390 réponses à ce sujet

[London]

I don't really buy into Metacritic userscores. There were a TON of ratings on Metacritic for Witcher 2 the second the scores were opened up. A lot of people popped in the game, were impressed by the graphics and the female nudity they got to see in the first 5 minutes of the game, then went on Metacritic to give it a 10 on that alone saying how "mature" the game is and how great the graphics were. Most people didnt' really spend the time to really get into the game before throwing thier excited scores up there. Unlike professionals, who need to delve further into a game before providing a review.

Dragon Age 2 sufferent from the opposite problem; people popping the game in, seeing that it wasn't exactly the same as Dragon Age 1 and threw in all the 0's.

I really think most of the user reviews are gut-reaction reviews.

I do think SOME user reviews are worthwhile reads; most of them ended up reviewing Witcher as a 9.0 but they actually seemed to give real reasons for their scores; I dont think the 0 crowd or most of the 10 crowd really justified their score.

Even if Witcher 2 is a good game I've decided that the feminist in me will never allow me to play it.  I certainly won't play Witcher 1 ever because I won't give money to support a game that found it necessary to collect women as sex cards, even if I don't have to look at the cards myeslf.  I just won't support it.  Even if I would buy Witcher 2, I'm already not getting the full series experience so why bother.  Also i saw the first few minutes of the game on youtube and even those few minutes just made me shake my head at the utter immaturity.

The game looks as though it was directed by a teenaged boy just waiting to lose his virginity.  Pointless and obvious chest shots, and apparently people were doing cartwheels over a certain death scene involving male genetailia.  Eh, I'll pass.

Modifié par SebastianDA, 26 mai 2011 - 02:25 .

[The Cafibulator]

SebastianDA wrote...

I don't really buy into Metacritic userscores. There were a TON of ratings on Metacritic for Witcher 2 the second the scores were opened up. A lot of people popped in the game, were impressed by the graphics and the female nudity they got to see in the first 5 minutes of the game, then went on Metacritic to give it a 10 on that alone saying how "mature" the game is and how great the graphics were. Most people didnt' really spend the time to really get into the game before throwing thier excited scores up there. Unlike professionals, who need to delve further into a game before providing a review.

Dragon Age 2 sufferent from the opposite problem; people popping the game in, seeing that it wasn't exactly the same as Dragon Age 1 and threw in all the 0's.

I really think most of the user reviews are gut-reaction reviews.

I do think SOME user reviews are worthwhile reads; most of them ended up reviewing Witcher as a 9.0 but they actually seemed to give real reasons for their scores; I dont think the 0 crowd or most of the 10 crowd really justified their score.

Even if Witcher 2 is a good game I've decided that the feminist in me will never allow me to play it.  I certainly won't play Witcher 1 ever because I won't give money to support a game that found it necessary to collect women as sex cards, even if I don't have to look at the cards myeslf.  I just won't support it.  Even if I would buy Witcher 2, I'm already not getting the full series experience so why bother.  Also i saw the first few minutes of the game on youtube and even those few minutes just made me shake my head at the utter immaturity.

The game looks as though it was directed by a teenaged boy just waiting to lose his virginity.  Pointless and obvious chest shots, and apparently people were doing cartwheels over a certain death scene involving male genetailia.  Eh, I'll pass.

It's not "necessary" in any way to collect the sex cards, nor are they really a "collection of women." You have to have sex once, I believe, with your romantic interest. About the same as Dragon Age I & II.

I don't see how the game can seem so appalingly immature. Geralt himself is either snide and arrogant, deeply sarcastic, violent, or a combination of the three. The characters are generally complicated people, though some of the commoners, and especially soldiers/bandits/pirate-y are indeed immature and very vulgar. With good reason, I should add.

I haven't completed The Witcher 2 yet, but thus far, it's been possible to avoid the sex scenes, save for the nudity in the opening. Which I see as justified seeing as you're basically the go-to-guy for the... more than eccentric king, and the woman in bed with you is your main romantic interest as well as someone who resembles your dead wife in a number of ways.

[Realmzmaster]

The Cafibulator wrote...

SebastianDA wrote...

I don't really buy into Metacritic userscores. There were a TON of ratings on Metacritic for Witcher 2 the second the scores were opened up. A lot of people popped in the game, were impressed by the graphics and the female nudity they got to see in the first 5 minutes of the game, then went on Metacritic to give it a 10 on that alone saying how "mature" the game is and how great the graphics were. Most people didnt' really spend the time to really get into the game before throwing thier excited scores up there. Unlike professionals, who need to delve further into a game before providing a review.

