128 réponses à ce sujet

[Kandid001]

zorp wrote...

Well it looks like a raid.

Metacritic DAO: 8.3 (1099 ratings) DA2: 3.0 (457 ratings)

Gamespot DAO: 9.0 (12581 ratings) DA2: 7.1 (926 ratings)

Or the Gamespot members got a better version of DA2...............

Some Gamespot reviews are removed.

http://www.gamefaqs....age-ii/58396258

[Vandrayke]

Zeppeli wrote...

Vandrayke wrote...

The truth about metacritic scores is that <500 people reviewed it. There could very easily be <500 people who simply hate the game without there being a conspiracy. Think about the DA:O audience size. Think about how passionate some fans are. Think about how passionate fans react when they're extremely disappointed.

People who "pretty much like the game" are playing it and don't care enough to review it yet.

And what are the positive reviews of other games on metacritics?? See Batman Arkham Asylum, it get 9 on Metacritic user score... See the fail of Civiliaztion V, the worst Civ ever, it got 7... point out The Witcher... The users gave to this game 9.5 so???

Does your idea work only on bad scores????

Those games have been out for a long time.  DA2 has been out for a few days.  

One interesting parallel involves expectations: Civ V had a lot of expectations.  Batman had limited expectations, and nobody knew about the Witcher until it had been out for forever.  

Obviously you can't have reactionary reviews when there are not high expectations



 

[Warikz]

Things i'd like to say is that you can't really take gauge of reviews until at least a month of the games release has passed. Why? because right now people who don't like the game/trolls are posting, whilst the people who might like the game are either unable to play due to release or happily playing it when they can and aren't even thinking about reviewing it. On a personal note, the only other person I truly trust to give the game a fair review is Totalbiscuit. The guy doesn't hold back on his punches, he's honest, and he doesn't have an agenda in his reviews. That isn't to say I agree with everything he says, far from it in fact, but I trust him to always be fair.

As for me, well I am enjoying DA2, and I have reached the point in my life where I don't need other peoples validation for holding the views that I do. Everyone eventually gets to that point, whether at 4 or 40, it doesn't matter. Myself as said, I enjoy the game, I like what I like, and I don't need people to agree with me, nor do I care if people disagree and ritually insult me. 

Modifié par Warikz, 10 mars 2011 - 03:45 .

[Zeppeli]

Vandrayke wrote...

Zeppeli wrote...

Vandrayke wrote...

The truth about metacritic scores is that <500 people reviewed it. There could very easily be <500 people who simply hate the game without there being a conspiracy. Think about the DA:O audience size. Think about how passionate some fans are. Think about how passionate fans react when they're extremely disappointed.

People who "pretty much like the game" are playing it and don't care enough to review it yet.

And what are the positive reviews of other games on metacritics?? See Batman Arkham Asylum, it get 9 on Metacritic user score... See the fail of Civiliaztion V, the worst Civ ever, it got 7... point out The Witcher... The users gave to this game 9.5 so???

Does your idea work only on bad scores????

Those games have been out for a long time.  DA2 has been out for a few days.  

One interesting parallel involves expectations: Civ V had a lot of expectations.  Batman had limited expectations, and nobody knew about the Witcher until it had been out for forever.  

Obviously you can't have reactionary reviews when there are not high expectations



 

So if the score will be low in Aril too, it will be more consistent? Sure. But you can not deny the fact that metacritic user score is a lot more right than professional critic's score on the long run... See the Witcher and Civ V for reference... 

[meganmeave]

 I have been reading a lot of various forum posts about how terrible DA2 is, on CNET, The Escapist, Metacritic, Amazon etc. I won't say all of the posts are from PC users, but I would say about 70% of them seem to be. From what I gather, PC users are upset the game has been "dumbed down" for console use. Even the GI review admits this is the case. I can certainly understand the PC user plight. PC games just aren't the focus of developers any more, and for the PC enthusiast, this can be extremely frustrating. I get that.

But I really wouldn't put much faith in anyone's review unless they have been playing it for a week. I've been playing for 15 hours now, and haven't even left for the Deep Roads. I just don't see how you could play something for 5 hours (yes, I'm being generous with how long I am assuming they have played before they rushed off to review the game) like this, then make a judgement that the game is so bad, it gets a 2 out of 10. You know what kind of a game should get a 2 out of 10? ET for the Atari. This just isn't that game.

