654 réponses à ce sujet

[Boiny Bunny]

jakecollette wrote...

Personally I think they will combine the good elements of both games and make an outstanding game.

As much as I would love to share in your illogical enthusiasm and excitement - I simply don't believe it will be a good game.

Interest factor: ~ 0

[tariq071]

Morroian wrote...

If you think DA2 deserved the zeros it got ............. well lets just say you're not being objective and assessing the game on its own merits. There's a reason statisticians remove the outlying scores in a sample.

Metacritic is self selected and thus prone to manipulation by those who feel most strongly. You're not getting an objective opinion of the game because those who are most objective don't vote and those who do post purely emotional reactions. Heck I love the game but I can't be bothered voting on metacritic. If the industry relies on user reviews from it then they're idiots.

It's valid more then "organized mob" claim, which was never proven(unlike case with some 10's).

Personally, I didn't gave it zero , but 4 /10 because that's how much is worth to me.I gave it extra +2 for being from BW, but then gave it -2 for false advertise.Not going to go into the rest, because it was already mentioned everywhere on the forum at least 1000+ times, but i did made it sure to explain it and not rage about it

If it's worth to you more, good for you.Still i can say i haven't find game that i misread it from users reviews on Metacritic(after reading quite a few), but i almost always had miss when i based purchase on "professional" reviews.

Either way demos and user gameplay videos are the king for making decision, at least for me.And ultimately, "4-chain"(sp?) conspiracy and "can't be bothered to rate" are  not valid excuses, sorry...

Modifié par tariq071, 23 mai 2011 - 01:24 .

[Sidney]

Morroian wrote...
Metacritic is self selected and thus prone to manipulation by those who feel most strongly. You're not getting an objective opinion of the game because those who are most objective don't vote and those who do post purely emotional reactions. Heck I love the game but I can't be bothered voting on metacritic. If the industry relies on user reviews from it then they're idiots.

Well and a swarm of the really really low grades that came in hit first few hours on day of release when no one could have any idea what was going on with the game just a lot of bitter little things that only want to play the same game over and over. Sad people.

[CitizenThom]

Yrkoon wrote...

<sigh> If the same system is used across the board for all games, then by definition, it's not "tainted" or "bias".. It's called a "measuing stick"... one that can be used to compare and measure  public  reception to a game.      And as a result,  there isn't a single gaming company in the world that doesn't intensly watch and follow metacritic poll results.

A measuring stick of a lot of things that don't necessarily have a direct corrolation to the quality of the product. The words 'measuring stick' make sense when you're talking about something quantitative, the same words make very little sense when applied to opinions of the quality of a game... a value that is in no way a constant, and a value that in no way tells us which games are good games and bad games. Everytime metacritic gets cited, sales can be cited too, and neither can tell anyone whether we individually will find a game to be of good quality or not in the end... it only lets us know if other people have.

I have no doubt that the marketing departments of gaming companies look at metacritic, but I don't imagine they stop when they see that number. Metacritic is a composite of people's varying interpretations of what makes them happy or unhappy with a game. And while that can carry over from game to game, gamers in general are not playing every single game that gets released, so there are distortions that do bias the scores in one direction for one game, and another direction for another game.

[d friendly]

I think I'll wait until the GotY edition, or similar. That way I can kill two birds with one stone. I get the reviews, and I don't have to put up with feeling nickel and dimed with DLC. Though honestly, I am skeptical that my willpower will last much longer than the first 75% off offer.

[Elhanan]

Found this while looking up info on Metacritic:

http://www.brainygam...metacritic.html

I ain't using the site anyway, but perhaps this might sway some others to gather intel elsewhere too, for some perspective.

[devSin]

20 pages in, I just want to say that IGN did not "confirm" anything. Not one single thing.

The "journalism" for this industry is a total sham.

[LyndseyCousland]

I how everyone completely missed my point in my thread. Keep on hatin', folks.

[Drachasor]

Elhanan wrote...

Found this while looking up info on Metacritic:

http://www.brainygam...metacritic.html

I ain't using the site anyway, but perhaps this might sway some others to gather intel elsewhere too, for some perspective.

Just pointing this out.  That link is about how Metacritic has problems with how it handles the reviews by Critics and only Critics.  It has nothing to do with user reviews.  IMHO, reviews by critics for games are crap anyway, so who cares?

[Zanallen]

Drachasor wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

Found this while looking up info on Metacritic:

http://www.brainygam...metacritic.html

I ain't using the site anyway, but perhaps this might sway some others to gather intel elsewhere too, for some perspective.

