132 réponses à ce sujet

[Teh Chozen Wun]

4chan.

[tfive24]

I would say look at the copies that are put up for used copies on the internet and your local game stores. I think that will give you a better impression how the game is really doing amongst the gaming community.

[Persephone]

I'd rate DA2 (DLC included) a 9/10 while DAO (with DAA and DLC in tow) gets a 7.5/10 from me.

Feel free to tear me apart for blasphemy if you must.

[inSPECTRE Shepard_]

JamesX wrote...

Sadly true. If this game was called Mass Effect: With Dragons, or Dragon Effect, I would have given it a 8 or 9.

Mass Dragons?

[mcha82]

Let's be honest here. If this game wasn't made by Bioware it would be getting a 5/10 on most review sites. The successes built on the Dragon Age Origins, and Bioware's own highly regarded reputation are the only reasons this game is getting reviews over 80% range.

[Gatt9]

Ashr4m wrote...

I think the user-scores are perfectly normal, they are emotional respones from dissapointed gamers while the "professional"-reviews are not actually paid off but forced not to give low scores or do give high scores due to contracts (for example reviewers with "exclusive" reviews most likely signeda contracts like "you hereby accept to not give the game a score bewlow xy"). Not to mention that professional reviews should be interpreted right. When the lowest score given by those reviewers is for example 70, obviously 80 is medicore at best. Not to mention that someone giving any game a score of 100 is simply ... (i think this is pretty funny actually they started years ago with 1-100 the more companys complained the better the scores got, yet actually they didnt they just set 70 the new 0, which is pretty funny cause nowadays <80 means bad, 95 means great.

So for me when i want to know if a game is good i read professional reviews and user reviews, some may be very agressive with 0 points etc. still when you read them you can see what aspects the useres found bad and you will probably know if you care about those. And in the end i guess the best thing to do is to just take user score, ad it to the "professional" score and and divide it 2, you will most likely get a nice number. Even though most people who dislake a game give too low a score, people who like it do the same, yet when you just take the average you get reasonable results.

Yet i find it rather strange that there are still people that try to blame those scores on "raids". Just because you dont agree with the score doesnt mean it was manipulated. For me its pretty obvious, lots of people where dissapointed because they expected to get a real DAO sequel, yet they got a more action oriented cinematic RPG whis is also fine but still has a different target-audience.

That's pretty much it,  as diversity decreases in a media consuming population,  fans of the niches start to get unhappy that they cannot get their preferred genres.  When the producers of the media make claims like "The market has evolved and people need to go with it!" as an excuse,  it irritates the losing populations.  When those producers go a step further,  and take the niche's IP's to convert them to "Mass market",  fans start getting really ticked off.

It makes matters worse when you have studios like Bethseda who mock the fans of the "Non-mainstream gameplay",  and media outlets that do the same.  Accompanied by obviously false statements of "(Type of game X) doesn't sell any more!",  despite it taking 10 seconds to disprove.

So basically,  right now,  unless you're an FPS/TPS/RTS only gamer,  you've been pretty much shoved out of the industry.  Emotions are starting to run high,  and you get the messes that DA2 and Fallout 3 were.

You've gotta keep in mind,  most of the people running the industry started when it was something high-caliber buisness professionals didn't do.  Those guys went to work at IBM,  Pepsi,  Disney,  etc.  The Gaming Industry didn't get those people.  So TBH,  many of them don't have a clue how to run an industry.  They're just trying to get the next Blockbuster,  rather than diversifying into a healthy market like Hollywood runs.  Since a few FPS/TPS/RTS sold really well,  those are "The only games that sell" because they happened to sell the most.  Not for any valid reason. 

Now we have gamer fatigue from every game being a mirror image of the last,  and a crap ton of "Lost" customers because the industry abandoned them.  It's not going to end well. 

As far as the raids go,  that's simple.  Someone made the claim that was what was happening,  then Bioware made the claim,  and herd mentality kicked in.  People inherently have a problem with being "Wrong",  Since people who like the game don't want to admit they might be the exception,  because they perceive it as being "Wrong",  they latch onto the idea of "Raids" as a justification so they can convince themselves that the game is actually perfect.  It's pretty normal psychological behavior.