I think too many people are rating this game as total crap who miss certain aspects of the last game. I'm not saying DA2 is above criticism - I have my own gripes about the game, don't get me wrong. I'm just saying, there is a vast difference between 1 and 7 in a rating. This game is not a 2. If you rated it without the passion of a fan who wants Bioware to recreate DA:O in less than 14 months - a game that took years to get together - then those people who gave it 1's and 2's would probably agree it doesn't deserve those scores.

The reason reviewers scores aren't that low is because they aren't allowed to grade something down simply because "Bioware let me down! This is not as good as DA:O!" They are paid to play a game and critique it as a whole, not just at first blush, not just compared to the predecesor, and not just for the ardent Bioware fan.

Personally, I think a score of about a 7 is fair at this point for me. It may get better, but I'll wait to make a final judgement until I have actually completed the game. Afterall, DA:O was not perfect by any means. I almost quit playing the first time I picked it up, it seemed dull and ugly. I forced myself to keep playing past the two hour mark then found I couldn't stop. Sometimes, with the heavily story driven games, you have to give them time to sink into you with their insidious hooks of gaming addicition. That's when the magic happens.

[gingerbill]

D00m580 wrote...

Yeah yeah, and you registered on the 9th just to reveal the terrible truth about that conspiracy. Good story, very enjoyable.

exactly . The OP is talking a load of nonsense , It's no secret there is a campaign to bad mouth DA2 , weak attempt by the OP to sucker people.

[Wolfwood]

On a more general note, I'd say that the most reliable source of a review for myself is my own expirience with a game, and I believe that this is true for most people, so arguing about it and making conspiracy theories is kinda useless.

Yup, Bioware making up conspiracy theories really makes it look like they are grasping at straws. Trying to ignore bad feedback, claiming that it is some conspiracy is really just them deluding themselves.

[stormhit]

Getterray wrote...

finc.loki wrote...

Something doesn't add up though.

A lot of people say they enjoy the game and the critic reviews add up to 83%.
On almost all games the user reviews and critic reviews stay within the same score.

Alpha protocol the Obsidian SPY RPG that is not all that well received cause of bugs and silly AI
Has 72 Critic score and 7.3 user score (IE 73).

You're telling me that people on average hate the game SOO bad it ends up with a 4.0 in user score over 83 critic score.
Unlikely except for people on purpose voting down the game.
Also all you have to do is create an account and move a slider on Meta critic to lower the score.

Can you honestly tell me the game is THAT bad.
Sure it has no ISO view and it isn't as long as the first one, but honestly.
Atrocious games has gotten higher reviews both with critics and users.
I am not defending Bioware, clearly this wasn't as big of a hit with critics either, but hardly an average of 4.0 for user reviews.

This is anger taking place and a small group of people decide that they want to leave their mark of hate the only way they can.
There is a too large of discrepancy for it to be totally honest.

FFXIV has a critic review score of 49 and user of 3.8, see they are not that far apart.

But DA 2 with 83 vs 4.0 that is way apart.

I'm not saying that DA2 is worth a 3.0 average. In fact, as I said, you should ignore all the 0/10 reviews.

All the evidence points to it NOT being 4chan. I think a lot of the reviews are too harsh on the game but just because they are negative does not point to it being from some grand conspiracy behind the scenes to bring Bioware down. I think its just a wave of very disgruntled fans. I don't think that there is any organization here at all, just a wave of dissatisfaction from around the world. If it was a small group of people there would be more 1 day old accounts. But there aren't.

Also, read the reviews. Don't just look at the score. Read the top critic scores. Read IGN's review. They talk about all the negatives of the game: the repetative dungeons, the bad camera, the short length, the poor PC conversion. And yet, none of those things factor into the score. You'd think with as many negative points they write about that it wouldn't deserve a 9.0.

Fine, it is not an organized 4chan raid.  Happy now?   Nobody is suggesting it's a "conspiracy" other than you.

That does not change the fact that for many months now a number of internet communities have been against the very existence of this game. You can't read those reviews and not take that into account.

[Getterray]

stormhit13 wrote...

Getterray wrote...

finc.loki wrote...

Something doesn't add up though.

A lot of people say they enjoy the game and the critic reviews add up to 83%.
On almost all games the user reviews and critic reviews stay within the same score.

Alpha protocol the Obsidian SPY RPG that is not all that well received cause of bugs and silly AI
Has 72 Critic score and 7.3 user score (IE 73).

