458 réponses à ce sujet

[Johnny20]

Yeah, it did feel more like a side-story, didn't it?

You know, if this was developed by someone else, as a quick spin-off cash-in, I'd almost forgive the game for being bad. I wish that was the case come to think of it, due to the fact we would still have Dragon Age 2 to look forward to and we also got ourselves a very flawed, yet occasionally enjoyable game with some new lore.

A nice thought... until you remember it isn't true.

[ginzaen]

FedericoV wrote...

RohanD wrote...

 http://www.gamecriti...n-age-ii-review
Many are praising Brad's honesty and integrity. I agree with them. 

Discuss.

EDIT: READ THE WHOLE REVIEW before posting. Don't just look at the score and fanboy flame it. 

I've read the review and the men's a joke. Read his review of Origins:

http://www.gamecriti...-origins-review

Not as negative but it wasn't positive too. He asked changes to the combat to make the experience better on the consolles... and then he is suprprised because they have taken the action route? Do he knows that an RTS do not play well with a controller? He should have played DA:O with a PC if he loved so much the old combat system. Screw himself.

Well said.

[ginzaen]

BobSmith101 wrote...

This was posted much eariler in the other forum. When I read it I was thinking 25% is kind of harsh. Then it got me thinking about some of the higher rated reviews and how the scores don't seem to match up with the text either. Maybe the guy is trying to make a point here, after all the higher reviews are only there for the purpose of a score and tagline, the majority of what is said does not matter.
It's still a lot more credible than the escaptist, or PCgamer because no one in their right mind, even most of the people here feel the game is worth a 9 or 10.

2 wrongs don't make a right from my point of view even if you are  saying it evens the score overall- reviewers should be consisant and fair- like some said some of the stuff he said was valid but some was also rubbish.i agree the game doesn't deserve a 9 or 10 but it definately doesn't deserver a 2.5 either

[AkiKishi]

ginzaen wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

This was posted much eariler in the other forum. When I read it I was thinking 25% is kind of harsh. Then it got me thinking about some of the higher rated reviews and how the scores don't seem to match up with the text either. Maybe the guy is trying to make a point here, after all the higher reviews are only there for the purpose of a score and tagline, the majority of what is said does not matter.
It's still a lot more credible than the escaptist, or PCgamer because no one in their right mind, even most of the people here feel the game is worth a 9 or 10.

2 wrongs don't make a right from my point of view even if you are  saying it evens the score overall- reviewers should be consisant and fair- like some said some of the stuff he said was valid but some was also rubbish.i agree the game doesn't deserve a 9 or 10 but it definately doesn't deserver a 2.5 either

That's kind of the point of metacritic though, by taking the reviews statistically you get quite a clear view of how a game is received overall, rather than just spikes.
We both agree that the 25% and the 10/10 are wrong , But the actual meta critic score is much closer to a representative score.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 24 mars 2011 - 01:23 .

[hudweiser]

A lot of what this guy said is pretty much dead on. I was a bit disappointed with this game as a sequel to Origins but despite its flaws I still enjoyed it. And that is really all that matters.

[ginzaen]

hudweiser wrote...

A lot of what this guy said is pretty much dead on. I was a bit disappointed with this game as a sequel to Origins but despite its flaws I still enjoyed it. And that is really all that matters.

you are correct- thanks for that back to playing it rather then being on forums.:innocent:

Modifié par ginzaen, 24 mars 2011 - 01:32 .

[arathor_87]

Don't look at the score, look at the opinions. I think he gave DA2 2.5/10 compared to DA:O. He want to show that this is not what DA is about.

I agree with him on almost every point, except one. The score is to high..I mean low. I's a 6-6.5. Not a disaster but neither a masterpiece as DA:O and ME..

[Vajraja]

I agree with the review, but like many here not with the score. HOWEVER, I think this would be a good wake up call to Bioware to re-evaluate.

As it stands I'm not investing anymore time or money in DA2. But am excited about ME3 and the DLC for it coming next week. Keeping my fingers crossed that franchise stays true to it's roots.

[Ilistria]

Although I would agree with some of the reviewers comments to do with recyling of locations which does reduce replay value to the game, I would tend to disagree with many of his other opinions, I enjoyed the story more than DA:O, I enjoyed the characters you teamed up with, loved the combat and overall very much enjoyed the 40 hours it took me to finish on first play through, so much so that I started a new game straight after the first.

I very much feel DA: 2 is one of those games you either love or hate, the reviewer clearly hated it, but should as a reviewer been more objective in giving a more unbiased review of the game, but then again I rarely read reviews from professional game reviewers, I much prefer to see comments from real players that play the game for fun, not as a paid job.

