Got my game informer today. Review inside. PC version right now. They didn't have console versions yet. Sure was nice to read a real review and see the excitement the game produces even in guys that play them for a living. =)
Sure was nice to read an actual REVIEW of the game finally. Ahhh...
Débuté par
GargamelX
, oct. 20 2009 08:48
Retour en haut
#2
Posté 20 octobre 2009 - 08:50
Cla-Wi
-
- Members
- 70 messages
Anything you'd care to share? Oh nvm, people have been talking about this one for a while now. 
Modifié par Cla-Wi, 20 octobre 2009 - 08:51 .
#3
Posté 20 octobre 2009 - 08:53
Aristorum
-
- Members
- 708 messages
Alas, my GI subscription ran out the month before this one.
What was the overall score?
What was the overall score?
#5
Posté 20 octobre 2009 - 08:57
LadyKarrakaz
-
- Members
- 1 279 messages
Any interesting point that could be shared?
#6
Posté 20 octobre 2009 - 08:57
GargamelX
-
- Members
- 24 messages
Score was 9/10
The guy was dying to go play it again after the review. heh. speed demon could play it in 40, most folks will take 70 hours. excellent ally AI system, addicting, feels like you have an input on the world. All that. There was a Devil's Advocate section on the right. Said that inventory is an issue as there is no storage, you have to carry everything you want, ingredients and all though to me that seems pretty standard really. Said rewards from quests were sometimes out of line as he already had gear that was much better for some time. However, it seems that even the devil's advocate was pretty much totally wowed by the game. I know that most of it has been out. I just liked having it in my hands like...here it comes! you know? heh
The guy was dying to go play it again after the review. heh. speed demon could play it in 40, most folks will take 70 hours. excellent ally AI system, addicting, feels like you have an input on the world. All that. There was a Devil's Advocate section on the right. Said that inventory is an issue as there is no storage, you have to carry everything you want, ingredients and all though to me that seems pretty standard really. Said rewards from quests were sometimes out of line as he already had gear that was much better for some time. However, it seems that even the devil's advocate was pretty much totally wowed by the game. I know that most of it has been out. I just liked having it in my hands like...here it comes! you know? heh
#7
Posté 20 octobre 2009 - 08:58
GargamelX
-
- Members
- 24 messages
it honestly wasn't that detailed. Mostly he just indicates that the world feels real, the quests seem real and draw you in and that, when it's all said and done you'll eat sleep and crap Dragon Age for a long time.
#9
Posté 20 octobre 2009 - 09:08
gethsemani87
-
- Members
- 83 messages
Thanks for the link dbankier. I am just happy my internship ends before this game is released... Slack school schedules are far better suited for hardcore gaming than 40 hour working weeks.
#12
Posté 20 octobre 2009 - 09:20
GargamelX
-
- Members
- 24 messages
Totally know. I wasn't posting for the sake of breaking news. Just saying how great it is to hold it in my hands and read it. Seems less "nebulous" now and more real.Azrailx wrote...
rly old...
#13
Posté 20 octobre 2009 - 09:20
Rivie
-
- Members
- 348 messages
Ooooo, I nabbed my brother's copy of GI. I gotta find that review!
#14
Posté 20 octobre 2009 - 09:22
LadyKarrakaz
-
- Members
- 1 279 messages
Thanks for the link and pointing to this review! One more great score for DAO!!!! 
Modifié par Purple Lady, 20 octobre 2009 - 09:22 .
#15
Posté 21 octobre 2009 - 03:50
wonko33
-
- Members
- 444 messages
Deslock is writing the review for PCGamer magazine. (He's a hardcore RPG game enthusiast, he's played everything since Wizardry basically 
)
On his twitter, he wrote that he loved it and said the game did not crash in 80+ hours of play. He hasn't said more because he was contracted for the review but I pre-ordered my copy the next day (that's how much I trust this guy's opinion).
I think they said he was going to be on the PCGamer podcast on Thursday the 22th. Look for it on itunes or their website
) On his twitter, he wrote that he loved it and said the game did not crash in 80+ hours of play. He hasn't said more because he was contracted for the review but I pre-ordered my copy the next day (that's how much I trust this guy's opinion).
