98 réponses à ce sujet

[Ixalmaris]

Because the job of professional reviewers depend on their employer making money. And the make money when gaming publishers buy advertisments and give exclusive material to them, which they won't do when their multi million dollar game gets a bad review.

What happens when a reviewer wants to escape this circle of dependency:
http://www.penny-arc...com/2007/11/30/
http://www.primotech...d-lynch-review/

[Saphara]

And the problem with users reviews are they are just as subjective and dependant on that person's taste.

Really unless something is pretty much universally panned (FF14) I'm probably going to ignore it. Same with the excessive positive reviews.

[Solid N7]

Saphara wrote...

And the problem with users reviews are they are just as subjective and dependant on that person's taste.

Really unless something is pretty much universally panned (FF14) I'm probably going to ignore it. Same with the excessive positive reviews.

^^This

[Ixalmaris]

Saphara wrote...

And the problem with users reviews are they are just as subjective and dependant on that person's taste.

Really unless something is pretty much universally panned (FF14) I'm probably going to ignore it. Same with the excessive positive reviews.

And the subjective opinion of thousands of customers is a good indication of the quality of the game. Thats how polls work (yes, including scientific ones) and democracies work by asking all people to state their opinion instead of relying on a few "professional electors".

Modifié par Ixalmaris, 12 mars 2011 - 10:06 .

[Dracotamer]

In this case though the user reviews are right lol.

[philbo1965uk]

Saphara wrote...

And the problem with users reviews are they are just as subjective and dependant on that person's taste.
.

Which is exactly the point of a review....

[Bhav]

Lets have a quick poll ... Who thinks I'm a ****?

90% may think I'm a **** on such a poll, but you're all wrong because I'm actually the single best human ever since Jesus.

[Keele]

I like how your examples are two years old.

Modifié par Keele, 12 mars 2011 - 10:13 .

[Saphara]

philbo1965uk wrote...

Saphara wrote...

And the problem with users reviews are they are just as subjective and dependant on that person's taste.
.

Which is exactly the point of a review....

which is why i generally dont listen to ANY of them, positive or negative. Im certainly glad i didnt for DA2, as im loving it. I also supremely dislike the Witcher and thus wont buy Witcher 2, and i think that my opinion on that flys in the face of a lot of users

Modifié par Saphara, 12 mars 2011 - 10:15 .

[epiccrabs]

I agree, most if not all the reviews praised the game like it was a god-given game. Came the aftermath, now it seems more like reviews are paid.

[Moondoggie]

Most of the user reviews have been really unreliable since people have been intent on hating the game so no matter what it was they would have hated it. DA:II has become the new FFXIII where people seem to just hate it and give it bad reviews for the sake of it because they tried something different and many gamers just want to play the same thing.

[Keele]

epiccrabs wrote...

I agree, most if not all the reviews praised the game like it was a god-given game. Came the aftermath, now it seems more like reviews are paid.

Seems =/= Are

[Bhav]

Moondoggie wrote...

Most of the user reviews have been really unreliable since people have been intent on hating the game so no matter what it was they would have hated it. DA:II has become the new FFXIII where people seem to just hate it and give it bad reviews for the sake of it because they tried something different and many gamers just want to play the same thing.

Completely incorrect. The difference in DA2 made it worse than just about every other RPG on the PC.

People hate the new dumbed down game, they dont want their RPGs becoming increasingly more and more stupid in every generation as is what keeps on happening.

And that is why people use the term dumbed down, to express just how terrible the changes made to the game were.

[epiccrabs]

Keele wrote...

epiccrabs wrote...

I agree, most if not all the reviews praised the game like it was a god-given game. Came the aftermath, now it seems more like reviews are paid.

Seems =/= Are

yean and a perfect score review =/= dragon age 2

[Bhav]

epiccrabs wrote...

I agree, most if not all the reviews praised the game like it was a god-given game. Came the aftermath, now it seems more like reviews are paid.

So you think that EA would be paying people to write bad reviews about their games?

Or I just misunderstood something.

Modifié par Bhav, 12 mars 2011 - 10:20 .

[Ixalmaris]

Keele wrote...

I like how your examples are two years old.

And that somehow invaliates them because in 3 years the whole industry has changed and magazines have shaken of the choke publishers had on them?
Right...

[FedericoV]

Ixalmaris wrote...

Because the job of professional reviewers depend on their employer making money. And the make money when gaming publishers buy advertisments and give exclusive material to them, which they won't do when their multi million dollar game gets a bad review.

What happens when a reviewer wants to escape this circle of dependency:
http://www.penny-arc...com/2007/11/30/
http://www.primotech...d-lynch-review/

I do agree. Infact DA:O's review were higher than the game deserved to be, especially on the consolle.