[Moirnelithe]

arathor_87 wrote...

Don't look at the score, look at the opinions. I think he gave DA2 2.5/10 compared to DA:O. He want to show that this is not what DA is about.

I agree with him on almost every point, except one. The score is to high..I mean low. I's a 6-6.5. Not a disaster but neither a masterpiece as DA:O and ME..

This. I hope Bioware learns from it. A 2.5/10 is too low, it was still a decently running game. Personally I'd give it a 6/10. I liked the original mage/templar/qunari conflict plot and I think Bioware should get some credit for that. Still, the magazines that gave a 9/10 can't be taken seriously anymore. I don't think they're giving fair reviews. I'm starting to wonder if they're afraid they won't get exclusive reviews if they don't give a 9/10. The person that gave the 2.5/10 had to buy the game himself. Which makes the review have much more credibility in my opinion.

[Rockpopple]

That review was an emberassment.

What's more hilarious, this guy is a professional reviewer. He gets paid to review games.

So when the Haters see a professional reviewer give the game good scores, it's "Oh you can't trust professional reviewers! They're all bought! They're liars! They're doing it for the money!"

But when THIS professional reviewer gives the game 2.5/10, those same ****** Haters suddenly go "Well this was a well written and insightful review that's honest and more trustworthy than the other reviewers out there."

It's so shallow on it's face it's laughable. The Haters are like Conspiracy theory - everything they see, even things that are contrary to their beliefs - are proof that they're right.

You can't rationalize with these people. Logic has no place in their system of beliefs.

This reviewer saw where things were going on Metacritic and decided to write some ham-fisted half-assed joke of a review to appeal to the Metacrowd.

Good for him. I saw plenty of comments on that site from people saying they're never going to read any of his reviews again.

Joke.

[Marionetten]

To those saying that 2.5 is far too low and that the review shouldn't be taken as credible because of it... how exactly is awarding the game 8/10 or 9/10 like most professional reviewers are doing any better?

Dragon Age II certainly isn't a 2.5. But it sure as hell doesn't deserve the many lofty scores it has received either. As always, the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Rockpopple wrote...

You can't rationalize with these people. Logic has no place in their system of beliefs.

The funny thing here is that the exact same thing applies to fanboys. The very same fanboys now bashing this guy.

Modifié par Marionetten, 24 mars 2011 - 02:36 .

[Beerfish]

Marionetten wrote...

To those saying that 2.5 is far too low and that the review shouldn't be taken as credible because of it... how exactly is awarding the game 8/10 or 9/10 like most professional reviewers are doing any better?

Dragon Age II certainly isn't a 2.5. But it sure as hell doesn't deserve the many lofty scores it has received either. As always, the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Rockpopple wrote...

You can't rationalize with these people. Logic has no place in their system of beliefs.

The funny thing here is that the exact same thing applies to fanboys. The very same fanboys now bashing this guy.

Somewhere in between leaves a lot of leeway if you split the difference and say it was a 5.5 that would be far too low.

Like a lot of things in life people use reviews to justify or match what they have already decided by playing the game.  Once I get a game in my hand reviews are meanginless because I'm the one that is going to judge how good of a game it is.  Reviews and previews rarely have a huge impact on anything I do or how I think of a game. 

Also reviews to be really meaningful need to change the way things are evaluated because using scores on varuious aspects of the game are misleading in how a person views a game as a whole.

[AkiKishi]

Marionetten wrote...

To those saying that 2.5 is far too low and that the review shouldn't be taken as credible because of it... how exactly is awarding the game 8/10 or 9/10 like most professional reviewers are doing any better?

Dragon Age II certainly isn't a 2.5. But it sure as hell doesn't deserve the many lofty scores it has received either. As always, the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Rockpopple wrote...

You can't rationalize with these people. Logic has no place in their system of beliefs.

The funny thing here is that the exact same thing applies to fanboys. The very same fanboys now bashing this guy.

As I said before this is why you need meta critic to balance out the different opinions statistically.

You look at Metacritic and you can see right away something is very wrong with DA2 compared to other Bioware games.

[Marionetten]

Beerfish wrote...

Somewhere in between leaves a lot of leeway if you split the difference and say it was a 5.5 that would be far too low.

Not if you use the whole scale. But of course, nobody does that today. Anything which doesn't get 8/10 or 9/10 is instantly considered a flop.