[vhatever]

Anyone who follows gaming and has used metacritic knows there is a collective effort by a large portion of people to down vote the game. There just simply is. No debate. The user score is currently worthless, as 50% of the votes are from people who probably havent even played the game, giving it 0 or 1s. A smaller yet significant portion giving it 9/10 who would fall in the "fanboy" category.

It's just utter garbage. reminds me of this last presidential ellection in the USA.

[Francofone]

inSPECTRE Shepard wrote...

JamesX wrote...

Sadly true. If this game was called Mass Effect: With Dragons, or Dragon Effect, I would have given it a 8 or 9.

Mass Dragons?

It's more like Dragon Effect: Age of Mass Appeals II

[Schneidend]

Ashr4m wrote...

Why bother with facts if one can just make things up.Stating things as fact without any prove is almost as good an argument as writing "believe me" at the end of an argument

There's an utter Storm of the Century of 0/10's going on. There's now way 100% of those are legit just like a 10/10 is dubious for pretty much any game.

[Schneidend]

Right, there's no way that any of those 0/10's aren't several instances of the same person, or people who didn't even bother playing the game.

[Galad22]

Schneidend wrote...

Right, there's no way that any of those 0/10's aren't several instances of the same person, or people who didn't even bother playing the game.

Reception for DA2 has been very lukewarm everywhere in internet, even professional reviewers like it quite lot less than they liked origins.

So why exactly do you feel that some inane conspiracy theory is more likely than people just not liking the game.

[Schneidend]

Ashr4m wrote...

I never said that, but you really seem to alter reality the way you like it, so either way almost any 0-user-score is a raid, or all are legit? Im pretty shure there are some multi-votes and some trolls, yet i think that a big part of all those votes are legit.

My original point was pointing out the obvious double-standard that people were displaying in this idea that low scores are all real and deserved but high scores are manipulated/fake. If you weren't addressing my original post, why did you quote it?

[moilami]

Schneidend wrote...

Ashr4m wrote...

I never said that, but you really seem to alter reality the way you like it, so either way almost any 0-user-score is a raid, or all are legit? Im pretty shure there are some multi-votes and some trolls, yet i think that a big part of all those votes are legit.

My original point was pointing out the obvious double-standard that people were displaying in this idea that low scores are all real and deserved but high scores are manipulated/fake. If you weren't addressing my original post, why did you quote it?

Obvious?

It is not so obvious. I might bet that those who hate the game are gonna hate it enough to not play it or be very pissed while playing, thus making low rating rating they possibly give very honest. But how honest are those 10 ratings "this game is so awesome the best evah me loves :wub:". Will they play it anymore even next year - like BG lovers who play the game 10 years after?

[J-Nice]

inSPECTRE Shepard wrote...

JamesX wrote...

Sadly true. If this game was called Mass Effect: With Dragons, or Dragon Effect, I would have given it a 8 or 9.

Mass Dragons?

I would definitely play Mass Dragons!

[EccentricSage]

Honestly, people need to take things like metacritic and 4chan for what they are. Blaming 4chan is like blaming free will and chaos.

I'm glad that I have seen devs expressing interest in what the fans think went wrong with 2. That's the constructive way to deal with the backlash they are seeing from some fans. What does one expect, releasing a sequel, with only one year of development, at $60? 

If this were Dragon Age: Rise of the Hero or some such, and priced at $30, I think the backlash would have been less severe, and the knowledge taken from criticism could have been applied to the next Dragon Age game, with hopefully a longer development process and less derpy looking elves.

Hell, a lot of the /v/ threads I've seen weren't really unreasonable. There were a lot of people explaining what they disliked and what they liked, as well as long threads discussing the plot. It's not hivemind.

Modifié par EccentricSage, 17 mars 2011 - 06:15 .

[lsdiskewl]

The Escapist review is the pinnacle of shilling. Not only did the review outright LIE about auto-attack being in game, it offered no critique of anything. It in essence called it the best RPG of all time!

Compare The Escapist review to Edges...which one is more accurate. Which one correlates with the user score?

[ink07]

It is the ecosystem that is wrong. In gaming "journalism" you get more access, money and hits the more praise you give to certain games. Publishers have too much power over reviewers, who instead of being 'professionals' as you say, are just regular fanboys/manbabies with louder voices than the lay gamer. It gets funnier, as reviewers have -collectively- a great power over metacritic, which lately looks as it is almost the only measure of success a publisher wants to pay attention to. Bonuses for development teams and marketing money -amongst other things- are given according to this rating.

