49 réponses à ce sujet

[Siegdrifa]

Guanxii wrote...


I may be going out on a limb here but many gaming journalists say dumb things, and make really dumb suggestions

No you are not, i agree with most of what you write.

Gaming journaliste take for granted they are video game expert, including 3D, scripting, game design understanding.

But the truth is, most of the time they are just extensive player with opinion, without REAL knowledge about 3D, programming and game designe.

Most of them couldn't make the difference between mesh, skin, shader, texture. they wouldn't know the difference between normal map and bump map. They mistake clip map for distant display.
As a result, everytimes they speak about the game using technical reference, they are illarous and show they don't know what they talk about.


The best way to not be desapointed with gaming journalist point of view, is to read review from journalist with the same tast and opinion as you.

[Epic777]

To the OP: a review from a professional review from a game journalists is not any worse that a video fanboy/girl review.Gaming journalists may say dumb things fanboys, fangirls write reviews that are just as dumb or dumber.

[bjdbwea]

Let's see... somone writes a review because he gets paid for it. The money he gets comes, incidentally, at least in part from advertising by the very companies that produce the games he reviews. On the other hand, someone writes a review about a game he bought out of his own pocket to be entertained. So whose reviews do you trust more?

Modifié par bjdbwea, 21 août 2010 - 05:15 .

[Solaris Paradox]

bjdbwea wrote...

Let's see... somone writes a review because he gets paid for it. The money he gets comes, incidentally, at least in part from advertising by the very companies that produce the games he reviews. On the other hand, someone writes a review about a game he bought out of his own pocket. So whose reviews do you trust more?

Whoever makes more valid points.

Duh.

[Epic777]

bjdbwea wrote...

Let's see... somone writes a review because he gets paid for it. The money he gets comes, incidentally, at least in part from advertising by the very companies that produce the games he reviews. On the other hand, someone writes a review about a game he bought out of his own pocket to be entertained. So whose reviews do you trust more?

It didn't save kane and lynch

[Siegdrifa]

bjdbwea wrote...

Let's see... somone writes a review because he gets paid for it. The money he gets comes, incidentally, at least in part from advertising by the very companies that produce the games he reviews. On the other hand, someone writes a review about a game he bought out of his own pocket to be entertained. So whose reviews do you trust more?

I would trust the one who would discribe to me the game the way i would describe it if i had to write the article.

Lot of game site allow a "player point of view" wich is too often poluted by brat who don't know the difference between "i like / don't like" and "it's good/bad".

How many times we read stupid comment because it's tipicaly "it's bad because i didn't liked it".

Usualy, a pro game reviewer know this difference and will tell you what part is good, what part is bad, and describe you the ambiance and atmosphere of the game with word.

Modifié par Siegdrifa, 21 août 2010 - 05:24 .

[Sparda Stonerule]

ArchDemonXIII wrote...

  First off, at what point did BW state that the changes they made were due to game reviewers? That's a pretty big assumption.   A lot of the stuff that got changed was stuff players were complaining about.  

 The Mako: Well, this is what happens when you get overly dramatic. People didn't say "the Mako is kinda cool, but the physics are a bit wonky, which makes those sections a bit tedious", people said "the Mako sucks. I hate having to use it.." Well, a if it provokes that much of a negative reaction, the intelligent thing to do is remove it entirely. Why polish a turd? Wouldn't be the first case of a game that had hated mechanics, just to try to tweak them for a sequal, only to have them still be hated. Better to focus on the positive aspects.I think BW did it smart, they got rid of a hated section and tried to take baby steps by tying a new vehicle in DLC. Given the response, I wouldn't be too surprised if there were no vehicles in ME3 either. I Made a thread on ideas on how to improve the HH, and a large portion of the posters basically said "it sucks, it's not the Mako." Yea, that gives them something to work with.

 Elevators: No way around it, BW messed up on this one. The problem is, the average gamer knows jack about tech. If most people realized that the elevators/airlocks were obfuscating loading screens, then i think less people would've griped about it. They don't realize that you can't make loading times magically disappear. This is one area that I think BW should've been smart enough not to listen to their fans.

