299 réponses à ce sujet

[DTKT]

Night Prowler76 wrote...

DTKT wrote...

chrissicross wrote...

Lawliet89 wrote...

PC is down to 85 at Metacritic. Pretty low compared to DA:O.

Hmm, the user scores are still pretty low too...

PC: 5.2/10 (47 Ratings)
Xbox: 4.4/10 (28 Ratings)
PS3: 3.8/10 (12 Ratings)

~4.75/10 (87 Ratings)

I wouldnt look at user reviews. 

No, because paying customers opinion of a product do not count, right?

No, because there is no way to know if the one writing the review has even played the game. Who will write a review on Metacritic? Fan that are either incredibily disappointed or extremly excited for a game.

And even so, the Metacritic aggregate is not perfect and I never look at the single number it gives.

[skylr616]

miltos33 wrote...

This is an all time low for Bioware.
Bioware Metacritic Scores:
Baldur's Gate: 9.1
Baldur's Gate: II 9.5
Neverwinter Nights: 9.1
SW: KOTOR: 9.4
Jade Empire: 8.9
Mass Effect: 9.1
Dragon Age: 9.1
Mass Effect 2: 9.4
Dragon Age II: 8.5

Wow, its doing amazing considering every one of the games before it were in development for at least 2x as long (DA:O was in development for nearly 8 years according to some accounts, compared to DAII's 1.5 years). Crazy good return on their investment O_o!

Just about the only thing that would lead me to consider DA2 a failure would be if Bioware failed to release a proper mod toolset (because just about every major complaint in the reviews, most of which are still positive overall btw, can be easily fixed with mods). Don't let us down Bioware!

Modifié par skylr616, 08 mars 2011 - 11:34 .

[Apollo Starflare]

Night Prowler76 wrote...

No, because paying customers opinion of a product do not count, right?

The problem is with big name titles like the latest Bioware game you tend to get a lot of people who havn't played the game giving it silly scores that skew the scale dramatically, sometimes they have agendas, sometimes there is no reason behind it, but it means user scores are often widely inaccurate when it comes to showing what the general public opinion of a game is. Seen it happen with newly released Nintendo titles and all sorts.

Anyway, the odds were always high that eventually Bioware would release something that wasn't a smash hit. Pretty much every well regarded creative force in the world has produced pieces of work that are less well regarded critically than their other works. *shrugs* Think there is a lot of overreaction going on. I've always suspected scores of this sort and I am in support of 90% of the changes, always seemed likely that it would get rated a little lower than Origins to me.

[Kill3rN1nja]

i personally trust the people who actually spent money on the product then people who get paid to right positive reviews for it.

[skylr616]

Kill3rN1nja wrote...

i personally trust the people who actually spent money on the product then people who get paid to right positive reviews for it.

loaded statement is loaded... oooh, ooooh, I can do that too!

i personally trust professional and unbiased journalists over the horde of smegheads that troll polls for fun

[Ardamin]

Gamespy 4/5 - A well-constructed narrative helps BioWare deliver the RPG goods. (DAO 4.5/5)

[Apollo Starflare]

skylr616 wrote...

Kill3rN1nja wrote...

i personally trust the people who actually spent money on the product then people who get paid to right positive reviews for it.

loaded statement is loaded... oooh, ooooh, I can do that too!

i personally trust professional and unbiased journalists over the horde of smegheads that troll polls for fun

You get my vote purely for the use of the word smeghead.

At the end of the day metacritic is about as reliable in telling you how good a game is as Wikipedia is a reliable source to cite in professional articles.

[Kill3rN1nja]

user reviews are as important as critic reviews regardless of what you say or think, its 1/2 the review to only read one, when you see blatant instability theres something wrong.

[Ardamin]

Gamer Limit 7/10 - At the end of the day, it’s best to completely divorce Dragon Age II from Origins: it really shares very little with it’s predecessor. (DAO 9.5/10)

Metro.co.uk 7/10 (X360) - It feels worryingly like Mass Effect: Tolkien Edition at times but the biggest problem with this action role-player is its lack of character.

[Mantaal]

Dragon Age II
Metascore
84/100

You got a wrong number there OP.

[Apollo Starflare]

Ardamin wrote...

Gamer Limit 7/10 - At the end of the day, it’s best to completely divorce Dragon Age II from Origins: it really shares very little with it’s predecessor. (DAO 9.5/10)

Metro.co.uk 7/10 (X360) - It feels worryingly like Mass Effect: Tolkien Edition at times but the biggest problem with this action role-player is its lack of character.

Heh, both reviews lost me quite quickly.

Limit talks about how having icons suddenly gives the game a black and white morality (they are just pictures, if that's what it takes to make something B/W well... Other than that it's the same as Origins. A lot of Origins choices vilified you for picking what was obviously an evil choice as well). He then goes on to say how he played a lot of the game by skipping through Hawke's dialogue, even suggesting readers try the same thing. This wouldn't be a big deal except he makes no mention of using subtitles. I really hope that was just an oversight in the write up.