Just pointing this out.  That link is about how Metacritic has problems with how it handles the reviews by Critics and only Critics.  It has nothing to do with user reviews.  IMHO, reviews by critics for games are crap anyway, so who cares?

But, as we've seen, it is all too easy to troll the user reviews. There is no real regulation at all.

[Zanallen]

LyndseyCousland wrote...

I how everyone completely missed my point in my thread. Keep on hatin', folks.

No one missed your point. No, the game is not officially announced. They are looking for people to work on a number of games, one of which will probably be DA3. However, a lot of things can go wrong between now and when the game has officially started development. That being said, given Bioware's reaction to DA2's sales and the ending of said game, there is no real doubt that a third game will be made.

[Drachasor]

Zanallen wrote...

Drachasor wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

Found this while looking up info on Metacritic:

http://www.brainygam...metacritic.html

I ain't using the site anyway, but perhaps this might sway some others to gather intel elsewhere too, for some perspective.

Just pointing this out.  That link is about how Metacritic has problems with how it handles the reviews by Critics and only Critics.  It has nothing to do with user reviews.  IMHO, reviews by critics for games are crap anyway, so who cares?

But, as we've seen, it is all too easy to troll the user reviews. There is no real regulation at all.

DA2 has over 2000 reviews, it would take like 10% of them to be trolls in one direction in not another for it to have a significant impact on the overall score (and even then we're only talk about a shift of a point or so).  There's no evidence of fraudulent voting on that scale, let alone on that scale and in only one direction.  Indeed, something below 5 makes sense for a below average game -- user reviews, unlike critic reviews make use of more of the full 10-point scale.  I'll take the aggregate user review over critic reviews any day of the week.

[Zanallen]

Drachasor wrote...

DA2 has over 2000 reviews, it would take like 10% of them to be trolls in one direction in not another for it to have a significant impact on the overall score (and even then we're only talk about a shift of a point or so).  There's no evidence of fraudulent voting on that scale, let alone on that scale and in only one direction.  Indeed, something below 5 makes sense for a below average game -- user reviews, unlike critic reviews make use of more of the full 10-point scale.  I'll take the aggregate user review over critic reviews any day of the week.

Unfortunately, you also have to deal with the users that are far too "passionate" for their own good. Unless you honestly believe that DA2 deserves a 0/10?  Hell, I would argue that no game deserves a 0/10 unless it is completely unplayable. 1/10 is a stretch, honestly. It is nice that the users have full use of the 1-10 scale, however, I don't think a lot of people even care what the precentages mean. 6-7 is a mediocre game. 5 is an outright failure and anything below 5 is nigh unplayable. People who find DA2 mediocre and then rate it at a 5 or below are just plain silly. At the very least, Metacritic should have a one week waiting period for user reviews for games. That will give people the chance to actually play the damn game before they make their review and it allows time for people to form an objective critique as opposed to some nonsense fueled more by passion than by actual thought.

[Harcken]

I think Dragon Age III will be the first Bioware game that I'll look at through an extremely fine microscope. I've always given every Bioware game the benefit of the doubt, and most of the time I was correct in doing so. Dragon Age II just made me feel like I was playing a game straight out of pandemic or some startup game company--hopefully. Bioware learns from history, and isn't doomed to repeat it.

I just have this aching feeling that, like DA2; DA3 was planned out months ahead of the release of DA2, with most of the design goals already set in stone, and a development calendar already hanging on the fridge. Hopefully, DA2 acted as an earthquake that forces my favorite RPG dev to start on new ground.

Modifié par Harcken, 23 mai 2011 - 06:17 .

[Drachasor]

Zanallen wrote...

Drachasor wrote...

DA2 has over 2000 reviews, it would take like 10% of them to be trolls in one direction in not another for it to have a significant impact on the overall score (and even then we're only talk about a shift of a point or so).  There's no evidence of fraudulent voting on that scale, let alone on that scale and in only one direction.  Indeed, something below 5 makes sense for a below average game -- user reviews, unlike critic reviews make use of more of the full 10-point scale.  I'll take the aggregate user review over critic reviews any day of the week.