I think they said he was going to be on the PCGamer podcast on Thursday the 22th. Look for it on itunes or their website
Modifié par wonko33, 21 octobre 2009 - 03:53 .
#16
Posté 21 octobre 2009 - 04:46
Foxd1e
-
- Members
- 386 messages
I find it hard to trust reviewers most of the time. Even Game Informer, they give a game like Dragon Age: Origins a 90, then turn around and give Borderlands a 93? I didn't know a game with such a weak story could get a 93. Surely anyone can see that a game like Dragon Age would have way more substance and staying power than a game like Borderlands yet it gets the higher review from the same magazine. The reviewers must of been drunk on the co-op play or something.
#17
Posté 21 octobre 2009 - 04:48
Arttis
-
- Members
- 4 098 messages
more people = more fun as long as it doesnt cross into the hundreds...
#18
Posté 21 octobre 2009 - 04:53
Flamin Jesus
-
- Members
- 1 050 messages
Apples and Oranges, by that standard almost every shooter of the last 5 years would deserve a rating below 50, and a game like Dominions 3 would be an automatic 100 (Not that Dom3 is bad, but most certainly not a 100).Foxd1e wrote...
I find it hard to trust reviewers most of the time. Even Game Informer, they give a game like Dragon Age: Origins a 90, then turn around and give Borderlands a 93? I didn't know a game with such a weak story could get a 93. Surely anyone can see that a game like Dragon Age would have way more substance and staying power than a game like Borderlands yet it gets the higher review from the same magazine. The reviewers must of been drunk on the co-op play or something.
#19
Posté 21 octobre 2009 - 04:55
wonko33
-
- Members
- 444 messages
I don't think content and staying power are really that important for the grade the game gets. It is just a feature amongs other.Foxd1e wrote...
I find it hard to trust reviewers most of the time. Even Game Informer, they give a game like Dragon Age: Origins a 90, then turn around and give Borderlands a 93? I didn't know a game with such a weak story could get a 93. Surely anyone can see that a game like Dragon Age would have way more substance and staying power than a game like Borderlands yet it gets the higher review from the same magazine. The reviewers must of been drunk on the co-op play or something.
I basically want to know if it is fun and if it's not buggy.
BTW here is Desslock twitter posts I mentioned before
"Dragon Age's battles are old school tough. Dialogue/story are game's main emphasis, but many fights are scripted, challenging setpieces.FUN"
"Three hours sleep due to Dragon Age. There is a ton of (good) dialogue in this game. 80+ hours in-must finish for Friday."
"Writing Dragon Age review all day-cover story in next issue of PC Gamer magazine. Final tally of hours spent prior to review-121. No crashes"
#20
Posté 21 octobre 2009 - 04:58
AClockworkMelon
-
- Members
- 715 messages
One thing you need to learn about Game Informer: Mainstream games will never get below a 7. Games that are guaranteed to sell well will always be given high scores.
They don't write reviews to inform readers. They write reviews to stroke them.
They don't write reviews to inform readers. They write reviews to stroke them.
#21
Posté 21 octobre 2009 - 05:01
wonko33
-
- Members
- 444 messages
That's why the score is irrelevant now days. Just look at the review and read between the lines 
#22
Posté 21 octobre 2009 - 06:00
Foxd1e
-
- Members
- 386 messages
Yes, I take reviews with a grain of sand but I just get irked sometimes I guess. I enjoy first person shooters, I plan on picking up Borderlands later today actually. I just hate how the average score for a good FPS(or RPS in Borderlands case) gets blown up way bigger than a good RPGs. The good rpgs in the last couple years have fought tooth and nail for hard-earned 91 or 92s on Gamespot, or other sites and FPSs get 94s and 95s thrown out like candy. I guess it's all frankly a matter of opinion but to me it seems unfair. Especially since imo a lot more work goes into RPGs.
On topic though, I look forward to what PC Gamer will have to say about Dragon Age.
On topic though, I look forward to what PC Gamer will have to say about Dragon Age.
Modifié par Foxd1e, 21 octobre 2009 - 06:01 .
#23
Posté 21 octobre 2009 - 06:12
Srikandi715
-
- Members
- 132 messages
Staying power? I personally have no interest in playing Borderlands, but it has randomized loot and dungeons, right? And it's coop multiplayer? Which means that the people who like those kinds of games will be playing it for months or years.