I also keep getting the impression from some reviewers that they bought into the illusion of customisation that Origins gave a bit too much, the best example being how the surname 'Hawke' gets mentioned time and again. All the origins had surnames too, and is it really any worse than 'Warden'? /gripe.

The other review not only felt the need to throw in Tolkien references and puns (because it's fantasy amirite? lol) but falsely suggests that it had been set up as a series and that because DA2 doesn't feature the same returning cast it wasn't a true sequel. This is something debated here a fair bit but I am strongly against the whole notion of this. They then went on to say they weren't a fan of Origins so I facepalmed and stopped reading.

In fact on that note, I'm done with reviews for DA2.

[Ardamin]

NowGamer 7.3/10 (X360) - Not a total disappointment, but BioWare’s fantasy sequel falls way short of expectations nevertheless. (DAO 9.4/10)

NowGamer 8.2/10 (PS3) - Dragon Age 2 is not without its problems, but it is a thoroughly engrossing - if not traditional - RPG.

[Drasill]

The reviews seem to be all over the place. Some reviewers hate it or they love it. So far I'm loving it and think its superior to Origins in every way except the characters are less interesting (except Hawke > Warden).

[Ardamin]

Gamer.no 8/10 (PC) | 7/10 (X360; PS3) - A compromise without big winners or big losers. (DAO 9/10 PC | 7/10 X360)

[MrTijger]

Ada Wong wrote...

Metacritic user scores are a joke. All the 0 reviews are blatant attempts to push the overall score down. Well, it's working for now. I bet those people haven't even played the game.

Thats why you ignore the user generated scores and focus on the professional review scores. A single one pro or con wont affect the overall average that much and by reading multiple reviews you get a fair picture.

[Apollo Starflare]

Three more:

Techland - 9.7/10

Attack of the fan boy - Loved (highest rating).

The Telegraph - 8/10

Y'know, these reviews actually remind me more of Mass Effect 1 both in score and general opinion than ME2 on the whole. Especially the 'repeated areas' complaint. Definitely an odd pitfall for Bioware to fall in after ME1, but probably brought about by the development time. AofFB's review is well rounded and a pretty good read especially, although one of their 'hated' points sounds like a tactics problem on their end to me (the charging off in battle) but I could be wrong.

Edit: Oh and I know I said I was done. I have a problem. HELP ME.

Modifié par Apollo Starflare, 09 mars 2011 - 02:39 .

[Bborst]

Scores aside we can see that there is a large majority that loves the game, while (as expected) the hardcore RPG fans are somewhere in the middle. I personally find the game enjoyable and actually like it better than Origins. My 2 cents is to not look at ALL the reviews but to look at the publishers that have similar taste as you do. Mine are Gametrailers, Escapist, and Gamespot usually... sometimes IGN falls in there (All to which gave it an 8+).

[Aurgelmir]

Just read on a forum that 'Edge' Magazine gave it 6/10.

Dont know if you get it outside of the UK, its renowned for its strict scoring. I think its only ever giveb 10/10 for a handfull of games in its many years.

[Xaltar81]

Poll here. No names, no flaming just honest votes. Please read discriptions.

[Ixalmaris]

4players (german)
Quite a large independant website known for being critical (very often spot on compared to hyped tests from magazines, sometimes a bit too strict)

All platforms

70% Average

Modifié par Ixalmaris, 11 mars 2011 - 07:23 .

[viverravid]

Anyone want to comment on how the scores in the big name publications are generally higher then in the smaller operations? What's going on?

The NowGamer review is probably closest to my feelings (though I haven't finished the game yet, still in Act II). It's a bit hard to reconcile that with the Escapist review, though.

[Ixalmaris]

viverravid wrote...

Anyone want to comment on how the scores in the big name publications are generally higher then in the smaller operations? What's going on?

The NowGamer review is probably closest to my feelings (though I haven't finished the game yet, still in Act II). It's a bit hard to reconcile that with the Escapist review, though.

Magazines and "big name" websites live from advertisment.
Review sources who post bad things about games do not get advertisment for it.
The bigger the publisher, the more advertisment he sells.

[micheal001]

Nice eyes candy I expect nothing less and so does EA and Bioware.

[viverravid]

Ixalmaris wrote...

viverravid wrote...

Anyone want to comment on how the scores in the big name publications are generally higher then in the smaller operations? What's going on?

The NowGamer review is probably closest to my feelings (though I haven't finished the game yet, still in Act II). It's a bit hard to reconcile that with the Escapist review, though.

Magazines and "big name" websites live from advertisment.
Review sources who post bad things about games do not get advertisment for it.
The bigger the publisher, the more advertisment he sells.

I was trying to retain some faith in the games press by holding out for another explanation. GameSpot were pretty reasonable, IMO. And one of the main draws to the Escapist (Zero Punctuation) is generally brutally honest.