426 réponses à ce sujet

[Special_Agent_Goodwrench]

jontepwn wrote...

danteliveson wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

........Wait..... Bethany's the Jacob...... Wow!!! I'm stunned.

That can't be good.

...but the prize.

Hawke: Mother always told me it is a heavy risk to fall for an outlaw such as Isabela.
Bethany: ...but the priiize, sister! The priiize!

I for one, am taking everything the reviews say about characters with a grain of salt. I've learned to do that long time ago.

[Josh902]

DrunkDeadman wrote...

jontepwn wrote...

danteliveson wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

........Wait..... Bethany's the Jacob...... Wow!!! I'm stunned.

That can't be good.

...but the prize.

Hawke: Mother always told me it is a heavy risk to fall for an outlaw such as Isabela.
Bethany: ...but the priiize, sister! The priiize!

I for one, am taking everything the reviews say about characters with a grain of salt. I've learned to do that long time ago.

Bethany:Here I am, I'm the master of your destiny
Lady Hawke:I am the one the only one, I am the God of kingdom come
Bethany:Gimme the prize, just gimme the prize

sry but that is exactly what i thought of


I review games for myself im not worrried Bioware has never let me down love you guys!

[PsychoWARD23]

Awesome

[Ryzaki]

I wish that "boneing everyone" would be clarified.

[Kinkaku]

Nice review but it all comes down to if you hate it or like it

Modifié par Akiios, 15 février 2011 - 01:54 .

[IndelibleJester]

nightcobra8928 wrote...

if it's like Athkatla i'll be a happy camper.

[Pauravi]

kingjezza wrote...

But even after such a positive review I can't help but feel dissapointed, for the reason that the review basically confims one of my concerns i've had about this game, it says apart from a few trips to the deeproads and one trip to a Dalish camp the rest of your time is spent in Kirkwell

Most of Planescape: Torment was spent in Sigil, too.  That didn't seem to hamper people's enjoyment of the game

[AtreiyaN7]

Oh, HERE is that other thread. No wonder I forgot about, it's been eleven days - that's like a million years in forum time.

[Loerwyn]

I got this issue on Thursday, and I was horrified by the review.

Why? Because it was so damned poor. The screenshots were of a horrific quality, the score wasn't justified and it contradicts everything else we've heard. Recycled areas, complete lack of originality with most characters - Where were the criticisms of the game? He mentioned it wasn't the best story - Something often true with BioWare games - so why did it not get knocked down for that?

Most biased and ridiculous review I've read in a long time. Shame on PC Gamer, really. Talk about the blind leading the blind...

[Desolution]

On topic: I've been reading PC:G UK for ~6 years now (since issue 89, if that helps), and, especially lately, I've found their review scores almost exactly correlate to my enjoyment of games (factoring in that I don't enjoy some genres as much as others). They also really don't like using superlatives. Last time they used "best" in an RPG review that I recall was KotOR1. And even then they refused to call it the best RPG yet released, merely saying it "may" be. Gaming has had some incredible stories lately, and so saying "maybe not the best story" to me translates to "I enjoyed the story, but dislike using superlatives". Especially given that it's Rich writing it.



Incidentally, if the game was flawless, it would have got a higher score. 94% in PC Gamer is very high, but HL2 got 96%, and we've had the odd 95% over the past few years. I'm sure points are taken off because of, say, Bethany being bland, and the fact that sometimes you might visit an area more than once, but is that really such a major complaint?

[DPB]

OnlyShallow89 wrote...

complete lack of originality with most characters

Can't say I've ever seen this in any other of the review threads.

[Loerwyn]

dbankier wrote...
Can't say I've ever seen this in any other of the review threads.

Let's have a look at the returning cast:
Anders, Bodahn & Sandal, Merill, Isabela, Flemeth and a host of others. Is a new cast *really* too much to ask for? And then add on top of that half of the voice cast is back from Origins, all of whom are as charismatic as a squashed turnip or are recycling the same character voices from Origins - Including the tones, inflections and even accents.