Whereas no matter how good a single player RPG is, most players won't play it more than once through. Particularly a Bioware-style game... where no matter how many choices you have as a player, at least 80% of the game is still the same on a second playthrough, assuming you do a full explore and all the sidequests you can on the first one. I can get some replayability out of an open-world sandboxy type RPG, but that's not the style of game Bioware makes. Mods can change that logic, of course
My general point, however, is that I have no problem seeing an "RPS" or whatever they're calling Borderlands as offering more gameplay hours... and no doubt it's as good a game for its audience as DA:O is for us.
Whereas no matter how good a single player RPG is, most players won't play it more than once through. Particularly a Bioware-style game... where no matter how many choices you have as a player, at least 80% of the game is still the same on a second playthrough, assuming you do a full explore and all the sidequests you can on the first one. I can get some replayability out of an open-world sandboxy type RPG, but that's not the style of game Bioware makes. Mods can change that logic, of course
My general point, however, is that I have no problem seeing an "RPS" or whatever they're calling Borderlands as offering more gameplay hours... and no doubt it's as good a game for its audience as DA:O is for us.
Modifié par Srikandi715, 21 octobre 2009 - 06:13 .
#24
Posté 21 octobre 2009 - 06:19
Foxd1e
-
- Members
- 386 messages
Borderlands has a randomized weapon generator similar to the one found in Diablo, afaik the main and side quests are always the same. The main draw is the Co-op multiplayer. Lol I am the audience for both games, I just think RPGs deserve a little more love in the eyes of game reviewers with all the work that goes into them and all.Srikandi715 wrote...
Staying power? I personally have no interest in playing Borderlands, but it has randomized loot and dungeons, right? And it's coop multiplayer? Which means that the people who like those kinds of games will be playing it for months or years.
Whereas no matter how good a single player RPG is, most players won't play it more than once through. Particularly a Bioware-style game... where no matter how many choices you have as a player, at least 80% of the game is still the same on a second playthrough, assuming you do a full explore and all the sidequests you can on the first one. I can get some replayability out of an open-world sandboxy type RPG, but that's not the style of game Bioware makes. Mods can change that logic, of course
My general point, however, is that I have no problem seeing an "RPS" or whatever they're calling Borderlands as offering more gameplay hours... and no doubt it's as good a game for its audience as DA:O is for us.
Modifié par Foxd1e, 21 octobre 2009 - 06:29 .
#25
Posté 21 octobre 2009 - 06:58
Flamin Jesus
-
- Members
- 1 050 messages
Foxd1e wrote...
Borderlands has a randomized weapon generator similar to the one found in Diablo, afaik the main and side quests are always the same. The main draw is the Co-op multiplayer. Lol I am the audience for both games, I just think RPGs deserve a little more love in the eyes of game reviewers with all the work that goes into them and all.Srikandi715 wrote...
Staying power? I personally have no interest in playing Borderlands, but it has randomized loot and dungeons, right? And it's coop multiplayer? Which means that the people who like those kinds of games will be playing it for months or years.
Whereas no matter how good a single player RPG is, most players won't play it more than once through. Particularly a Bioware-style game... where no matter how many choices you have as a player, at least 80% of the game is still the same on a second playthrough, assuming you do a full explore and all the sidequests you can on the first one. I can get some replayability out of an open-world sandboxy type RPG, but that's not the style of game Bioware makes. Mods can change that logic, of course
My general point, however, is that I have no problem seeing an "RPS" or whatever they're calling Borderlands as offering more gameplay hours... and no doubt it's as good a game for its audience as DA:O is for us.
RPGs (Well made ones, anyway) are by far my favourite genre, but 'effort' doesn't factor in a rating. If two people produce something of (for you) equal quality, you don't give a flying fart if one worked 5 hours and the other 20.
And honestly, people, we're arguing about one or two percent? Isn't that a little ridiculous? I don't even see how someone working with an entirely subjective scale can even estimate with such precision.
But I have to admit that game review scores are largely pointless, not because of small differences of a few percent, but because game reviewers completely skew the scale, 5 should be the average, 7 should already be pretty good, a 9 should only be given to a guaranteed game of the year, and 10s (Which have recently been thrown around like candy by many reviewers) should be reserved for game of the century material.
