261 réponses à ce sujet

[Alex Kershaw]

Faust1979 wrote...

 The OP is wrong Sonic Chronicles has gotten lower ratings than some of their previous games. 

OP mentioned that and previous poster did not notice it. OP finds it a pretty poor excuse to bring up a casual handheld game that is completely different to every other game Bioware has ever made, but is happy to accept that it is their lowest ranked RPG instead.

[Faust1979]

Alex Kershaw wrote...

Faust1979 wrote...

 The OP is wrong Sonic Chronicles has gotten lower ratings than some of their previous games. 

OP mentioned that and previous poster did not notice it. OP finds it a pretty poor excuse to bring up a casual handheld game that is completely different to every other game Bioware has ever made, but is happy to accept that it is their lowest ranked RPG instead.

also I just found out that Shattered steel got a 6.8 on gamespot and has had several medicore reviews so that would also count. He did say lowest rated Bioware game ever 

[Faust1979]

Alex Kershaw wrote...

'Tis true. Here's the list of Bioware games with their metacritic score:

(I didn't include that Sonic DS game because it's a handheld nor Shattered Steel from 1996 as no reviews are available)

(multi-platform games were given their highest score)

Mass Effect 2 (2010) - 96
Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn (2000) - 95
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic (2003 )- 93
Baldur's Gate (1998) - 91
Neverwinter Nights (2002) - 91
Mass Effect (2007) - 91
Dragon Age: Origins (2009) - 91
Jade Empire (2005) - 89
MDK2 (2000) - 83
Dragon Age II (2011) - 82

Why fix what isn't broken, Bioware?   

you must not have looked very hard for reviews of Shattered steel because there is one on gamespot which gives it a 6.8

[Alex Kershaw]

Faust1979 wrote...

Alex Kershaw wrote...

Faust1979 wrote...

 The OP is wrong Sonic Chronicles has gotten lower ratings than some of their previous games. 

OP mentioned that and previous poster did not notice it. OP finds it a pretty poor excuse to bring up a casual handheld game that is completely different to every other game Bioware has ever made, but is happy to accept that it is their lowest ranked RPG instead.

also I just found out that Shattered steel got a 6.8 on gamespot and has had several medicore reviews so that would also count. He did say lowest rated Bioware game ever 

This game is about Metacritic and Shattered Steel isn't on there. Also, are we so desperate that we have to bring up a game from 1996 - the first game the company ever made?

[Faust1979]

Alex Kershaw wrote...

Faust1979 wrote...

Alex Kershaw wrote...

Faust1979 wrote...

 The OP is wrong Sonic Chronicles has gotten lower ratings than some of their previous games. 

OP mentioned that and previous poster did not notice it. OP finds it a pretty poor excuse to bring up a casual handheld game that is completely different to every other game Bioware has ever made, but is happy to accept that it is their lowest ranked RPG instead.

also I just found out that Shattered steel got a 6.8 on gamespot and has had several medicore reviews so that would also count. He did say lowest rated Bioware game ever 

This game is about Metacritic and Shattered Steel isn't on there. Also, are we so desperate that we have to bring up a game from 1996 - the first game the company ever made?

you said it right in your opening statement Lowest rated game EVER so therefor you must include all Bioware games and do your homework to try and make a valid argument, so you must include all games from their library like as you said lowest rated game EVER

[DarthCaine]

Alex Kershaw wrote...

Why fix what isn't broken, Bioware?   

You think they didn't know that DA2 won't be liked? They cut corners and rushed it just to cash in on DAO's success. All they care about it is how much it sells and DA2 WILL sell well due to Origins.

All the changes were made so it could be released sooner with a smaller budget, nothing else

Modifié par DarthCaine, 22 mars 2011 - 06:47 .

[Phwrobel]

dIRECT0R wrote...

OMG they ruined the Qunari.. Of all the moronic dumbing-down changes this was the worst. I mean they almost completely ruined the glorious feel the game had, its just barely holding on.