[Knal1991]

Ixalmaris wrote...

Saphara wrote...

And the problem with users reviews are they are just as subjective and dependant on that person's taste.

Really unless something is pretty much universally panned (FF14) I'm probably going to ignore it. Same with the excessive positive reviews.

And the subjective opinion of thousands of customers is a good indication of the quality of the game. Thats how polls work (yes, including scientific ones) and democracies work by asking all people to state their opinion instead of relying on a few "professional electors".

None of your examples shows a situation where mass subjective opinions are perfect.......
That's why products get overhyped...
That's why many scientific polls can get dismissed later on...
That's why sometimes people choose a bad leader....

The only thing that's good for every individual is their own beliefs of what something should be. thus the best indicator is your own judgment (even if you have what people consider a poor one)...

Personally can see for myself If I am gonna like a certain game...

[Esbatty]

Keele wrote...

I like how your examples are two years old.

Not another time jumper... 4 years, serah. 4 years.

[Garak2]

Saphara wrote...

philbo1965uk wrote...

Saphara wrote...

And the problem with users reviews are they are just as subjective and dependant on that person's taste.
.

Which is exactly the point of a review....

which is why i generally dont listen to ANY of them, positive or negative. Im certainly glad i didnt for DA2, as im loving it. I also supremely dislike the Witcher and thus wont buy Witcher 2, and i think that my opinion on that flys in the face of a lot of users

Yeah what was up with that. I heard all these great things about the The Witcher and so I bought it. Didn't get far.

For one thing I hate having to turn around and make sure my kid isn't in the room when the cursing starts. I can live without it. Cursing was cool when I was 12...

Anyway though, I still prefer user reviews (despite The Witcher thing).

[Jedra101]

You need both. At the end of the day it's about balance. You read the official reviews and you read the customer and forum reviews. Most people should be able to determine how good a game is by taking both into account.

Most of the games magazines have been 'bought', but sometimes it's good to look at professional reviews in non-games magazines that aren't so reliant on the advertising.

Conversely a lot of the time most people post on forums to complain, which is then countered by equally ludicrous positive responses.

By taking the two you can get an idea of how the game is.

For me, the feeling I get is that DA:2 has all the hallmarks of becoming a franchise game. It's been dumbed down and more linear plotline introduced. Although it has an 18 certificate here in the UK, I think they are aiming at a younger market. I think this is to enable EA to produce a more regular production line of DA games. I have the game, it's OK - more hack and slash than RPG in my opinion, but fun for a few hours. Will I buy the next one next year? Probably not - there are better RPGs on the horizon and I would have preferred a more emmersive experience than what DA:2 offered.

[Garak2]

Moondoggie wrote...

Most of the user reviews have been really unreliable since people have been intent on hating the game so no matter what it was they would have hated it. DA:II has become the new FFXIII where people seem to just hate it and give it bad reviews for the sake of it because they tried something different and many gamers just want to play the same thing.

FFXIII was horrible. I did beat it but only once and I will never play it again, it just isn't worth it. Lost Odyssey though was a much better game and probably got worse reviews. Go figure.

[Saphara]

Garak2 wrote...

Saphara wrote...

philbo1965uk wrote...

Saphara wrote...

And the problem with users reviews are they are just as subjective and dependant on that person's taste.
.

Which is exactly the point of a review....

which is why i generally dont listen to ANY of them, positive or negative. Im certainly glad i didnt for DA2, as im loving it. I also supremely dislike the Witcher and thus wont buy Witcher 2, and i think that my opinion on that flys in the face of a lot of users

Yeah what was up with that. I heard all these great things about the The Witcher and so I bought it. Didn't get far.

For one thing I hate having to turn around and make sure my kid isn't in the room when the cursing starts. I can live without it. Cursing was cool when I was 12...

Anyway though, I still prefer user reviews (despite The Witcher thing).

Heh, the only "user" reviews I'd actually listen to would be form my RL friends and family since i know them and their personalities. Even then, it can be a crapshoot.

[Cuthlan]

I don't have a problem with real user reviews.

But metacritic reviews from people who haven't completed the game? Some from people who haven't even PLAYED the game?

That is the problem with user reviews.

[epiccrabs]

Bhav wrote...

epiccrabs wrote...

I agree, most if not all the reviews praised the game like it was a god-given game. Came the aftermath, now it seems more like reviews are paid.

So you think that EA would be paying people to write bad reviews about their games?

Or I just misunderstood something.

Have you seen the man with the GOLDEN VOICE?!?!?

On a serious note, are you blind? Haven't you seen what this game's reviews scores are
8.0 on gamespot
8.5 on IGN
94/100 on PC Gamer
92/100 on PC Trailers

The list could go on and on but what can I say to change the mind of fanboys?