You're telling me that people on average hate the game SOO bad it ends up with a 4.0 in user score over 83 critic score.
Unlikely except for people on purpose voting down the game.
Also all you have to do is create an account and move a slider on Meta critic to lower the score.

Can you honestly tell me the game is THAT bad.
Sure it has no ISO view and it isn't as long as the first one, but honestly.
Atrocious games has gotten higher reviews both with critics and users.
I am not defending Bioware, clearly this wasn't as big of a hit with critics either, but hardly an average of 4.0 for user reviews.

This is anger taking place and a small group of people decide that they want to leave their mark of hate the only way they can.
There is a too large of discrepancy for it to be totally honest.

FFXIV has a critic review score of 49 and user of 3.8, see they are not that far apart.

But DA 2 with 83 vs 4.0 that is way apart.

I'm not saying that DA2 is worth a 3.0 average. In fact, as I said, you should ignore all the 0/10 reviews.

All the evidence points to it NOT being 4chan. I think a lot of the reviews are too harsh on the game but just because they are negative does not point to it being from some grand conspiracy behind the scenes to bring Bioware down. I think its just a wave of very disgruntled fans. I don't think that there is any organization here at all, just a wave of dissatisfaction from around the world. If it was a small group of people there would be more 1 day old accounts. But there aren't.

Also, read the reviews. Don't just look at the score. Read the top critic scores. Read IGN's review. They talk about all the negatives of the game: the repetative dungeons, the bad camera, the short length, the poor PC conversion. And yet, none of those things factor into the score. You'd think with as many negative points they write about that it wouldn't deserve a 9.0.

Fine, it is not an organized 4chan raid.  Happy now?   Nobody is suggesting it's a "conspiracy" other than you.

That does not change the fact that for many months now a number of internet communities have been against the very existence of this game. You can't read those reviews and not take that into account.

Actually, David Gaider is on record blaming the scores on 4chan. I kept mentioning his name over and over because he is the one insinuating a raid. A Bioware imployee trying to pin this all on 4chan is pathetic.

[Aurgelmir]

When Bioware pinned it on 4chan, all they did was escelate it.

[Mrbananagrabber]

One of those reviews is mine (gave it 5/10). It was the very first time I made an account on metacritic for one simple reason:

it was the first time I felt the reviewers were full of ***. The score I gave is what I honnestly think the game deserves, 84 is a complete and utter travesty. If this game had been made by an unknown company it would've gotten 7/10 average, but sadly EA has very long arms.

[Dansayshi]

In the end you can only make up your own mind. Dont simply look at the score. Read up about it instead.

Game reviews from big magazines / websites are not to be trusted. They HAVE to appease the publisher / studio w/e. If a game is ****, they wont come out and say it. Although one has in the past, and got sacked for it. FF13 is a classic example, that game was pure garbage, but gained high reviews from many.

[Mrbananagrabber]

Dansayshi wrote...

In the end you can only make up your own mind. Dont simply look at the score. Read up about it instead.

Game reviews from big magazines / websites are not to be trusted. They HAVE to appease the publisher / studio w/e. If a game is ****, they wont come out and say it. Although one has in the past, and got sacked for it. FF13 is a classic example, that game was pure garbage, but gained high reviews from many.

FFXIII and now DA2

[Pinkslee]

I find it ridiculous that Bioware contacts these open-review websites and asks (or makes for all I know) them take down bad reviews, then go and be hypocrites by making new accounts just to raise the score!

This game is completely deserving of a bad rating, but I also agree that getting a lot of people to vote it 0/10 is taking it too far. The sad part is that Bioware is so concerned about losing sales that instead of admitting they made a sub-par game they instead try to cover-up any bad reviews.

Both the reviewers and Bioware are fueling a fire of retardation that will only end when one of them runs out of the resources required to keep the other side suppressed... Fortunately that person will most likely be Bioware and the bad-reviewers will stop acting like douches and review the game in a way that isn't ridiculous.

[Aurgelmir]

Pinkslee wrote...

I find it ridiculous that Bioware contacts these open-review websites and asks (or makes for all I know) them take down bad reviews, then go and be hypocrites by making new accounts just to raise the score!

This game is completely deserving of a bad rating, but I also agree that getting a lot of people to vote it 0/10 is taking it too far. The sad part is that Bioware is so concerned about losing sales that instead of admitting they made a sub-par game they instead try to cover-up any bad reviews.