 Inventory: ME1's inventory was just bloated as all hell. While I think they should've retained things like Omni-tools, Biotic amps and weapon mods, getting to choose between crap assault rifle I-X or useful assault rifle I-X is nothing I miss. I put way more care in choosing my loadout in ME2 than I did n ME1. ME1, I generally knew what I wanted, most of the time was spent trying to acquire the item I needed rather than actually using it. I know some people love fiddling with spreadsheets because it makes them feel all brainy when they concoct some uber combo, but i'd rather concentrate on, y'know, actually playing the game and having fun. I'm not too dumb to use ME1's system, it just adds nothing for me. 

 Also, before anyone jumps on the "well, WE never complained about X", keep in mind, both games sold around 2 million units if I recall correctly. How many of  those people are on these forums? if there's less than a million ME players on here, you really can't use it as a microcosm for the people that actually play it. And the "loyal fan" argument is a crock of BS. I see people hating on BW al day because they cater to shooting fans with this series. I like Capcom fighting games. I hate RE games. When they make an RE game, I don't tell capcom they suck and have sold out. It's called diversification. A little money in their pockets gives them money to defray the cost of passion projects. Get over it.

My $0.02

I have to agree. The ME 1 criticism wasn't very constructive anywhere. Heck I even defended the Mako, Elevators, and Inventory to my friends. I liked it. I just happen to like ME 2 much more. I've considered everything from the story to gameplay and I think it was a good sequel. Either way I agree with you, some people seem to ignore that a lot of praise for ME 2 is legitimate. Just like a lot of the criticism for ME 2 is legitimate.

[bjdbwea]

Solaris Paradox wrote...

bjdbwea wrote...

Let's see... somone writes a review because he gets paid for it. The money he gets comes, incidentally, at least in part from advertising by the very companies that produce the games he reviews. On the other hand, someone writes a review about a game he bought out of his own pocket. So whose reviews do you trust more?

Whoever makes more valid points.

Duh.

And you know they are valid, how? How do you know they didn't conceal any negative points to justify a precious perfect score?

Modifié par bjdbwea, 21 août 2010 - 05:36 .

[Solaris Paradox]

bjdbwea wrote...

And you know they are valid, how? How do you know they didn't conceal any negative points to justify a precious perfect rating?

When a reviewer goes into depth and detail about what they like and dislike, it certainly helps. I tend to ignore reviews that are brief and vague--which, alas, many professional reviews are. I tend to gravitate toward video reviews, as they can demonstrate things they want to point out in video form for easier judging. I'm also a multi-review kind of guy, so as reviews, heh, "build consensus," you can make further judgments about what's valid and what's not.

It's important to keep your own tastes in mind, though. Some people will emphasize things you know you will have different feelings about, for example. Even trustworthy reviews might not match your own tastes, so it pays to know how to read "beneath" the review.

[bjdbwea]

Solaris Paradox wrote...

When a reviewer goes into depth and detail about what they like and dislike, it certainly helps. I tend to ignore reviews that are brief and vague--which, alas, many professional reviews are. I tend to gravitate toward video reviews, as they can demonstrate things they want to point out in video form for easier judging. I'm also a multi-review kind of guy, so as reviews, heh, "build consensus," you can make further judgments about what's valid and what's not.

It's important to keep your own tastes in mind, though. Some people will emphasize things you know you will have different feelings about, for example. Even trustworthy reviews might not match your own tastes, so it pays to know how to read "beneath" the review.

I agree, but I usually don't bother to read reviews that gave a perfect score in the first place. Which game has honestly ever been perfect? I don't know a single one.

[Epic777]

bjdbwea wrote...

Solaris Paradox wrote...

When a reviewer goes into depth and detail about what they like and dislike, it certainly helps. I tend to ignore reviews that are brief and vague--which, alas, many professional reviews are. I tend to gravitate toward video reviews, as they can demonstrate things they want to point out in video form for easier judging. I'm also a multi-review kind of guy, so as reviews, heh, "build consensus," you can make further judgments about what's valid and what's not.

It's important to keep your own tastes in mind, though. Some people will emphasize things you know you will have different feelings about, for example. Even trustworthy reviews might not match your own tastes, so it pays to know how to read "beneath" the review.

I agree, but I usually don't bother to read reviews that gave a perfect score in the first place. Which game has honestly ever been perfect? I don't know a single one.

Soul Calibur in 1999, it was the best fighting game by a mile

[Kriztaen]

Sparda Stonerule wrote...

some people seem to ignore that a lot of praise for ME 2 is legitimate. Just like a lot of the criticism for ME 2 is legitimate.

Truer words could not be spoken.

Solaris Paradox wrote...