Sorry, but it's not a 94/100 game. Between 80 and 90 I'd possibly be less suspicious, but considering the other reviews we have, the opinions from the demo and all trailers we've seen, and I have absolutely no belief that this game could be above 90/100. 

The PC Gamer UK review stinks to the high heavens of bias; Whether financial or fanboyism, I don't know, but it's incredibly poor as far as reviews go. It's like the Oblivion reviews that gave it 99/100 or even 100% - Complete and utter tripe. It's a low 80s game at best.

Modifié par OnlyShallow89, 26 février 2011 - 03:51 .

[Aesieru]

I could see this being a 90... It's possible, but MetaCritic, GameSpot review, Joystiq, and all those others aren't the ones to listen to.



Your friends, generally are.



And the extrapolation of the thoughts of the common citizen.

[Purple People Eater]

OnlyShallow89 wrote...

dbankier wrote...
Can't say I've ever seen this in any other of the review threads.

Let's have a look at the returning cast:
Anders, Bodahn & Sandal, Merill, Isabela, Flemeth and a host of others. Is a new cast *really* too much to ask for? And then add on top of that half of the voice cast is back from Origins, all of whom are as charismatic as a squashed turnip or are recycling the same character voices from Origins - Including the tones, inflections and even accents.

Sorry, but it's not a 94/100 game. Between 80 and 90 I'd possibly be less suspicious, but considering the other reviews we have, the opinions from the demo and all trailers we've seen, and I have absolutely no belief that this game could be above 90/100. 

The PC Gamer UK review stinks to the high heavens of bias; Whether financial or fanboyism, I don't know, but it's incredibly poor as far as reviews go. It's like the Oblivion reviews that gave it 99/100 or even 100% - Complete and utter tripe. It's a low 80s game at best.

And you've played the game, so you know its undeserving of such a score?....yeah thats what I thought. Look just stop spewing your venom until you actually play it ok. If you dislike the game after its out (which you've obviously already pre-dispositioned yourself to do) then you can **** about the review being untroo.

[Loerwyn]

Purple People Eater wrote...
And you've played the game, so you know its undeserving of such a score?....yeah thats what I thought. Look just stop spewing your venom until you actually play it ok. If you dislike the game after its out (which you've obviously already pre-dispositioned yourself to do) then you can **** about the review being untroo.

So few games are deserving of a true '90+' score. I've not 'pre-dispositioned' myself to dislike the game; Like many things I have an open mind, but every single bit of news has put me off more and more. Why do I need to have played the game to know that it's not a 94/100 game? It's clear just by looking at the information we've been given, that other reviewers have put out there and that people have said that it's not a 94/100 game. 

P.S. I'm not buying the game. I needed to vent about the utter BS PC Gamer printed. 

[Purple People Eater]

OnlyShallow89 wrote...

Purple People Eater wrote...
And you've played the game, so you know its undeserving of such a score?....yeah thats what I thought. Look just stop spewing your venom until you actually play it ok. If you dislike the game after its out (which you've obviously already pre-dispositioned yourself to do) then you can **** about the review being untroo.

So few games are deserving of a true '90+' score. I've not 'pre-dispositioned' myself to dislike the game; Like many things I have an open mind, but every single bit of news has put me off more and more. Why do I need to have played the game to know that it's not a 94/100 game? It's clear just by looking at the information we've been given, that other reviewers have put out there and that people have said that it's not a 94/100 game. 

P.S. I'm not buying the game. I needed to vent about the utter BS PC Gamer printed. 

S-U-B-J-E-C-T-I-V-E

[Loerwyn]

This isn't Boggle or Scrabble, you don't need to spell words out.

[JensenBakura]

kingjezza wrote...

- Most of the companions are excellent, Bethany being the only dud as she lacks in personality [smilie]../../../../images/forum/emoticons/sad.png[/smilie]

You know, some people do lack personality in real life.  I noticed her voice and dialogue in the demo was a little..."flat", but as a RL older brother with a younger sister, I immediately was able to form a bond with her, even in the short time the demo lasts.  I don't think it will be a chore at all to have her around for the whole game at least during my "protective older sibling" playthrough.