Unfortunately, you also have to deal with the users that are far too "passionate" for their own good. Unless you honestly believe that DA2 deserves a 0/10?  Hell, I would argue that no game deserves a 0/10 unless it is completely unplayable. 1/10 is a stretch, honestly. It is nice that the users have full use of the 1-10 scale, however, I don't think a lot of people even care what the precentages mean. 6-7 is a mediocre game. 5 is an outright failure and anything below 5 is nigh unplayable. People who find DA2 mediocre and then rate it at a 5 or below are just plain silly. At the very least, Metacritic should have a one week waiting period for user reviews for games. That will give people the chance to actually play the damn game before they make their review and it allows time for people to form an objective critique as opposed to some nonsense fueled more by passion than by actual thought.

If you consider a 5-6 to be an ok, game, which I think is probably about right, then a bit over 4 makes a lot of sense in regards to DA2.  I do think the average of user reviews is pretty good in almost all cases.  I'm not saying it is perfect, but I think it is about within a point of the "right" score (unlike Critic reviews which are awful).  The problem you have is that you are judging the user reviews by how critics rate things, but they suck at rating games which is why scores are so inflated in magazines (assuming they were made by a big publisher that makes lots of ads).  If you ask someone to judge something on a 1-10 scale, then "mediocre" is going to be around 5.  Game reviews are probably biased a bit higher than that because of how critics rate things, but a 5-6 is where most mediocre games fall (well, within a point of that, giving some leeway for error).

Again, it is NOT perfect, but it a fairly good ROUGH indicator of how good a game is...unlike what you get from the critics.

[Zanallen]

Drachasor wrote...

If you consider a 5-6 to be an ok, game, which I think is probably about right, then a bit over 4 makes a lot of sense in regards to DA2.  I do think the average of user reviews is pretty good in almost all cases.  I'm not saying it is perfect, but I think it is about within a point of the "right" score (unlike Critic reviews which are awful).  The problem you have is that you are judging the user reviews by how critics rate things, but they suck at rating games which is why scores are so inflated in magazines (assuming they were made by a big publisher that makes lots of ads).  If you ask someone to judge something on a 1-10 scale, then "mediocre" is going to be around 5.  Game reviews are probably biased a bit higher than that because of how critics rate things, but a 5-6 is where most mediocre games fall (well, within a point of that, giving some leeway for error).

Again, it is NOT perfect, but it a fairly good ROUGH indicator of how good a game is...unlike what you get from the critics.

Nah, I use the 1-10 scale the same way my teachers have used it for the majority of my life. Percentage-wise, 100-90 is awesome, 89-80 is good, 79-70 is alright, 69-60 is mediocre and anything below that is various degrees of absolute failure.

[Drachasor]

Zanallen wrote...

Drachasor wrote...

If you consider a 5-6 to be an ok, game, which I think is probably about right, then a bit over 4 makes a lot of sense in regards to DA2.  I do think the average of user reviews is pretty good in almost all cases.  I'm not saying it is perfect, but I think it is about within a point of the "right" score (unlike Critic reviews which are awful).  The problem you have is that you are judging the user reviews by how critics rate things, but they suck at rating games which is why scores are so inflated in magazines (assuming they were made by a big publisher that makes lots of ads).  If you ask someone to judge something on a 1-10 scale, then "mediocre" is going to be around 5.  Game reviews are probably biased a bit higher than that because of how critics rate things, but a 5-6 is where most mediocre games fall (well, within a point of that, giving some leeway for error).

Again, it is NOT perfect, but it a fairly good ROUGH indicator of how good a game is...unlike what you get from the critics.

Nah, I use the 1-10 scale the same way my teachers have used it for the majority of my life. Percentage-wise, 100-90 is awesome, 89-80 is good, 79-70 is alright, 69-60 is mediocre and anything below that is various degrees of absolute failure.

Obviously you've never taken a survey or been to a hospital.

[Elhanan]

Drachasor wrote...

Zanallen wrote...

Drachasor wrote...

If you consider a 5-6 to be an ok, game, which I think is probably about right, then a bit over 4 makes a lot of sense in regards to DA2.  I do think the average of user reviews is pretty good in almost all cases.  I'm not saying it is perfect, but I think it is about within a point of the "right" score (unlike Critic reviews which are awful).  The problem you have is that you are judging the user reviews by how critics rate things, but they suck at rating games which is why scores are so inflated in magazines (assuming they were made by a big publisher that makes lots of ads).  If you ask someone to judge something on a 1-10 scale, then "mediocre" is going to be around 5.  Game reviews are probably biased a bit higher than that because of how critics rate things, but a 5-6 is where most mediocre games fall (well, within a point of that, giving some leeway for error).

