177 réponses à ce sujet

[The Metalion]

All the 9/10 ratings came on the day of release.  The lower ratings came after people actually played it.

It's like the game was so highly anticipated that nobody wanted to let fans down by giving it a low rating.

When you're expecting a game that's worthy of 9/10 and hoping for 10/10, a game worth 8 feels more like a 7 or a 6.  The game was way over-hyped.

[AzureAether]

Any company that reviews games requires them to have games to review. The video game market is struggling at the moment in some places, so the reviewers want games to sell to keep themselves floating along. Likewise, the game company wants good reviews in order to sell a lot. I wouldn't say 'bribe' is the right word, but I would go as far to say as that there is some sort of agreement between people (I have never seen a game that recycles areas like DA2 does get so high a score. Dungeons were kind of a joke).

[Any0day]

The Metalion wrote...

When you're expecting a game that's worthy of 9/10 and hoping for 10/10, a game worth 8 feels more like a 7 or a 6.  The game was way over-hyped.

Don't dare blame this on over-hype, because honestly - I don't think anyone had it hyped to ''rpg of the decade'' or anything. Sure - we had expectations, just like the expectation that when I order from a five star restaurant I'm not served caned dog food. The game was poor all on it's own merit.

[Gatt9]

AzureAether wrote...

Any company that reviews games requires them to have games to review. The video game market is struggling at the moment in some places, so the reviewers want games to sell to keep themselves floating along. Likewise, the game company wants good reviews in order to sell a lot. I wouldn't say 'bribe' is the right word, but I would go as far to say as that there is some sort of agreement between people (I have never seen a game that recycles areas like DA2 does get so high a score. Dungeons were kind of a joke).

Gaming sites need revenues,  revenues are generated by hits (Number of unique visitors),  as ads are paid by the number of unique hits that have the ad displayed to them.  To get the traffic,  they need previews and Day 0 reviews.  To get the ads they need the publishers to be happy with them.

So the only way the sites can make the advertisers happy,  and get the early builds,  is to make sure their games are given better than average ratings regardless of quality.

The agreement is simply that,  the gaming sites cannot survive without giving the Publishers what they want.  That's why Indie games get completely different ratings.

It was a sad day when Jonny Wilson left Computer Gaming World,  that was the last bastion of Gaming Press that didn't review advertisers.

Personally,  I think there needs to be a investigation,  the whole thing is waaaayyy too similiar to the Payola issues that resulted in laws and lawsuits in the mid-20th century.  Where radio stations accepted gifts in order to give favorable reviews and visibility to music publisher's songs,  same thing here,  the gifts are the early builds and the banner ads.  There's clearly a anti-consumer practice occurring here.

[Edhriano]

Does

"Give this game good review or else kiss adds goodbye !"

Count as bribe?

[Valcutio]

I'm not into conspiracies but I think in order for any professional critic to rank DA2 above a 7/10 (which is generous) - they had ulterior motives. Did money change hands? Only they know.

[PirateT138]

I put zero stock in game critics. It's irrelevant that they rated it so high. Laughable, but irrelevant. It is also fairly suspicious but they might just be stupid instead of shady.

Most people will eventually view them the same way. The only honest reviews I ever read were from players and many of them echoed my sentiments exactly about the game.

Point is: I'll be waiting for player reviews before I buy anything else from Bioware.

[Kilshrek]

I'll throw this in here, Portal 2 on PC is getting 95 from "the professionals" at Metacritic, I'd agree with that score, though there are people out there panning it for day 1 DLC (which is wrong, among other complaints) and short length for a full price game (which is their opinion and their money, but I disagree with Portal 2 being short on value for money).

User reviews are coming in and right now there is a ratio of 3:1 on the good/bad reviews. Most gamers love it I'd say. I love it. It may not be a 40 hour game, but that was the most fun 9 hours I had since the 2 hours I spent playing Portal. Portal 2 was damn good value for my money. I paid $45 for Portal 2.

