241 réponses à ce sujet

[AkiKishi]

lv12medic wrote...

DA2 is a sequel with a lot of changes, of course it's going to be rated lower than the original.  New Art style, gameplay changes, GUI changes.  I don't see what the big deal is.  Some games get in the 90's and I hate them, and other games get in the 50's and I love them.

Over and out.

Breaker Breaker, Roger Wilco 10-4. 73's.

Was that the case with ME2 ? That's a real question not a sarcastic comment btw

[CaribWarrior J]

Atakuma wrote...

Ign and gameinformer gave Origins a 8.5 and 8.0 respectively, so it's scores ranged much lower than you stated.

This.
 
I must say that I really enjoyed DA:O and think that it deserved higher that 8.5 or 8.0.  Nevertheless I expect DAII to be a better game with better overall ratings.

[MorrigansLove]

Atakuma wrote...

MorrigansLove wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

Ign and gameinformer gave Origins a 8.5 and 8.0 respectively, so it's scores ranged much lower than you stated.

IGN gave Origins 91, moron.

You are right but Gameinformer still gave it an 8 and my point still stands.

Who eez dis Gameinformer teagan?! I've never read GameInformer, are they trustworthy?

[SomeBug]

Games Journalism LOL

[AkiKishi]

...dp soz.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 25 février 2011 - 11:28 .

[MorrigansLove]

Cool hwhip.

[Daniteh]

When dragon age origins came out, it was something new, now that its the sequel, people have higher expectations, and since a lot of the same things that are in dragon age origins are staying, I assume some reviewers were disappointed in one way or another.



In my mind, Dragon age 2 might be great, or might not, but I'm not one to push my opinion down someone's throat.

[JamesX]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Was that the case with ME2 ? That's a real question not a sarcastic comment btw

I think ME2 got higher scores and sold better than ME1.

But personally, I think it is a worse game.  Different strokes for different folks.   Some people liked Avatar, I do too.  Some of the same people liked Iron Man 2, I thought that movie is a mess.

[orpheuslupus]

Because clearly an 8 is the worst possible score a game can receive. Clearly. I mean, it's not like most of my personal favorite games have their average scores in the 8 (or even, GASP!, sevens!) range or anything.



Look, maybe the game won't be "as good" as Origins in some respects. Or maybe it's just that it's not as "new". The reviewers each have their own reasons, because they're all different people and such. That's just how it goes. I prefer this to getting the same exact game in the follow-up in either case.

[RohanD]

Atakuma wrote...

Ign and gameinformer gave Origins a 8.5 and 8.0 respectively, so it's scores ranged much lower than you stated.

IGN review: http://au.pc.ign.com.../1041792p2.html

GI review: http://www.gameinfor.../05/review.aspx

so...both gave it 9/10

Modifié par RohanD, 25 février 2011 - 11:30 .

[DieHigh2012]

MorrigansLove wrote...

Spartansfan8888 wrote...

Yeah I agree with you dude it's gonna be terrible.....

....which is why i preordered it as soon as they announced the Signature Edition

When did I ever bl**dy say it was going to be terrible?
Get off the forums, little child, you obviously can't read.

Yes, because your post embodies maturity, right?

[Carlthestrange]

It gets lower ratings because if fails to live up to its hype. Still a better game, but because people didn't get exactly what they want, they downvote it.

[AtreiyaN7]

Different reviewers + different tastes + major changes = unpredictable scores?

It doesn't have to be better than DA:O at any rate (ratings-wise), so long as it's a solid game.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 25 février 2011 - 11:33 .

[MorrigansLove]

DieHigh2012 wrote...

MorrigansLove wrote...

Spartansfan8888 wrote...

Yeah I agree with you dude it's gonna be terrible.....

....which is why i preordered it as soon as they announced the Signature Edition

When did I ever bl**dy say it was going to be terrible?
Get off the forums, little child, you obviously can't read.

Yes, because your post embodies maturity, right?

Probably not, I am only 23...

[PretentiousCat]

All I can see now is the 8.0! Threads popping up everywhere.



Higher than an 8.5 = Paid off

Lower than 8.5 = Lul I knew it would be crap.



No one is ever happy.

[MorrigansLove]

orpheuslupus wrote...

Because clearly an 8 is the worst possible score a game can receive. Clearly. I mean, it's not like most of my personal favorite games have their average scores in the 8 (or even, GASP!, sevens!) range or anything.

Look, maybe the game won't be "as good" as Origins in some respects. Or maybe it's just that it's not as "new". The reviewers each have their own reasons, because they're all different people and such. That's just how it goes. I prefer this to getting the same exact game in the follow-up in either case.

Can you read? Seriously, I'm curious. Do I say 8 is bad? NO. I am asking why is Dragon Age 2 being perceived as better than origins, when it has worse reviews!

[PhrosniteAgainROFL]

JamesX wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Was that the case with ME2 ? That's a real question not a sarcastic comment btw

I think ME2 got higher scores and sold better than ME1.