Dragon Age 2 sufferent from the opposite problem; people popping the game in, seeing that it wasn't exactly the same as Dragon Age 1 and threw in all the 0's.

I really think most of the user reviews are gut-reaction reviews.

I do think SOME user reviews are worthwhile reads; most of them ended up reviewing Witcher as a 9.0 but they actually seemed to give real reasons for their scores; I dont think the 0 crowd or most of the 10 crowd really justified their score.

Even if Witcher 2 is a good game I've decided that the feminist in me will never allow me to play it.  I certainly won't play Witcher 1 ever because I won't give money to support a game that found it necessary to collect women as sex cards, even if I don't have to look at the cards myeslf.  I just won't support it.  Even if I would buy Witcher 2, I'm already not getting the full series experience so why bother.  Also i saw the first few minutes of the game on youtube and even those few minutes just made me shake my head at the utter immaturity.

The game looks as though it was directed by a teenaged boy just waiting to lose his virginity.  Pointless and obvious chest shots, and apparently people were doing cartwheels over a certain death scene involving male genetailia.  Eh, I'll pass.

It's not "necessary" in any way to collect the sex cards, nor are they really a "collection of women." You have to have sex once, I believe, with your romantic interest. About the same as Dragon Age I & II.

I don't see how the game can seem so appalingly immature. Geralt himself is either snide and arrogant, deeply sarcastic, violent, or a combination of the three. The characters are generally complicated people, though some of the commoners, and especially soldiers/bandits/pirate-y are indeed immature and very vulgar. With good reason, I should add.

I haven't completed The Witcher 2 yet, but thus far, it's been possible to avoid the sex scenes, save for the nudity in the opening. Which I see as justified seeing as you're basically the go-to-guy for the... more than eccentric king, and the woman in bed with you is your main romantic interest as well as someone who resembles your dead wife in a number of ways.

 In the Witcher 1 you can actually have sex with your love interest twice. In one of the quest sex is not optional( I believe the blue eyed lass) which means you collect at least one sex card. Getting drunk in certain quests is not optional if you want to complete the quest. You also can give drugs to Jethro to get information.

[London]

I appreciate your replay and understand a lot of people are very happy with Witcher, but the more I read about the series the less I find it is for me, personally (which is fine, I'm sure they are making more than enough money on other people).

If what you say is true, Witcher still forces sex and nudity upon you - whereas in Dragon Age I have the option to remain single if I really want to and sleep with no one. I did enjoy the Dragon Age romance options, but I didn't feel the scenes were about figuring out how to create female characters that go out of their way to keep their chests exposed.

I also understand that the card collections aren't necessary; but the women written as they were, and the sex cards even being present at all, was a huge turn off to me and the moment I read about them I told myself I would not throw any money in support of that studio.

[The Cafibulator]

SebastianDA wrote...

I appreciate your replay and understand a lot of people are very happy with Witcher, but the more I read about the series the less I find it is for me, personally (which is fine, I'm sure they are making more than enough money on other people).

If what you say is true, Witcher still forces sex and nudity upon you - whereas in Dragon Age I have the option to remain single if I really want to and sleep with no one. I did enjoy the Dragon Age romance options, but I didn't feel the scenes were about figuring out how to create female characters that go out of their way to keep their chests exposed.

I also understand that the card collections aren't necessary; but the women written as they were, and the sex cards even being present at all, was a huge turn off to me and the moment I read about them I told myself I would not throw any money in support of that studio.

All I can say is: it's medieval, nudity is normal.

I also want to note that it's perfectly legal (though sometimes fined) in seven states to be topless. You could have nudity forced on you at any time IRL. Oh, the horror!
(and BTW not trolling, I just think you should give The Witcher 1/2 a chance, though I've disowned DA2... but I'm also fluent in Polish and read The Witcher books, so maybe there's more fandom to this than I realize )

And on that note, I think the sex is actually still semi-justified - Geralt is an amnesiac, but still has a massive void in his heart (oh god the tropes, help meeee) and to some extent, knows and feels several things about his dead wife that drive him to do some of his womanizing. In the novels he's pretty damn faithful, and the two go to extreme lengths when the other is in danger or threatened. Just thought I'd provide some perspective, that's all. Cheers for being civil about it, too!

Modifié par The Cafibulator, 26 mai 2011 - 03:12 .

[In Exile]

mrcrusty wrote...

Metacritic from a numerical score point of view is that not useful for prospective buyers. Ignore the numbers altogether, especially 10s and 0s, the 3-9 area is mostly good and look for any consistent positives and/or negatives you see spread out over a number of the reviews.