Again, it is NOT perfect, but it a fairly good ROUGH indicator of how good a game is...unlike what you get from the critics.

Nah, I use the 1-10 scale the same way my teachers have used it for the majority of my life. Percentage-wise, 100-90 is awesome, 89-80 is good, 79-70 is alright, 69-60 is mediocre and anything below that is various degrees of absolute failure.

Obviously you've never taken a survey or been to a hospital.

I have, and the reason I Ieave all of this is for the context that indicates that the scores mean different things to different people. You see a lower score for mediocrity, while others would place it higher while meaning the same thing. Then there are the extremists that go 10 - 0. While some see this as bearing validity, I cannot help but thinking of a tea party with a rabbit being appropriate.

[Zanallen]

Drachasor wrote...

Obviously you've never taken a survey or been to a hospital.

Done both, actually. Now are you talking about those "Rate how you feel on a scale of 1-10" things? That crap shopuld have been faded out a long time ago. Its about as scientific as clapping to determine how you feel. Plus, it is completely subjective on the value a given individual attributes to each number and their own person enjoyment.

[Yrkoon]

Elhanan wrote...
I have, and the reason I Ieave all of this is for the context that indicates that the scores mean different things to different people. You see a lower score for mediocrity, while others would place it higher while meaning the same thing.

That's... irrelevant.  Since in the end, you  still get a  collective, total  sum ranking of all the user scores....  and more importantly, you get it for all games.  Thus a  viewer can look at, say,  DA:O's  89 rating, and then DA2's 79 rating and  be able to  instantly get an idea of which game was better received by players.

Modifié par Yrkoon, 23 mai 2011 - 11:05 .

[Elhanan]

Yrkoon wrote...

That's... irrelevant.  Since in the end, you  still get a  collective, total  sum ranking of all the user scores....  and more importantly, you get it for all games.  Thus a  viewer can look at, say,  DA:O's  89 rating, and then DA2's 79 rating and  be able to  instantly get an idea of which game was better received by players.

... which are based on flawed and biased data, IMO. Pass.

Modifié par Elhanan, 23 mai 2011 - 11:39 .

[LordPaul256]

tariq071 wrote...

Yah , well good luck selling 400k preorders this time around.

I will buy it post -release , but only when if i see that is completely opposite of what DA:Kirkwall was and no Hawke(or any of his cronies) to be found anywhere. Not that i am holding my breath about that happening anyways.

Pretty much this. 

No Hawke, and good luck getting a pre-order out of me.

Not that I honestly have much hope of that happening.  I think the Vegas odds on Hawke returning are unfortunately quite good.  And it was such a lovely neighborhood...  

[Wittand25]

Drachasor wrote...
If you consider a 5-6 to be an ok, game, which I think is probably about right, then a bit over 4 makes a lot of sense in regards to DA2.  I do think the average of user reviews is pretty good in almost all cases.  I'm not saying it is perfect, but I think it is about within a point of the "right" score (unlike Critic reviews which are awful).  The problem you have is that you are judging the user reviews by how critics rate things, but they suck at rating games which is why scores are so inflated in magazines (assuming they were made by a big publisher that makes lots of ads).  If you ask someone to judge something on a 1-10 scale, then "mediocre" is going to be around 5.  Game reviews are probably biased a bit higher than that because of how critics rate things, but a 5-6 is where most mediocre games fall (well, within a point of that, giving some leeway for error).

Again, it is NOT perfect, but it a fairly good ROUGH indicator of how good a game is...unlike what you get from the critics.

That is only if you only evaluate Triple A titles. If you want to rate all games including thing like The farming Simulator (Yes it is even more mind numbingly boring than it sounds imo.) 7Sins  (I know it is dated but don´t even ask) it becomes impossible to give DA2 less than a 7 without inventing negative scores for them.
Ratings in magazines seem inflated because as a  "serious gamer" one only buys and cares about the crème del a crème of computer games anyway and ignores the whole mediocre games.

And no it is not possible to just use an average to get the idea of the quality of a game since there is way too much covariance with other things to compare the score of two games. Like that a game that raises high hopes will get worse ratings than a game that did not even if there is no difference in quality or that the perception of both publisher and developer colors the opinion of a game or that things like DRM get factored in by users even if it does not have any effect on the actual game.

Modifié par Wittand25, 23 mai 2011 - 12:13 .

[NKKKK]

Summer 2012?

How about you push it back a year...or two.