Dragon Age 2 cost me $88, and took me around 35 hours to complete. This time included great time wasters like certain boss fights, and ridiculous enemy waves. I expected my decisions to change things in the game, they rarely did. I expected to be able to influence the outcome of certain events, again, I rarely could. By the end of DA 2 I wasn't exactly sure what I had done, besides a runner. There were cameos from DAO, there were references. There was humour, there were good jokes and great banter between companions. Then there was the durrspawn, who threatened as much as damp tissue(though the miraculously manage to claim two or three victims depending on how you play, cutscene deaths, you so cool). Awesomeness combat as well, with featherweight two handers and ninja style rogues, the mechanics have been done to death but the animations and speed annoyed me still. Finishing DA 2 left me with very mixed feelings, I liked the story(to a degree) and companions, but everything else left me feeling rather frustrated. Where did the flavour text go? Why is the codex(in the UI) so obscure, and entries feeling so much more digital instead of the book and parchment feel which worked so well in keeping me immersed in DAO? I feel DA 2 wasn't really value for my money, even if it was more than 4 times the game time of Portal 2.

I'd say critics giving Portal 2 great scores would be spot on, and I wouldn't call BS on high ratings. DA 2 is another matter, 9's and 10's are out of the question, it really doesn't merit scores that high.

edit : I realise it may be called comparing apples to oranges since they're clearly different games playing in different leagues, but my point is value for money.

Modifié par Kilshrek, 20 avril 2011 - 05:57 .

[Edhriano]

PirateT138 wrote...

Point is: I'll be waiting for player reviews before I buy anything else from Bioware.

Well put If I say so myself.

Kilshrek wrote...

edit : I realise it may be called comparing apples to oranges since they're clearly different games playing in different leagues, but my point is value for money.

When I spent hard earn cash on something I expect it to be well spent.
If I had known I would have save it for a new hard disk on something.
Really  ....

[abaris]

Valcutio wrote...

I'm not into conspiracies but I think in order for any professional critic to rank DA2 above a 7/10 (which is generous) - they had ulterior motives. Did money change hands? Only they know.

No, as I said before: No money for the individual. But as has been said, ads keep the magazines and sites alive and kicking. The ones running these media outlets will point that out to the ones writing their reviews.

Out of personal experience I can say, it will be something like, look for the good features and if you must, find a few flaws and, in not so many words, remember who's paying your wages. The rating system these mags employ does the rest. There's always something in there to boost the overall rating, even if the rest turns out to be utter crap.

So, tell me, have you ever seen any game rated really low if it was published by one of the major companies and advertisers? I guess not. The low ratings are almost exclusively reserved for low funds Indie productions. Or let me put it differently: Low funds Indie productions are probably the only ones getting an honest review by the critics. Be they low or high. Everything else is pushed.

[v_ware]

http://social.biowar...1/index/7145086

Read this: They clearly say they can only get a review code if they will publish a good review.

[Teredan]

Now the question is what should people learn from this?

Easy, do not pre order, do not trust review scores if you're lazy at least cross reference them.

And last but not least make your own opinion.

[Naliamegod]

I am guessing the high reviews come from two main factors:

1.) Rating inflation in video game reviews from publishers these days (Anything below an 8 is considered almost insulting to some people)

2.) Didn't play through the whole game, thus many of the more massive problems (glitches, repeated areas) isn't as notable as before.


EDIT:  Fix'd

Modifié par Naliamegod, 20 avril 2011 - 12:57 .

[Slayer299]

Naliamegod wrote...

I am guessing the high reviews come from three main factors:

1.) Rating inflation in video game reviews from publishers these days (Anything below an 8 is considered almost insulting to some people)

2.) Didn't play through the whole game, thus many of the more massive problems (glitches, repeated areas) isn't as notable as before.

You didn't mention what the three factors are....