As for the Qunari its obvious someone imagined them, an original, interesting race I really looked forward to learning about (I mean Sten was probably right up there alongside Morrigan as one of the most interesting Origins characters), and then some IDIOT decided his "vision" is more accurate. Someone who really, really likes horns for some weird Freudian reason.

Personally, I felt the change in design was welcome as it made them more distinct. Other than being slightly larger than the other character models in DA:O, what marked Sten from being out of the ordinary was skin pigmentation and that he had dreadlocks yet was referred to as an entirely different race. Although I do agree with you that the armour for the Qunari wasn't to my liking. However, I really liked the look of the Arishok.

dIRECT0R wrote...Probably the same guy who turned Flemmeth into a hair-horned fashion queen that for some reason wears armour only on her hands and legs - something so incredibly stupid I've never even seen it in any RPG, anywhere.

You must not have played many rpgs. You can go back as far as original D&D pen and paper and you'll see hundreds, if not thousands of examples of "chainmail bikinis" and other even sillier things. Heck, you could go back to the Conan serials and see much of the same thing. Having metal gauntlets and leg greaves is not exactly out of the ordinary. One of the stereotypical images of a ninja would wear that. Also consider that Flemeth is wearing a thick leather bodice and supplements protection with the gauntlets and greaves.

BioWare gave this project into the hands of some people who have NO idea what a fantasy RPG is about. I don't know what happened in BioWare, but there was clearly one intelligence behind their original conception, and another.. "intelligence" behind the butchering of the concept. I mean such cheapness is everywhere today, but to see it so cruelly implemented on one of the best RPGs in modern gaming history is... physically painful. Hope they come to their senses in DA3, or else Bethesda's grand return to the fantasy RPG genre will simply blow them away in terms of quality. Skyrim is liable to be better even than DA1, let alone the dumbed-down version. The number of top-notch RPG series just went down from 2 to 1. I mean, the game is "good" I guess, its just not up there anymore.

Personally, I don't care for Bethesda's style of rpg which is essentially a sand box game with poor dialog barring Patrick Stewart's 5-10 minutes worth of voicework, 1st person shooter perspective, uninteresting characters and yawn inducing plot. You see, everyone can use loaded language to convey their personal fiat or contempt.

Sure you could argue that DA2 plot fails in that the main plot wasn't obvious, but the main story was how did the Champion become earn his title and followed by his role in what turns out to be the catalyst to Chantry vs Mage war (and likely DA:3 plot).

Personally, I view DA:2 as an experiment and that Bioware took a lot of risks by not only trying to move to a more action-rpg style but also for plot structure. Most of the criticism appears aimed at this change in style. THe experience is different and I for one welcome it rather than just treading the same water ad nauseum. I'd say the valid criticism is that they reused the numerous maps, made the interface too futuristic in feel, and made the gore effects so absurd as you'd expect you were in a slasher movie. Had those all been caught during development cycle, or even patched later on through map packs, objective scores on the game would be much higher. As it stands, DA:2 has a tough act to follow as people wanted DA:Origins+1 and Bioware may not have gone out of their way enough to explain to people that DA:2 wasn't going to be that. Had they removed the 2, implying it as a sequel and rather gone say the Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance route it would have been more welcomed by the spurned fandom.

[WalterSobchack]

dIRECT0R wrote...

Personally, I don't care for Bethesda's style of rpg which is essentially a sand box game with poor dialog barring Patrick Stewart's 5-10 minutes worth of voicework, 1st person shooter perspective, uninteresting characters and yawn inducing plot. You see, everyone can use loaded language to convey their personal fiat or contempt.

Sure you could argue that DA2 plot fails in that the main plot wasn't obvious, but the main story was how did the Champion become earn his title and followed by his role in what turns out to be the catalyst to Chantry vs Mage war (and likely DA:3 plot).