Dragon Age II is mediocre for a BioWare game. It's not great but it's certainly not awful. It has a lot of things going for it like the family dynamic and the cinematic presentation. It also has a lot of things going against it like the recycling of assets and the threadbare main plot. As said, if you look at the fanboys and the haters you will notice a pattern in their behavior. Now look somewhere in between for sensible discourse.

[Zhijn]

Rockpopple wrote...

That review was an emberassment.

What's more hilarious, this guy is a professional reviewer. He gets paid to review games.

So when the Haters see a professional reviewer give the game good scores, it's "Oh you can't trust professional reviewers! They're all bought! They're liars! They're doing it for the money!"

But when THIS professional reviewer gives the game 2.5/10, those same ****** Haters suddenly go "Well this was a well written and insightful review that's honest and more trustworthy than the other reviewers out there."

It's so shallow on it's face it's laughable. The Haters are like Conspiracy theory - everything they see, even things that are contrary to their beliefs - are proof that they're right.

You can't rationalize with these people. Logic has no place in their system of beliefs.

This reviewer saw where things were going on Metacritic and decided to write some ham-fisted half-assed joke of a review to appeal to the Metacrowd.

Good for him. I saw plenty of comments on that site from people saying they're never going to read any of his reviews again.

Joke.

So that would make "the lovers" naive and gullible?.
What you said can easily be said for anyone praising and handing out 8's and 9's, even 10's.

I dont agree with this low score, but then again i dont really care about a score in general. It is what the review say that hits the sore spot. And does so with a great fury, hate or love it- this is what this reviewer feels along with alot of disappointed rpg gamers.

I dont even know who this reviewer is, never heard of him. But i agree alot with his review, what was to be some epic rpg adventure is now a medicore hack n' slash with little story or care for any character, and a hole lot of exploding corpses. Oooh dont get me wrong, certain parts of DA2 has its charm, but just not enough.

To be honest i expected much more from Dragon Age 2, it has such a rich lore and areas to expand on. But it all just got ripped apart and thrown into a mainstream garbage container that would go on and on for a good 25-30 hours of recycled areas.

[Awildawn]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Marionetten wrote...

To those saying that 2.5 is far too low and that the review shouldn't be taken as credible because of it... how exactly is awarding the game 8/10 or 9/10 like most professional reviewers are doing any better?

Dragon Age II certainly isn't a 2.5. But it sure as hell doesn't deserve the many lofty scores it has received either. As always, the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Rockpopple wrote...

You can't rationalize with these people. Logic has no place in their system of beliefs.

The funny thing here is that the exact same thing applies to fanboys. The very same fanboys now bashing this guy.

As I said before this is why you need meta critic to balance out the different opinions statistically.

You look at Metacritic and you can see right away something is very wrong with DA2 compared to other Bioware games.

I hope you don't include user scores since there was a lot of haters, fanboys wars on this site. As  for the review score, 82 basically means : good try but could have done better in today's reviewers notations. I would agree with this but the game has been realized in a ridiculously short amount of time so I would rather say : "incredible work by the developers but the game would still have needed another 6 months to be at the level of previous Bioware masterpieces".

[Rockpopple]

BobSmith101 wrote...

[/b]You look at Metacritic and you can see right away something is very wrong with DA2 compared to other Bioware games.

You seem very hung up on Metacritic. I find that very odd.

They're not the only website that allows for user reviews, and no - not all of the other sites that do allow for User reviews toss out garbage reviews like 0s and 1s. But they do make you register with an email address.

So the question is, why do you discard ALL of the other user review sites (All of which have user reviews MUCH higher for Dragon Age II than Metacritic does) and only pay attention to Metacritic?

Only you know the answer to that one, but if I were to hazard a guess, I'd say it's simply a case of cherry-picking on your part.

You agree with Metacritic's user-reviews' opinion on this game - therefore Metacritic is the only user-review website that counts. You disagree with other user-review sites opinion on this game - therefore they don't count.


It's simplistic, but that's not how things are done rationally, but like I said, people who think that way aren't being rational.

Modifié par Rockpopple, 24 mars 2011 - 03:06 .

[AkiKishi]

Rockpopple wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

[/b]You look at Metacritic and you can see right away something is very wrong with DA2 compared to other Bioware games.

You seem very hung up on Metacritic. I find that very odd.

They're not the only website that allows for user reviews, and no - not all of the other sites that do allow for User reviews toss out garbage reviews like 0s and 1s. But they do make you register with an email address.

So the question is, why do you discard ALL of the other user review sites (All of which have user reviews MUCH higher for Dragon Age II than Metacritic does) and only pay attention to Metacritic?