It's really a shame at how the entire industry, from company CEOs to end gamers put such stock into a numerical value that doesn't really articulate a person's thoughts on a game, yet completely ignore the points they raise in favor or against it.

If metacritic gave us a bell curve, we could get meaningful data. For example, a 4 average with 40% 2s and 60% 6s would tell us a lot about the general reception of the game (some people thought it was a crime against nature and others thought it was mediocre), etc.

[Snazzy McSplendid]

This is directed at the original post, and largely ignoring anything that may have been said inbetween. I mean, seriously, I'm not reading 13 pages of this.

Dragon Age 2 (xbox 360) user review score = 4.4
Two Worlds (xbox 360) user review score = 5.8

Dragon Age 2 (xbox 360) critical Metascore = 79
Two Worlds (xbox 360) critical Metascore = 50

Now, seriously... even the most vehement critic of Dragon Age 2 would have to admit that it does enough right to count as objectively better than a genuine piece of garbage like Two Worlds, right? Yet, look what happened... the Metascores for both games ended up at, in my opinion at least, a fair score for both games. And, the user review scores would be funny, if people didn't seem to take them seriously.

[The Cafibulator]

Snazzy McSplendid wrote...

This is directed at the original post, and largely ignoring anything that may have been said inbetween. I mean, seriously, I'm not reading 13 pages of this.

Dragon Age 2 (xbox 360) user review score = 4.4
Two Worlds (xbox 360) user review score = 5.8

Dragon Age 2 (xbox 360) critical Metascore = 79
Two Worlds (xbox 360) critical Metascore = 50

Now, seriously... even the most vehement critic of Dragon Age 2 would have to admit that it does enough right to count as objectively better than a genuine piece of garbage like Two Worlds, right? Yet, look what happened... the Metascores for both games ended up at, in my opinion at least, a fair score for both games. And, the user review scores would be funny, if people didn't seem to take them seriously.

I think it'd be more fitting to compare Dragon Age II to Two Worlds II. Both are supposed to be improvements over their predecessors. Two Worlds II got a 67 from critics, and a 7.0 from users. Personally, I even prefer it over DA2.

[Elhanan]

The Cafibulator wrote...

All I can say is: it's medieval, nudity is normal.

I also want to note that it's perfectly legal (though sometimes fined) in seven states to be topless. You could have nudity forced on you at any time IRL. Oh, the horror!
(and BTW not trolling, I just think you should give The Witcher 1/2 a chance, though I've disowned DA2... but I'm also fluent in Polish and read The Witcher books, so maybe there's more fandom to this than I realize )

And on that note, I think the sex is actually still semi-justified - Geralt is an amnesiac, but still has a massive void in his heart (oh god the tropes, help meeee) and to some extent, knows and feels several things about his dead wife that drive him to do some of his womanizing. In the novels he's pretty damn faithful, and the two go to extreme lengths when the other is in danger or threatened. Just thought I'd provide some perspective, that's all. Cheers for being civil about it, too!

Congrats!  You have just shown what can occur when you ask thoughtlessly for the removal of bikini chanmail....

The notion that you actually believe this is normal speaks louder than complaints made against including it, IMO.

[agesilaj12]

The Cafibulator wrote...

Snazzy McSplendid wrote...

This is directed at the original post, and largely ignoring anything that may have been said inbetween. I mean, seriously, I'm not reading 13 pages of this.

Dragon Age 2 (xbox 360) user review score = 4.4
Two Worlds (xbox 360) user review score = 5.8

Dragon Age 2 (xbox 360) critical Metascore = 79
Two Worlds (xbox 360) critical Metascore = 50

Now, seriously... even the most vehement critic of Dragon Age 2 would have to admit that it does enough right to count as objectively better than a genuine piece of garbage like Two Worlds, right? Yet, look what happened... the Metascores for both games ended up at, in my opinion at least, a fair score for both games. And, the user review scores would be funny, if people didn't seem to take them seriously.

I think it'd be more fitting to compare Dragon Age II to Two Worlds II. Both are supposed to be improvements over their predecessors. Two Worlds II got a 67 from critics, and a 7.0 from users. Personally, I even prefer it over DA2.

I played Two Worlds 2 after finishing DA2. Didnt want to buy it , cs I laughed at first one which had soom good ideas but was stupidly executed. I ended up enjoying Two Worlds 2, as opposed to DA2. Lot has to do with fact that I wasnt expecting anything, so it came as a good surprise. And by the way, game graphics look way better than DA2 if nothing else.