Both the reviewers and Bioware are fueling a fire of retardation that will only end when one of them runs out of the resources required to keep the other side suppressed... Fortunately that person will most likely be Bioware and the bad-reviewers will stop acting like douches and review the game in a way that isn't ridiculous.

I read on the Gamespot forums that they are 'Moderating' all low marking user reviews as well.

[sanadawarrior]

zorp wrote...

Well it looks like a raid.

Metacritic DAO: 8.3 (1099 ratings) DA2: 3.0 (457 ratings)

Gamespot DAO: 9.0 (12581 ratings) DA2: 7.1 (926 ratings)

Or the Gamespot members got a better version of DA2...............

Gamefly actualy has DAII user scores ahead of DAO with 8.8 to 7.7 for 360 and 8.4 to 7.4 for PS3, probably because you have to sign up for the service to rate it so trolls can't just make an account on there.

http://www.gamefly.c...-Age-II/145165/
http://www.gamefly.c...-Age-II/145160/
http://www.gamefly.c...Origins/138010/
http://www.gamefly.c...Origins/138005/

[finc.loki]

Wolfwood wrote...

On a more general note, I'd say that the most reliable source of a review for myself is my own expirience with a game, and I believe that this is true for most people, so arguing about it and making conspiracy theories is kinda useless.

Yup, Bioware making up conspiracy theories really makes it look like they are grasping at straws. Trying to ignore bad feedback, claiming that it is some conspiracy is really just them deluding themselves.

"Bad feedback"?

Popping on Metacritic as a user to just give the game a 0 rating is akin to being a moron and hardly proper feedback.
Even if the person doesn't like it, he/she should give a sensible feedback and review.

Basically people that dish out a 0 are childish reactionary people. They give a bad score cause they feel "betrayed" or the game didn't fit "their" needs .
Bioware changed things up and take it for what it is, don't like it this time then DON'T BUY IT.

If you still buy it knowing full well what the changes are and even played the demo and somehow magically STILL think it will be like DA:O, well that just pathetic.

You know that most of the negative scores are probably from people that don't even own or play the game.
They want to punish Bioware and show their anger by trying to make them look bad.

Then do so in the forum , say that you don't like it and what's dissapointing, they will either take it to heart and change things for next time or not.
But reviewing and scoring a game/movie etc is about telling what is good or bad etc.

There are 3 major complaints from a vocal MINORITY:

1. Too fast of a combat, and it leaves less tactical play (which is very arguable and subjective).
2. Environments are repetitive and set mostly in one location.
3. Voiced character. (which was the opposite in complaint regarding DA:O).

So, how does these 3 things warrant a 0 score in any logical, sound thinking mind?
Answer: It doesn't.

The professional reviewers I think made a pretty decent job in reviewing DA 2, they touched on the points that some agree or disagree with that it isn't like DA:O, cause of the changes.
Then they also actually review the game for what it is and what it tries to achieve and this is where the higher scores come in, cause it does do a pretty decent job.
So the overall average is pretty fair in Metacritic PRO scores.

I don't think it is a conspiracy, but clearly there is a bunch of overreacting people out there.

I own both games  and I enjoy each for what they are.

The first had more varied environments and cool party members and longer game, but for ME the combat was a downside it was slow and clunky and felt like it needed work, same with graphics.
I also prefer voiced PC characters and don't like silent ones, especially in a "talkative" game as DA:O with all the banter and quantative dialogue.

In DA2 I like the combat, I find it much more fun and immersive, and I like that you have voiced character now.
The graphics is better.
BUT, I don't like as much that it is mostly in one location and that it is shorter.
I haven't finished it yet, but this is my initial response.

So as can be clearly seen there is + and - for each game.
I wouldn't be stupid and rate both games a 0 cause of a few changes or differences.
I take them for what they are and I knew buying them what I was getting into and what type of games I was getting.

Ps. Even though I used the term "you" a lot it was more in general and not directly at YOU wolfwood.

[finc.loki]

Mrbananagrabber wrote...

One of those reviews is mine (gave it 5/10). It was the very first time I made an account on metacritic for one simple reason:

it was the first time I felt the reviewers were full of ***. The score I gave is what I honnestly think the game deserves, 84 is a complete and utter travesty. If this game had been made by an unknown company it would've gotten 7/10 average, but sadly EA has very long arms.