Personally, I view DA:2 as an experiment and that Bioware took a lot of risks by not only trying to move to a more action-rpg style but also for plot structure. Most of the criticism appears aimed at this change in style. THe experience is different and I for one welcome it rather than just treading the same water ad nauseum. I'd say the valid criticism is that they reused the numerous maps, made the interface too futuristic in feel, and made the gore effects so absurd as you'd expect you were in a slasher movie. Had those all been caught during development cycle, or even patched later on through map packs, objective scores on the game would be much higher. As it stands, DA:2 has a tough act to follow as people wanted DA:Origins+1 and Bioware may not have gone out of their way enough to explain to people that DA:2 wasn't going to be that. Had they removed the 2, implying it as a sequel and rather gone say the Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance route it would have been more welcomed by the spurned fandom.

Except that Bioware is treading the same water ad nauseam. The risk-taking style you refer to is clearly used in Mass Effect, and this is plain and obvious.  The only risk they took was that console gamers, which this game objectively appeals to, would lap up the fantasy RPG setting as much as the sci-fi RPG setting.  It goes beyond a mere branding failure in putting the "2" after DA: they didn't even bring anything truly new to the table in terms of design or mechanics that hadn't been tried before, and then did a merely average job of executing it on top of that.

Yeah, when gamers are asked to pony up another $60, I think they deserve more than that whether it's a true sequel or not.

[JoshPloof]

etherhonky wrote...

the main problem with DA2 is that people can't discern the difference between "dislike" and "bad game".

theres a HUGE difference.

the game is not bad because MANY people are loving it, including myself. so it must be that many people just dislike it, i wonder why they assume its a bad game just because "they" don't like it?

people want to impose their opinions of DA2 for some reason, but DA2 is biowares "album". its their reflection of creativity, story and expression. is their art. they are not wrong for showing us what happens in kirkwall when the hawkes come back to roost.

its already been stated that dragon age's main protagonist/antagonist is Thedas. were seeing a section of the world with a magnifying glass. social turmoil, monster conflict, power upheavals in the various high positions of kirkwall... its all very interesting.

to me, kirkwall is a great microcosm of thedas to explore how a city thrives and exists in the age of dragons. people are only seeing what happens to dragon age when you take away stuff like high camera angles, armor for NPCs etc...

theyre totally missing the grand picture...

Maybe it's just a bad game and you and everyone else are enjoying a bad game.

[AtreiyaN7]

Boohoo, an 82 - it's totally killing me inside.

*sarcasm to the infinite power*

[Savber100]

Good.

That means Bioware will perk up and listen to fans WHY it got rated so low. ;P

Well.. I hope so anyways.

[Korusus]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Boohoo, an 82 - it's totally killing me inside.

*sarcasm to the infinite power*

It's a 79 on gamerankings.com.... just sayin.

[CRISIS1717]

lol people don't seem to understand the Metacritic ratings are a big deal, if this goes into the 70s we could see what happened to THQ happening to Bioware.

[Johnsen1972]

It's sad to see the facts. I only didnt play Jade Empire on the list.
Played all other games and I must say DA2 is the worst Bioware game I ever played.

[bjdbwea]

Since 96/100 is a completely laughable score for ME 2, that list seems to be quite useless. Not that this would make DA 2 any better. It's a bit funny though that the same sort of changes that were praised so much in ME 2, are suddenly criticized in DA 2.

[Johnsen1972]

Well ME2 was a great game but in my humble opinion KOTOR and BG2 have been better games.

Modifié par Johnsen1972, 23 mars 2011 - 12:24 .

[Persephone]

Metacritic does not matter whatsoever.

[ad1dash0lm3s]

Korusus wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Boohoo, an 82 - it's totally killing me inside.

*sarcasm to the infinite power*

It's a 79 on gamerankings.com.... just sayin.

It still shouldn't matter. Oooh, this game only has a 79, it sucks. No, it is personal opinion on the game, it shouldn't be distuinguished as a bad game because of it's rating. I am sorry if you weren't trying to sound like someone who believes a game is as good as it's rating. It is just how I took your comment.