OnlyShallow89 wrote...

This isn't Boggle or Scrabble, you don't need to spell words out.

True, but that doesn't mean he isn't allowed to if he wants.

Modifié par JensenBakura, 26 février 2011 - 04:16 .

[AkiKishi]

Purple People Eater wrote...

And you've played the game, so you know its undeserving of such a score?....yeah thats what I thought. Look just stop spewing your venom until you actually play it ok. If you dislike the game after its out (which you've obviously already pre-dispositioned yourself to do) then you can **** about the review being untroo.

You can work that out just by reading the actual review and then looking at the score. If you read the review in isoloation of a score you would probably judge it 80 ish at most. Certainly not the glowing the review of a 90+ game.

The revies not that bad. It's the missmatch with it and the score that sets alarm bells ringing. We all know the the GAMER magazines need to keep tight with publishers or they will lose their inside track to other magazines.

[Purple People Eater]

My thing is this. Every reviewer gives their opinion on a game. The pcgamer uk review thought DA2 was a 94. That was his experience with the game. The other two reviews, which I believe were 88, and 87, were those reviewers opinions on the game. Why is it that just because one person gives it higher marks than another, that persons opinion is called into question. Some of you do realize that alot of reviewers did not like DAO. Now were they wrong, or was that just their opinion?.

See, DA2 may not get a score higher than 94 from anyone else, but it just might. What are all the doubters going to do if it gets a few 97s, and 98s from people. Call them lying fanboys?. How can you?. That was their experience, and their level of enjoyment.

[Loerwyn]

Because - As BobSmith pointed out above - The score does not correlate with the review, nor does it correlate with the others. If it was given a 90 at most, then it'd make more sense, but it was so much higher than the others that it's somewhat suspicious.

The point is a review isn't just about someone's opinion; It's about the game, too. If a game is a technical mess - Like Oblivion - that needs to be reflected in the scores. If the game is a story-based RPG, as Dragon Age 2 is, and the reviewer states that the story isn't up to scratch then a 94 score is completely ignoring that factor.

There's such little negativity in the review, such little criticism. It's not a review; It's a brown-nosing glorification of the game.

[drahelvete]

BobSmith101 wrote...

You can work that out just by reading the actual review and then looking at the score. If you read the review in isoloation of a score you would probably judge it 80 ish at most. Certainly not the glowing the review of a 90+ game.

The revies not that bad. It's the missmatch with it and the score that sets alarm bells ringing. We all know the the GAMER magazines need to keep tight with publishers or they will lose their inside track to other magazines.

Well, he said that he thinks it has the best RPG combat ever, the best story telling, that it utilizes the lore of the world better than DA:O did, and that it's the most impressive attempt he's ever seen to make the player's decisions in the game mean something.
Even if he may have been more critical of other elements of the game, it sure sounds like a 94 to me.

[Purple People Eater]

There's no winning the argument. People see what they want to see, and tell themselves what they want to tell themselves. So I guess we'll see.

[Maconbar]

drahelvete wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

You can work that out just by reading the actual review and then looking at the score. If you read the review in isoloation of a score you would probably judge it 80 ish at most. Certainly not the glowing the review of a 90+ game.

The revies not that bad. It's the missmatch with it and the score that sets alarm bells ringing. We all know the the GAMER magazines need to keep tight with publishers or they will lose their inside track to other magazines.

Well, he said that he thinks it has the best RPG combat ever, the best story telling, that it utilizes the lore of the world better than DA:O did, and that it's the most impressive attempt he's ever seen to make the player's decisions in the game mean something.
Even if he may have been more critical of other elements of the game, it sure sounds like a 94 to me.

These are the reasons that I am excited about the game.  Many of the animations irk me but if DA:2 has great storytelling, with deep lore, and incorporates my decisions, I will be thrilled.

[rob_k]

*shrugs* If the person had rated it an 84 - 87 as well, people would say the game's mediocre as proved by other threads.



If it gets a high score, then the reviewers are paid off.



So yes, there is no winning this argument.