[abaris]

Elhanan wrote...

Congrats!  You have just shown what can occur when you ask thoughtlessly for the removal of bikini chanmail....

The notion that you actually believe this is normal speaks louder than complaints made against including it, IMO.

You even boldened the part where he said its medieval, its normal. And he's right. The medieval times were much more relaxed in the sexual department than ours. Read up on bathhouses and the likes before you jump to conclusions.

Also I find it always a little disturbing that noone says peep about the violence usually present in all these games but if it comes to sexual content or nudity they all cry murder.

[The Cafibulator]

Elhanan wrote...

The Cafibulator wrote...

All I can say is: it's medieval, nudity is normal.

I also want to note that it's perfectly legal (though sometimes fined) in seven states to be topless. You could have nudity forced on you at any time IRL. Oh, the horror!
(and BTW not trolling, I just think you should give The Witcher 1/2 a chance, though I've disowned DA2... but I'm also fluent in Polish and read The Witcher books, so maybe there's more fandom to this than I realize )

And on that note, I think the sex is actually still semi-justified - Geralt is an amnesiac, but still has a massive void in his heart (oh god the tropes, help meeee) and to some extent, knows and feels several things about his dead wife that drive him to do some of his womanizing. In the novels he's pretty damn faithful, and the two go to extreme lengths when the other is in danger or threatened. Just thought I'd provide some perspective, that's all. Cheers for being civil about it, too!

Congrats!  You have just shown what can occur when you ask thoughtlessly for the removal of bikini chanmail....

The notion that you actually believe this is normal speaks louder than complaints made against including it, IMO.

What about people too poor to afford clothing? What about the fact that the nudity in the game is reserved for prostitutes, witches, and the overall strange women. Or love interests?

I should note that one of the most, if not the most, popular legends of medieval Europe was Arthur... Who ploughed his (half) sister. And in reality, most of the nobility during that time period were basically first cousins.

[Corto81]

Elhanan wrote...

The Cafibulator wrote...

All I can say is: it's medieval, nudity is normal.
 

The notion that you actually believe this is normal speaks louder than complaints made against including it, IMO.

Have you ever read up on medieval times?
Cafibulator is 100% right here.

Those days were filled with sex, violence and diseases.

Personally, I find Witcher's world much more believable when presented in such a realistic way, than if it was censored for nudity.

Not to mention, like the poster above me said, having issues with seeing boobs but not beheaded corpses and exploding bodies and blood splattering across the screen is a bit funny.

[Elhanan]

abaris wrote...

You even boldened the part where he said its medieval, its normal. And he's right. The medieval times were much more relaxed in the sexual department than ours. Read up on bathhouses and the likes before you jump to conclusions.

Also I find it always a little disturbing that noone says peep about the violence usually present in all these games but if it comes to sexual content or nudity they all cry murder.

Then you must read very little here, as exploding bodies seems to be a No-No to several. But this seems to be a commonly held belief among many.

Taken from links:

http://www.medievalt...ages/index.html

Due to the fact that the Middle Ages comprises a period of about 1,000 years it is often subdivided into three periods:

• Early Middle Ages, sometimes referred to as the Dark Ages (from the 5th to end of the 10th century)
  
  
• High Middle Ages (from the 11th to the end of the 13th century)
  
  
• and Late Middle Ages (from the 14th to the end of the 15th century)
  
  http://en.wikipedia...._Medieval_times
  
  Bathing in Medieval times
  
  With the decline of the Roman Empire, the public baths often became places of licentious behavior, and such use was responsible for the spread rather than the cure of diseases. A general belief developed among the European populace was that frequent bathing promoted disease and sickness. Medieval church authorities encouraged this belief and made every effort to close down public baths. Ecclesiastical officials believed that public bathing created an environment open to immorality and disease. Roman Catholic Church officials even banned public bathing in an unsuccessful effort to halt syphilis epidemics from sweeping Europe. Overall, this period represented a time of decline for public bathing
  
  And here:
  
  http://www.medieval-...alclothing.html
  
  For the peasant, the garb was basic and simple. The outer clothing was commonly made of wool with undergarments of linen. As one would expect, the wool garments were hot, heavy and itchy, but fortunately, the linen undergarments made the wool a bit more comfortable. The undergarments were laundered, but it was rare to wash the outer garments. While one might think this would serve to create a rather pungent society, such was not necessarily the case. Though the peasants worked very hard, frequently at manual labor, they also spent a great deal of time around open fires and smoke. The smoke permeated their clothes and acted as a natural deodorant reducing the odors.