Also, publishers can hand-pick reviewers and fly them half-way across the country (or sometimes the world) to luxurious locations or hotels where they preview the games under special conditions. (Not EA in particular, but many do this) Through PR departments they get tons of goodies alongside the early copies or review builds and are invited to special launch parties, etc.

This is just marketing of course, and shouldn't influence the guys reviewing the products, but when these guys are not professional journalists, but enthusiasts who most of the times got into this through their own fansites, well, there is an expected outcome.

Publishers can also put an embargo on reviews under certain number (usually 9 or 8.5) so your review won't appear in metacritic until after the launch date, when people have already preordered or rushed to the stores after reading previews that are nothing but praise. This is why blind preorders are being pushed through myriads of pre-order bonuses in every retail chain you can imagine. EA and Bioware are specially guilty of this one. Of course, if you break the embargo, say goodbye to your early access privileges.

A site putting up an early review (with a 9 or a 10 of course) will get tons more hits than the one that puts up a late review, no contest. In some cases, a site which uses a five-star rating system won't even get review copies because the second best grade they award is an 4/5 -which translates to an 8- an undesirable number for any AAA heavily marketed product. (the case of giant bomb*)

There is no surprise then, that when accessing the DA 2 official page you are bombarded with these reviews. And its very obvious -if you notice- only the grades of certain sites are shown (specially not very well known or important sites) and in the case of important sites like IGN, only the praise is shown, but not the 8.0 that accompanies that praise.

By not giving some sites early review access, they are avoiding the number coming up in metacritic until after release day. I wouldn't go as far as to say that publishers bribe reviewers or buy ratings, it's not as simple as that, but gaming sites rely heavily on marketing dollars from big publishers, the more access to early information, the more hits they receive from the respective fanbases, so the more publicity spots they can sell in their site, and so on and so forth. Big publishers will avoid a big marketing push on a site that doesn't make them look as good.

It is a very shady bussiness, but is it that, and for us consumers it is only , or mainly, pure entertainment, thats why we are invested in different ways.

The problem is that this ecosystem is so interdependant, neither the publishers nor the gaming sites are willing enough to change their practices, when millions of dollars involved and a single 7.5 metacritic rating can mean tha value of your shares take a hit of 20% (see THQ).
_____________________________

*I mentioned Giant Bomb because being a site that doesn't rely on gaming publicity, but on original content for their revenue, it is seen as risky approaching them too much and expecting good praise.

Ask Bioware (or EA in this case) why after advertising a couple of times with them through their site and podcast, they didn't even send them an early review copy. Too scared of that 8?

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

I haven't played the game all the way through and likely never will just because I've seen all I feel I need to see of it. I would probably give it a 5.5 to a 6 out of 10. If it was a stand alone game I might give it a 7 but alot of the disappointment for me was the fact that it was obviously rushed and excluded alot of features I actually enjoyed about DA:O. A sequel usually doesn't take away from a successful formula and try to remake itself. BG did it correctly by adding to what made it successful in the first game and taking away very little in the second. It also didn't try to cater to a different audience, which mellowed the play mechanics and character customization aspects of DA:O.

[Ryllen Laerth Kriel]

J-Nice wrote...

inSPECTRE Shepard wrote...

JamesX wrote...

Sadly true. If this game was called Mass Effect: With Dragons, or Dragon Effect, I would have given it a 8 or 9.

Mass Dragons?

I would definitely play Mass Dragons!

But would you play a game called Age Effects? It could be about Flemmeth's breasts sagging of the centuries of her life.

[Whispre]

mcha82 wrote...

Let's be honest here. If this game wasn't made by Bioware it would be getting a 5/10 on most review sites. The successes built on the Dragon Age Origins, and Bioware's own highly regarded reputation are the only reasons this game is getting reviews over 80% range.

Being honest, I think you're way off base.

I would give this game a 8-9/10 because I love it. I'm on my third play through at this point and enjoying every minute. I just don't spend all my time on the forums griping (seeking attention) because I like it. I bet most people who play this game haven't come near the forums, and are skewed much more heavily towards liking it than those who come here to gripe.