 101. (0, 101) in math terms. Not [0, 101].

[Viz79]

flem1 wrote...

Viz79 wrote...

I can't believe the number of people that are saying it will be in their 80s. This RPG clearly towers above Fallout 3 and Oblivion from everything we have seen - and Bioware is 'the' quality cRPG developer (few can say that Betheseda's releases can compare to Bioware's, and of course Bioware has more releases and experience under their belt). And if Oblivion was 94, how can anyone in their right mind see Dragon Age not match it (nevermind fall significantly below into the 80s?)

Oblivion and Fallout 3 were part of well-known brands that warded off too many low outlier reviews.

The only non-sequel RPG to ever hit 94 was KOTOR -- part of the best-known brand in entertainment.  I'd be shocked if DA got over 92.

This isn't about branding, this is about an average from so-called 'professional' reviews.  To push DA below the 94% spot, you actually need significant reasons to do that. I can't think of a single one derived from previews and everything else we have gathered apart from the fact that perhaps the game is a little more 'challenging' than a normal RPG.  hardly a big negative.

You don't need an established 'franchise' to get high marks - look at Bioshock (unless you are considering the System Shock connection - ironically that was the spiritual successor of 'System Shock' too and that particular game only rated in its mid-high 80s (btw I know its not a RPG but just an example). Baldurs Gate on the other hand is considered one of the if not 'the' definitive cRPG of all time).

Still drawing from what you have said, if one was to use that reason - these words guarantees >94.  'Spiritual success of Baldurs Gate' AND actually has the quality to back it up too. Not even Fallout or Elder Scrolls can really compare to BG honestly.

[Baelin Firestorm]

Metacritic: 93 / User: 86



Why only 86 for users? The user pool will contain fans of other games looking to dump on this game, users who can't get the game to work properly because their PC knowledge is "just this side of a gorilla", and (as always) individuals that buy the game with either no idea of what they're getting or aren't willing to explore different types of games than what they're use to.