765 réponses à ce sujet

[packardbell]

Okay so two reviews said the story is quite good while PC Gamer said it wasn't.. so much. Who to believe.

[falconlord5]

Blacklash93 wrote...

Grumpy young man wrote...

Wasn't there also a thread about some influential UK magazine which picked the game as it's Editors Choice, and since those are rare and >90 it says something as well. The main thing is that no one important gives it less than 85.

Still wouldn't be ME2 quality. Dragon Age plays second fiddle yet again.

Blacklash, ME2 isn't the end all be all of gaming. Dragon Age 2 is doing what works for the story, and the development team. Not what works for Mass Effect, and not what works for you.

All that said, do remember that the reviews are purely subjective. The issues that these reviewers brought up are only issues for them, and may or may not be noticable in your playthrough.

[DTKT]

PrinceOfFallout13 wrote...

also since when is an 87 and 88 bad? would it really make that much of a difference if it was a 90?

It's a perception. While the difference between 88 and 90 is really not very high, the public perception of a 90 seems higher because it's how it feels to most people.

I'm sure Bioware would have loved a 90 score from most reviewers to keep the Metacritic high. How did those publications rate DAO?

[Wittand25]

To give some contest to those ratings: Gamestar rated DA:O 92%, PC Games gave it 91%. Both gave ME2 88%.

I do not have the mags yet, because they will only be out by Wednesday, but those ratings are pretty good even if they are below the ratings for the first game.

Edit Corrected a typo.

Modifié par Wittand25, 19 février 2011 - 08:21 .

[Blacklash93]

PrinceOfFallout13 wrote...

also since when is an 87 and 88 bad? would it really make that much of a difference if it was a 90?

It's not up to par with Bioware's golden standard of this generation, ME2.

DA2 being a step down in quality is what matters to me.

[Brockololly]

Given that the game is gold, its more than likely reviewers have had the full game for a while now.

Filament wrote...

Carbon copy environments do tend to stick out like a sore thumb, I hope it's not too gratuitous.

I'm guessing this is Kirkwall they're talking about, what with most of the game taking place there. It sounds simialr to the mention of same-ish environments brought up in the PC Gamer review.

Modifié par Brockololly, 19 février 2011 - 08:21 .

[AlexXIV]

PrinceOfFallout13 wrote...

also since when is an 87 and 88 bad? would it really make that much of a difference if it was a 90?

Yes.

A jump from 80s to 90 is remarkable. But hell any RPG with 80 and better is worth it's money.

[Saibh]

Reposting:


PC Gamer UK:

DAO: 94
DAII: 94

PC Games (Germany)

DAO: 91
DAII: 88

Gamestar:

DAO: 92
DAII: 87

Modifié par Saibh, 19 février 2011 - 08:20 .

[The Elder King]

nevermind

Modifié par hhh89, 19 février 2011 - 08:22 .

[Estel78]

DarthCaine wrote...

I don't think most people expected it to be better than Origins ... I sure as hell didn't ...

I do.

[AlexXIV]

Mash Mashington wrote...

- unsatisfying ending

ouch

Ouch indeed. Not exactly something to look forward to huh.

[_Aine_]

Creid-X wrote...

Naqey wrote...

- poor level design with one-to-one copy-pasting of whole quest areas (do they mean, some areas are a carbon copy of each other???)

think ME1, if you know what I mean (different locations, same layout)

I surely hope they're exaggerating things, I tolerate many things in games that make people really irky but the one thing I don't like is recycled areas.
The pros are looking good though.

Maybe they mean that a lot of your quests end up taking place in the same areas of Kirkwall, like always being sent to the Chantry, or the main courtyard (or whatever) or the taverns etc.  It does mostly take place there, so for people looking for a huge world, maybe they mean that the constraints of it being location based as opposed to world-based makes it feel smaller.  *shrugs*  On the whole, a decent review but a lot of pros or cons are based on preference too.  I will wait and see what I think  

[Blacklash93]

Mash Mashington wrote...

- unsatisfying ending

ouch

Origins's was?

[Saibh]

AlexXIV wrote...
Yes.

A jump from 80s to 90 is remarkable. But hell any RPG with 80 and better is worth it's money.

A two-point jump on a scale of 100 doesn't make that big of a difference. It's the visual cue that bothers people. Like bread costing $2.99 instead of $3.00.

[DTKT]

Blacklash93 wrote...

PrinceOfFallout13 wrote...

also since when is an 87 and 88 bad? would it really make that much of a difference if it was a 90?

It's not up to par with Bioware's golden standard of this generation, ME2.

DA2 being a step down in quality is what matters to me.

Each review outlet has different rating system. A 8 from Eurogamer is not the same as a 80 from PC gamer. If you consider that they both rated ME2 at 88, I would say that they tend to be "harsh" on the game itself. That means that getting a 9 and a 10 is quite difficult.

Also, rating a game in a scale of 1-100 seems quite silly to me. What did motivate the 3% drop from DAO and DAII? What did change and could warrant a 3% drop?

[slimgrin]

So then why didn't Blizzard do this with SC2?  <_<

Seems like a risk from the standpoint of a publisher, unless they're in bed with the reviewers. To what extant that actually happens, I don't know. Might require my tinfoil hat.

Modifié par slimgrin, 19 février 2011 - 08:22 .

[AlexXIV]

Freakaz0idx wrote...

Do these Germans have any credibility? What made them so special that they got to review the game before all the legitimate review sites?

They may be just faster, and what means legitimate? I check PC Games for more than decade and they only have bias for german products. Aka they tend to rate games from german companies better. But since it is not a german company I think it is reliable. What do you expect though? It is a good rating, just not great.

[Saibh]

Anyhow, another reviewer gave DAII a 94. Many reviewers gave DAO scores in the 80s. One even game them a 70. I won't judge until I see more than three reviews.



Actually, I won't judge until I play it myself. Excusing Sonic Chronicles, JE is the lowest rated BioWare game. And I love JE.

[AlexXIV]

Saibh wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...
Yes.

A jump from 80s to 90 is remarkable. But hell any RPG with 80 and better is worth it's money.

A two-point jump on a scale of 100 doesn't make that big of a difference. It's the visual cue that bothers people. Like bread costing $2.99 instead of $3.00.

No I read about the way they are rating. A jump from 89 to 90 is bigger than for example from 87 to 89. To get a 90+ it needs to be a perfect game with minor flaws.

[Savber100]

packardbell wrote...

Okay so two reviews said the story is quite good while PC Gamer said it wasn't.. so much. Who to believe.

Well, a well-told story is subjective to personal taste.

Also, PC Gamer didn't say the story was bad just not the BEST. Big difference.

Modifié par Savber100, 19 février 2011 - 08:26 .

[Saibh]

AlexXIV wrote...

No I read about the way they are rating. A jump from 89 to 90 is bigger than for example from 87 to 89. To get a 90+ it needs to be a perfect game with minor flaws.

I'll take your word on it. Like I said, three reviews don't mean a whole lot to me.

[Maria Caliban]

Estel78 wrote...

- poor level design with one-to-one copy-pasting of whole quest areas (do they mean, some areas are a carbon copy of each other???)

Yes. The Lowtown in Kirkwall at night is the exact same location as Lowtown in Kirkwall at day.