Only you know the answer to that one, but if I were to hazard a guess, I'd say it's simply a case of cherry-picking on your part.

You agree with Metacritic's user-reviews' opinion on this game - therefore Metacritic is the only user-review website that counts.

That's not how things are done rationally, but like I said, people who think that way aren't being rational.

What's odd about it ? It encompasses a wide spread of reviews which makes it more statistically acurate.

The 2.5 was not a user review if that is what you are thinking.

Awildawn wrote...

I hope you don't include user scores since there was a lot of haters, fanboys wars on this site. As  for the review score, 82 basically means : good try but could have done better in today's reviewers notations. I would agree with this but the game has been realized in a ridiculously short amount of time so I would rather say : "incredible work by the developers but the game would still have needed another 6 months to be at the level of previous Bioware masterpieces"

User reviews are more personal even a 0 tells a story even if it's not representative of the game. Get a lot of 0's and it tells you that fans of the previous game are not happy.

An 82 for a AAA title is bad. Run a comparison of the scores of AAA games.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 24 mars 2011 - 03:12 .

[Rockpopple]

BobSmith101 wrote...


What's odd about it ? It encompasses a wide spread of reviews which makes it more statistically acurate.

The 2.5 was not a user review if that is what you are thinking.

Yeah, I know the 2.5 wasn't a user review.

What's odd is that you discard a huge variety of other user opinions from other websites and only pay attention to one: the one you happen to agree with.

And I don't think the word "statistics" means what you think it means.

[AkiKishi]

Rockpopple wrote...
Yeah, I know the 2.5 wasn't a user review.

What's odd is that you discard a huge variety of other user opinions from other websites and only pay attention to one: the one you happen to agree with.

And I don't think the word "statistics" means what you think it means.

Because I know other sites remove low end scores, makes them worthless.

I think it does but feel free to argue pointlessly if you so choose.

[Beerfish]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...
Yeah, I know the 2.5 wasn't a user review.

What's odd is that you discard a huge variety of other user opinions from other websites and only pay attention to one: the one you happen to agree with.

And I don't think the word "statistics" means what you think it means.

Because I know other sites remove low end scores, makes them worthless.

I think it does but feel free to argue pointlessly if you so choose.

A lot of stat models will remove low scores and high scores.  It all depends then on what the majority of scores are in a sample.  The funny thing is that some people bleat about how foolish high scores are and then feel that it is perfectly acceptable to include a ridiculously low score.

A more meaningful way to rate a game is to not only score various aspects of games but also put a weight against those categories because people do value some parts of games much more than other parts and those biases come out in their overall scores anyway.

[heathxxx]

I'd much rather see frank appraisals like that and then read between the lines, than the utter dross that the larger review sites and magazines churn out, inevitably funded by sponsors and advertisers they've no desire to upset.

It's refreshing that a reviewer is prepared to be blunt about their thoughts. Certainly the balance of the piece might be skewed, as it's not really highlighting any potential plus points of the game as such, but at least it's written as frankly as it can be, in the eyes of the author.

If nothing else, it's worthwhile reading criticism like that, to counter-balance the fawning tripe that abundantly populates most other review sites.

My own opinion?

The game is nowhere near as "great" as many review sites suggest. Neither is it as rank awful as some would say. It's "OK" or "average" at best for me. Worth pre-ordering or paying full price for? The jury is still out on that one. I've played worse games and I've played better games.

Modifié par heathxxx, 24 mars 2011 - 03:36 .

[Ahicz]

Well, not much to add really, he's spot on. The game is trash and a disgrace for a developer like Bioware.

Had it been developed by some noname team instead, other critics would have smashed it just like he did.

Modifié par Ahicz, 24 mars 2011 - 03:32 .

[Wivvix]

This review was 100% spot on. I really couldn't have said it better myself.

I've identified the reason DA2 was so bad. The lead designer, Mike Laidlaw, professed this opinion in response to criticisms about DA2.

Mike Laidlaw: Dragon Age II was designed by just the senior, core team. Honestly I don't feel it's a game that's been designed to appeal far and wide and so on. If it were, there were choices we could have made that would have taken it much, much further. We would have probably simplified down to a single character, maybe with companions; probably looked at doing some even deeper changes to inventory management, making sure that... You wouldn't want to confuse people with enchanting or anything complex like that.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-03-10-biowares-mike-laidlaw-a-defence-of-dragon-age-ii-interview

Modifié par Wivvix, 24 mars 2011 - 04:30 .