"If this game had been made by an unknown company it would've gotten 7/10 average"

That is a load of crock!

The game itself is pretty good, what most people don't like is that they didn't REUSE some of what the previous game had.

Had this been the first game, it would have been viewed for what it is and no doubt scores would be higher.
But instead it is and always will be compared to the previous DA.

Some reviewers gave it a high score cause, get this, THEY DID LIKE THE GAME....
Some gave it a more somber 70 rating, which today is pretty low score.
Reviewers give their scores not just because of their "personal feeling", they have to review the game for what it is and what it is trying to achieve and whether it succeds in doing so.

Just because YOU and some others are upset does it mean the game is garbage, that is subjective.
Clearly not all agree, the community is split in this regard cause some like the changes and some don't.

[Duncaaaaaan]

1. /v/ is lazy. /v/ doesn't even play video games because they are so lazy.

I stopped reading there.

[finc.loki]

Dansayshi wrote...

In the end you can only make up your own mind. Dont simply look at the score. Read up about it instead.

Game reviews from big magazines / websites are not to be trusted. They HAVE to appease the publisher / studio w/e. If a game is ****, they wont come out and say it. Although one has in the past, and got sacked for it. FF13 is a classic example, that game was pure garbage, but gained high reviews from many.

FFXIV got high reviews you say, and from BIG reviewing magazines and sites? Hardly.

Look at these scores from the top reviewing sites and magazines etc regarding FFXIV:

IGN 55
Eurogamer 50
PC powerplay 50
Gametrailers 42
Gamespot 40
Gamespy 40
1up 33

I'd hardly call that "high" reviews, in fact atrocious is what they are, especially since today a "mediocre-decent" game gets scores in the 70's.

They don't have to appease any publisher, especially not the larger reviewing sites.
They STILL get the review copies and get previews etc.
Why? Cause if they don't as the customers SEE it on their sites, we would start to question it.

We would know that something would be wrong and these large review sites have far to many of us visiting their sites for reviews and previews.
Can you imagine how bad it would be and look for a Publisher if they would start to neglect, IGN, Gamespot, Gametrailers etc cause they have in the past handed out a low score for one of their games.

Sure some reviews might seem padded at times, but that is also depending on the reviewing person itself and personal feelings or not.

Today scores have simply changed.

Where as before a mediocre game got 50 out of a 100 today that is around 65-75.
Hence just look at FFXIV scores up there. If you get a score of 55 or 40 etc from GT and IGN and Gamespot that means a REALLY bad attempt at a game.

Square Enix even appologized to the public for their failed game.

DA2 is not failed game that is broken etc, it is just a different take on the original DA:O with it's own spin.
Some like it some don't, but the game isn't atrocious.

Modifié par finc.loki, 11 mars 2011 - 06:03 .

[tariq071]

D00m580 wrote...


On a more general note, I'd say that the most reliable source of a review for myself is my own expirience with a game, and I believe that this is true for most people, so arguing about it and making conspiracy theories is kinda useless.

For that you actually have to buy game and play it, therefore it's obsolete since you already spent your money.

And if you do some research, you will discover that "word of the mouth" is today most utilized way to create ones opinion. Games do rise(example Witcher)  and fall (MoH) based on that today.

Encouraging someone to buy something and then discover what is like is not the way to go, bcause then you are asking him to base his purchase decison on one single opinion, yours (or mine whichever)...

Modifié par tariq071, 11 mars 2011 - 06:05 .

[Skemte]

Who cares? You either like the game or dislike it overall.. This constant propping up of official reviews and popularity is getting scary, half of you guys sound like these reviews your diagreeing with is insults your family.

[Rockpopple]

Also, the fluoride in the tap water is what made them post the bad reviews. They're all around us, I tells ya!

[xCobalt]

finc.loki wrote...

Dansayshi wrote...

In the end you can only make up your own mind. Dont simply look at the score. Read up about it instead.

Game reviews from big magazines / websites are not to be trusted. They HAVE to appease the publisher / studio w/e. If a game is ****, they wont come out and say it. Although one has in the past, and got sacked for it. FF13 is a classic example, that game was pure garbage, but gained high reviews from many.

FFXIV got high reviews you say, and from BIG reviewing magazines and sites? Hardly.

You should really learn what 13 is in roman numerals.