But personally, I think it is a worse game.  Different strokes for different folks.   Some people liked Avatar, I do too.  Some of the same people liked Iron Man 2, I thought that movie is a mess.

You may like ME1 better/more than ME2 but ME2 is a better game. There is difference...

[Amioran]

MorrigansLove wrote...

Albeit, the scores are good ranging from 85 to 94 but Dragon Age Origins was a masterpiece in most peoples eyes with the score ranging from 90 to 100! (I don't trust the PC gamer review anyway as it came out so early when the game had'nt even gone gold) I want to know what the developers think of this, also.

Over and out.

There could be many reasons, but two of the most obvious:

1) Sequel are expected to enhance the previous experience in every possible way (neither they were son of Gods). So to have, for example, an 8 for a sequel out of a 7 for the original you will have to achieve at last 9/9.5 in reality. This is not always the rule (some sequels get good votes just for the name, sadly, in fact) but it is anyway a standard.

2) If sequels have also a little thing worse than the original this will lower the score much more than the game reviewed wthout the comparision would, just because the first point. Anyway sequels are much more difficult to please reviewers than originals, apart some well known exceptions.

Apar this, then, we don't know yet the full picture of the reviews, so it is too early to judge if DA2 will receive better scores or not, but rest assured of this: if it does that (receiving better scores) it usually means that for reviewers it is MUCH better; if they are roughtly the same then it usually means that for reviewers it is better, but not as much as they wanted (i.e. perfect), either if only for the "originality" (yes, as fun as it may sound the word in the case of DA2 vs DAO).

Modifié par Amioran, 25 février 2011 - 11:40 .

[PretentiousCat]

MorrigansLove wrote...

orpheuslupus wrote...

Because clearly an 8 is the worst possible score a game can receive. Clearly. I mean, it's not like most of my personal favorite games have their average scores in the 8 (or even, GASP!, sevens!) range or anything.

Look, maybe the game won't be "as good" as Origins in some respects. Or maybe it's just that it's not as "new". The reviewers each have their own reasons, because they're all different people and such. That's just how it goes. I prefer this to getting the same exact game in the follow-up in either case.

Can you read? Seriously, I'm curious. Do I say 8 is bad? NO. I am asking why is Dragon Age 2 being perceived as better than origins, when it has worse reviews!

It's being touted as such because that's the marketing scheme.

Who would want to buy something thats worse than the first one? Unless they were told it could be as good if not better.

[Atakuma]

RohanD wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

Ign and gameinformer gave Origins a 8.5 and 8.0 respectively, so it's scores ranged much lower than you stated.

IGN review: http://au.pc.ign.com.../1041792p2.html

GI review: http://www.gameinfor.../05/review.aspx

so...both gave it 9/10

I was looking at the console reviews.

[Invalidcode]

Gauge a game with review score alone and draw conclusion without yourself finished the full version?



Brilliant! Hand the man the Nobel.

[DieHigh2012]

MorrigansLove wrote...

DieHigh2012 wrote...

MorrigansLove wrote...

Spartansfan8888 wrote...

Yeah I agree with you dude it's gonna be terrible.....

....which is why i preordered it as soon as they announced the Signature Edition

When did I ever bl**dy say it was going to be terrible?
Get off the forums, little child, you obviously can't read.

Yes, because your post embodies maturity, right?

Probably not, I am only 23...

I'm 24, I find that excuse lacking.

I hardly ever look at reviews anymore, and about the only games I buy are from BioWare now a days anyway. Being as they have yet to let my down storywise.

[AkiKishi]

JamesX wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Was that the case with ME2 ? That's a real question not a sarcastic comment btw

I think ME2 got higher scores and sold better than ME1.

But personally, I think it is a worse game.  Different strokes for different folks.   Some people liked Avatar, I do too.  Some of the same people liked Iron Man 2, I thought that movie is a mess.

I prefer ME2, ME1 is great as long as you stick to the plot planets, but outside of that totally generic. Combat in ME also breaks after you get enough upgrades to the point where you can just hold down the trigger. Not so happy with the universal cooldown thing. And I consider the RP stuff a lost cause in both games I never feel connected to Shepard he's too much of a tool.

[DarthSliver]

Basing getting the game off reviews is stupid. Maybe you should start basing what movies you see off the reviews. I seen some of the greatest movies get highly negative remarks by the reviews. It aint any different with Dragon Age 2, plus alot of stuff has changed. If there is one thing humans dont like its change.

[lv12medic]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Was that the case with ME2 ? That's a real question not a sarcastic comment btw

Well, actually, I was the one being sarcastic (or something like it).  However, the general trend of how sequels compare to their original counterparts in any form of medium is still a negative slope.  I know ME2 was reviewed higher, along with Uncharted 2 (those I can list off the top of my head).  So of course there are cursed counter examples .

But at the same time, usually those reviews of sequels usually go up becuase the game fixed some issue that was directly pointed out by the reviewer of the first game.  Mass Effect for example had popping textures while ME2 did not.  There were many review complaints about those popping textures then there was lots of praise for its loss in the sequel.  

Modifié par lv12medic, 25 février 2011 - 11:39 .