When a reviewer goes into depth
and detail about what they like and dislike, it certainly helps. I tend
to ignore reviews that are brief and vague--which, alas, many
professional reviews are. I tend to gravitate toward video reviews, as
they can demonstrate things they want to point out in video form for
easier judging. I'm also a multi-review kind of guy, so as reviews, heh,
"build consensus," you can make further judgments about what's valid
and what's not.

It's important to keep your own tastes in mind,
though. Some people will emphasize things you know you will have
different feelings about, for example. Even trustworthy reviews might
not match your own tastes, so it pays to know how to read "beneath" the
review.

Indeed, most of the time I will go to GameFAQs and look up 1-2 reviews with high scores then 1-2 with low scores. But mostly I check Gamespot for video reviews while I have my morning coffee.

One thing I like is when I hear something like: "There are graphical glitches from time to time and some clipping issues but these are easily ignored thanks to a great story and although it can feel a little clunky at first, solid gameplay and controls"

That is not taken directly from any reviews btw, just my idea of something along the lines I like to hear since it is an example of fair reviewing, highlighting both negative and positive and finding the balance. Sort of how I felt when I first played Red Dead Redemption and Batman Arkham Asylum, the controls for both felt a bit clunky at first and the character movement felt stiff but after less than half an hour it felt like second nature and came naturally.

[Solaris Paradox]

bjdbwea wrote...

I agree, but I usually don't bother to read reviews that gave a perfect score in the first place. Which game has honestly ever been perfect? I don't know a single one.

I don't view the highest score as a "perfect" score, just as the highest score. I would give Super Mario Galaxy 2 a 10 out of 10 any day of the week if I bothered adding ratings to my recommendations, but if you asked me to, I could easily list off a good number of complaints I have with the game.

[Fiery Phoenix]

Whoever said ME2 was overly referential proved how stupid and unobservant they are. We all know the core point of the ME games is the import utility, which is essentially referring to the previous adventure in accordance with the chosen decisions. They complained about a substantial aspect of the trilogy. Therefore, their point is entirely moot and BioWare should know better than listen to them.

Modifié par FieryPhoenix7, 21 août 2010 - 05:55 .

[theelementslayer]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

Whoever said ME2 was overly referential proved how stupid and unobservant they are. We all knew the core point of the ME games is the import utility, which is essentially referring to the previous adventure in accordance with the chosen decisions. They complained about a substantial aspect of the trilogy. Therefore, their point is entirely moot and BioWare should know better than listen to them.

I think what the reviewer actually said was, This game is much better if you have played the first one, then you can see all the little references. He never said it was a bad thing being referential he just said that it was better if you played the first. 

And for the whole thing of reviews, ya some I agree with some I dont. Just because there are different opinions doesnt mean the reviewers are wrong because they dont agree with what you have to say. Overall the reviews for both ME1 and ME2 I have agreed with.

"1

[Fiery Phoenix]

theelementslayer wrote...

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

Whoever said ME2 was overly referential proved how stupid and unobservant they are. We all knew the core point of the ME games is the import utility, which is essentially referring to the previous adventure in accordance with the chosen decisions. They complained about a substantial aspect of the trilogy. Therefore, their point is entirely moot and BioWare should know better than listen to them.

I think what the reviewer actually said was, This game is much better if you have played the first one, then you can see all the little references. He never said it was a bad thing being referential he just said that it was better if you played the first. 

And for the whole thing of reviews, ya some I agree with some I dont. Just because there are different opinions doesnt mean the reviewers are wrong because they dont agree with what you have to say. Overall the reviews for both ME1 and ME2 I have agreed with.

"1

I have to admit I have never read the review in which ME2 was said to be overly referential. It's just what people are saying, and from whatever criticisms about ME2 I've seen, I wouldn't be surprised if it was true that someone did say it. And I know what review you're talking about, Slayer -- the IGN review. That was actually a good review and I thoroughly enjoyed reading it.

[Epic777]

The big problem for bioware is there is a schism in their fanbase between fans of me1 and me2. It will be difficult to produce a product for the fans when said fans are divided.

[theelementslayer]

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

theelementslayer wrote...

FieryPhoenix7 wrote...

Whoever said ME2 was overly referential proved how stupid and unobservant they are. We all knew the core point of the ME games is the import utility, which is essentially referring to the previous adventure in accordance with the chosen decisions. They complained about a substantial aspect of the trilogy. Therefore, their point is entirely moot and BioWare should know better than listen to them.