[WalterSobchack]

Persephone wrote...

Metacritic does not matter whatsoever.

Funny, the lead dev on DA2 said that ME2's aggregate review score definitely influenced them in importing ME2 design decisions into DA2.

Maybe if DA2 gets a mediocre score, some future dev might consider not making the same mistakes.

[Persephone]

WalterSobchack wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Metacritic does not matter whatsoever.

Funny, the lead dev on DA2 said that ME2's aggregate review score definitely influenced them in importing ME2 design decisions into DA2.

Maybe if DA2 gets a mediocre score, some future dev might consider not making the same mistakes.

Good for him and personally I am glad they made most of these changes. So sue me.

[WalterSobchack]

Persephone wrote...

WalterSobchack wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Metacritic does not matter whatsoever.

Funny, the lead dev on DA2 said that ME2's aggregate review score definitely influenced them in importing ME2 design decisions into DA2.

Maybe if DA2 gets a mediocre score, some future dev might consider not making the same mistakes.

Ah yes, the refuge of the fanboy: Metacritic doesn't matter...except when it does matter in a way that I like.

Good for him and personally I am glad they made most of these changes. So sue me.

[Korusus]

ad1dash0lm3s wrote...

Korusus wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Boohoo, an 82 - it's totally killing me inside.

*sarcasm to the infinite power*

It's a 79 on gamerankings.com.... just sayin.

It still shouldn't matter. Oooh, this game only has a 79, it sucks. No, it is personal opinion on the game, it shouldn't be distuinguished as a bad game because of it's rating. I am sorry if you weren't trying to sound like someone who believes a game is as good as it's rating. It is just how I took your comment.

I don't think individual ratings matter (for example the PCGamer 94 rating was bizarre but the reviewer's opinion in the end).  I do think aggregate ratings matter.  It's not "Oh a 79 must mean the game sucks!"  It's more like "Hmm, a 79...that's unusually low for BioWare...maybe there's something to that?"

It's a trend, not a declaration.

Essentially we're referring to DA2 as a statistical outlier.  The only way to easily show that is with aggregate ratings.

Modifié par Korusus, 23 mars 2011 - 01:03 .

[Persephone]

WalterSobchack wrote...

Ah yes, the refuge of the fanboy: Metacritic doesn't matter...except when it does matter in a way that I like.

If you must insult me like a child: It's fanGIRL.

[astrallite]

bjdbwea wrote...

Since 96/100 is a completely laughable score for ME 2, that list seems to be quite useless. Not that this would make DA 2 any better. It's a bit funny though that the same sort of changes that were praised so much in ME 2, are suddenly criticized in DA 2.

Maybe because the purpose of ME2 was to be a more cinematic experience, and DA2 is a cutscene heavy game that would least be described as cinematic.

[Alex Kershaw]

bjdbwea wrote...

Since 96/100 is a completely laughable score for ME 2, that list seems to be quite useless. Not that this would make DA 2 any better. It's a bit funny though that the same sort of changes that were praised so much in ME 2, are suddenly criticized in DA 2.

Why is 96/100 laughable? Just because YOU didn't enjoy a particular game doesn't immediately make your opinion the only valid one. Perhaps you need to accept that everybody has different opinions, but when you average them, Mass Effect 2 was 96/100. It's fine to disagree with the majority but it isn't fine to disagree with the majority and then claim that you are right, and everybody else is wrong.

For the record, that 96/100 is the average of 98 critics. The user score is 9/10 based on 1768 ratings.

And I find it amusing that you think people are ganging up on DA2 for no reason. As if they all decided to love Mass Effect 2, but secretly loved DA2 too but decided to give it criticism. You honestly think this? You really think they loved the ME2 influence but decided to say otherwise? Why would they do this? If they actually liked the game, they wouldn't criticise it in hopof it being changed. People are saying they don't like the game because they don't like the game. If you want to elborate on these ME2 changes, please do so...

Modifié par Alex Kershaw, 23 mars 2011 - 12:48 .