[Haexpane]

Tirigon wrote...

All major review sites are bribed, which is why I trust none of them.

Well here we have it, you truly are a paranoid idiot without remorse.

[Slayer299]

Paranoid....perhaps and yet we have how many major review sites actually calling out BW on any significant flaws in DA2?

[astrallite]

I don't get how this is any surprise. The average release-date score was in the low 90s for Dragon Age 2. Everything since then has been high 70s--those are REAL reviews, not "special relationship" journalists.

Modifié par astrallite, 20 avril 2011 - 08:16 .

[randName]

I like some of these. (from metacritic)

GameFocus
"Dragon Age 2 is a perfect example of how a great sequel should be put together. "

GameTrailers
"Though it doesn't hold a candle to its predecessor when it comes to sheer breadth, Dragon Age II has quite a bit more soul."

BigPond GameArena
"If you were like me and worried about Dragon Age II, you can relax. It's not quite the same game, but where it's different it is better."

MS Xbox World
"Dragon Age 2 takes everything that made the original so outstanding, and improves upon it effectively, offering another compelling, extensive, epic experience that will win you over with its rich character and tremendous attention to detail."

[AlexXIV]

Selling opinions. Please send pms with offers.

[AlexXIV]

randName wrote...

I like some of these. (from metacritic)

GameFocus
"Dragon Age 2 is a perfect example of how a great sequel should be put together. "

GameTrailers
"Though it doesn't hold a candle to its predecessor when it comes to sheer breadth, Dragon Age II has quite a bit more soul."

BigPond GameArena
"If you were like me and worried about Dragon Age II, you can relax. It's not quite the same game, but where it's different it is better."

MS Xbox World
"Dragon Age 2 takes everything that made the original so outstanding, and improves upon it effectively, offering another compelling, extensive, epic experience that will win you over with its rich character and tremendous attention to detail."

And these are fair critizism? I don't think so. Fair for Bioware maybe, but not for the customers.

[randName]

AlexXIV wrote...

randName wrote...

I like some of these. (from metacritic)

GameFocus
"Dragon Age 2 is a perfect example of how a great sequel should be put together. "

GameTrailers
"Though it doesn't hold a candle to its predecessor when it comes to sheer breadth, Dragon Age II has quite a bit more soul."

BigPond GameArena
"If you were like me and worried about Dragon Age II, you can relax. It's not quite the same game, but where it's different it is better."

MS Xbox World
"Dragon Age 2 takes everything that made the original so outstanding, and improves upon it effectively, offering another compelling, extensive, epic experience that will win you over with its rich character and tremendous attention to detail."

And these are fair critizism? I don't think so. Fair for Bioware maybe, but not for the customers.

Depends, if the reviewers played the game through, and best would it be if they played it twice or more ~ and then would try validate their opnions through a decent analysis.

But most don't - doesn't pay well enough to be a good reviewer, better to be witty and sharp with words.


Anyway I didn't buy DA2 due to the reviews, so don't really care - and it's an old problem in games, or we should already have learnt that most sites aren't honest, including gamespot etc.
It's a shame really, but so it goes it seems, not DA2s fault.

& It's a bit tiresome that metacritic is getting to be so important, since it makes for a stronger incentive to raise the score through either AD pressure, or rules that benefit those that write "good" reviews, and it's hard to lay blame on one party or one product, as for all we know those I quoted actually did hold those opions in writing - I don't see how they can, but opinions are fickle like that.

Modifié par randName, 20 avril 2011 - 10:48 .

[Foryou]

Grow the hell up you don't like a game get over it. Suck it up and move on. If EA bribed companies don't you think that it would be getting much more higher scores. Personally I liked DA2

[Rawke]

Oh yay, it's this thread again...

[Mecha Tengu]

what the necro

[PlazmaSugar]

its not a matter of being bribed its because if a big name review site like IGN gave something like black ops a bad score they would be crucified and no one would use the site again