I think what the reviewer actually said was, This game is much better if you have played the first one, then you can see all the little references. He never said it was a bad thing being referential he just said that it was better if you played the first. 

And for the whole thing of reviews, ya some I agree with some I dont. Just because there are different opinions doesnt mean the reviewers are wrong because they dont agree with what you have to say. Overall the reviews for both ME1 and ME2 I have agreed with.

"1

I have to admit I have never read the review in which ME2 was said to be overly referential. It's just what people are saying, and from whatever criticisms about ME2 I've seen, I wouldn't be surprised if it was true that someone did say it. And I know what review you're talking about, Slayer -- the IGN review. That was actually a good review and I thoroughly enjoyed reading it.

It was one of the metacriticed reviews. But my problem is some people think that reviwers suck because their opinion differs from the reviewers. I hate that because they seem to think they are right reviewer is wrong. They try to blame it on the reviewers getting paid money, which I dobt happens because then it becomes an auction and not a review, and people would see through it.

There is only one game that I dont believe should get the rating it got, and that was NFS Underground-69 meta on PC. However alot of people didnt like it so I was a minority. Did it make the reviwer wrong, nah it just meant I had different tastes. Also reviewers are alot more objective and fans are alot more subjective.

I remember COD:MW2 got a 86 Meta by pros, and a 2.2 by PC users. Why because everyone who reviewed it as PC user hated the no dedicated surveys and put it in there. So to all of you who think its a big conspiracy, I highly doubt it.

[ArchDemonXIII]

Kriztaen wrote...

Indeed, most of the time I will go to GameFAQs and look up 1-2 reviews with high scores then 1-2 with low scores.

I do that, too.

[Sidney]

The Metacritic scores are usually hard to beat as an aggregate because 1 or 2 schleps might love/hate something the critical mass is usually pretty good. There's not any of 90+ games on there that I've played and said...well not really all that good.

[TheKillerAngel]

Soul Calibur in 1999, it was the best fighting game by a mile

OH MY GOD I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU. I loved that game. Too bad I no longer have my Dreamcast.

I think the series has degraded over time, just as Ivy's clothes and proportions have gotten more ridiculous.

[TheKillerAngel]

I have to admit I have never read the review in which ME2 was said to be overly referential. It's just what people are saying, and from whatever criticisms about ME2 I've seen, I wouldn't be surprised if it was true that someone did say it. And I know what review you're talking about, Slayer -- the IGN review. That was actually a good review and I thoroughly enjoyed reading it.

As a person who played Mass Effect 2 before the original, I had no idea what the hell Reapers were or why Cerberus was so evil.

[Sparda Stonerule]

If I really like a game I tend to look at peoples opinions. Both of those who agree and disagree with me. All I can really say about it is that whenever there is a divide in a fanbase there are some interesting things that happen. Some people have knee jerk responses to everything. This happens on both sides when people read something and just react to it without any thought or justification. Then there are the people who say it's bad because it's bad or they say it's good because it's good. This happens on both sides. There are people who believe that their side is right and everyone else is wrong. Those people will look anywhere and blame money, laziness, and stupidity in an attempt to justify their opinion. This happens on both sides, however people who dislike a game are the ones who bring up money a lot more. Finally my favorite people. The people who like or dislike the game and make very logical, very valid points. Unfortunately those people tend to get buried under the rapid people who won't budge no matter what.



All in all both sides of this debate are fairly equal. I honestly wish people would just accept that there is no clear cut way to view the game. Everyones opinions are valid. Some people just word them better.

[Esbatty]

I picked up Mass Effect 1 because not only was the price right but many of the webcomics I read would do like a week worth of jokes on it, and usually they tend to do maybe a one off comic but to dedicate so much of their weekly output to this one game that wasn't like Gears or God of War or Halo, ya know some big overly pimped game, I had to pick it up to see what it was all about.



And I was so glad I did.

[JGDD]

Kriztaen wrote...
- Whoever thought planet scanning was fun...should not be in the part of the dev team that decides what is fun in their game.
.

I replay the game a lot and I can quite honestly say that if I didn't use a cheat to max-out the elements I wouldn't replay it all. This part of the game got old in a hurry on my very first play through and has yet to get any better on subsequent replays.

Makes me wonder if it was Ms. Norman that had a say in whether this was kept? She is lead game play designer after all.