[*]Perhaps you may find that bath houses and the like were prevelant before the 5th century, before the time considered the decline of the Roman Empire, but not during the Middle Ages.

Modifié par Elhanan, 26 mai 2011 - 08:23 .

[The Earl Of Bronze]

Corto81 wrote...

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

Corto81 wrote...


But yeah... Using that logic, no point in arguing about anything, ever

Like I said, it's pointless, so I'm just gonna repost, and we can go in circles.
Bottom line, DA2 got inferior marks because it's an inferior game.
To both other BW titles and TW2.

In your opinion.

Yes, in my opinion.

And in opinion of the vast majority of people apparently.

You can spin the bad ratings this way and that but the FACTS are:
- most BW games get high grades from both professional reviews and user reviews
- TW2 has (so far) got generally good grades from both of those
- DA2 has received sub-par pro reviews (for a BW game) and absolutely horrible user reviews

No how true those average ratings are, we can argue.
But taking into account that Metacritic is a rather good guide to a game's quality, the obvious conclusion (IMO yes, but again, rather obvious) is that BW simply released a sub-par product.
And that, as a sequel to their best-selling game yet.

Don't confuse opinion with fact. Reviews are essentially useless, good or bad, make up your own mind, why people rely on reviews so much is beyond me, do they lack the ability to think for themselves? You could quote a thousand review scores and every one would have no real value.  

Modifié par The Earl Of Bronze, 26 mai 2011 - 09:41 .

[abaris]

Elhanan wrote...


Then you must read very little here, as exploding bodies seems to be a No-No to several. But this seems to be a commonly held belief among many.

Yeah, because of the silliness not the gore.

And as for the Middle Ages, thanks for the history lesson. But no thanks. I know what I'm talking about. I have my European equivalent of the American history major since 1989.

[Corto81]

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

Don't confuse opinion with fact. Reviews are essentially useless, good or bad, make up your own mind, why people rely on reviews so much is beyond me, do they lack the ability to think for themselves? You could quote a thousand review scores and every one would have no real value.  

I'm not confusing anything with anything here.

You can spin the bad ratings this way and that but the FACTS are:
- most BW games get high grades from both professional reviews and user reviews
- TW2 has (so far) got generally good grades from both of those
- DA2 has received sub-par pro reviews (for a BW game) and absolutely horrible user reviews
 

How are those not facts?
It's black on white, they're numbers.
You can argue that every single of those reviews are fake and phoney, but the FACT is that those numbers are there.

Modifié par Corto81, 26 mai 2011 - 10:14 .

[Elhanan]

abaris wrote...

Yeah, because of the silliness not the gore.

And as for the Middle Ages, thanks for the history lesson. But no thanks. I know what I'm talking about. I have my European equivalent of the American history major since 1989.

Then you have your sources. Unless they still bathe together over at Metacritic, the point is irrelavent here anyway.

Those that prefer a modest approach are commonly assailed with the violence theory, and are often labeled as prudes. Personally, I reduce the gore in my games, and prefer the deathblow animations of DAO over the cut-scenes of DA2, esp for the purposes of gaining screenshots.

But perhaps we need more modesty, esp as we are not living in olden times;  just playing games set in them. I am all for immsersion, but in doing so prefer to avoid viewing the nudity, sex, profanity, eating, and bathroom habits of the setting, and leave the characters in the dep end. That is immersion humor....

If the focus of the game are these types of adult materials, this adult will pass; see little that is linked to maturity.

[The Earl Of Bronze]

Corto81 wrote...

The Earl Of Bronze wrote...

Don't confuse opinion with fact. Reviews are essentially useless, good or bad, make up your own mind, why people rely on reviews so much is beyond me, do they lack the ability to think for themselves? You could quote a thousand review scores and every one would have no real value.  

I'm not confusing anything with anything here.

You can spin the bad ratings this way and that but the FACTS are:
- most BW games get high grades from both professional reviews and user reviews
- TW2 has (so far) got generally good grades from both of those
- DA2 has received sub-par pro reviews (for a BW game) and absolutely horrible user reviews
 

How are those not facts?
It's black on white, they're numbers.
You can argue that every single of those reviews are fake and phoney, but the FACT is that those numbers are there.

The numbers are meaningless as they have no value. You have placed value in those numbers to support your belief. Why do you require others opinion to support your own? I can understand voicing your opinion, but why try to make it out to be more than that? A review is just an opinion not a fact, a review score is just an opinion not a fact.

[Elhanan]

Corto81 wrote...

You can spin the bad ratings this way and that but the FACTS are:
- most BW games get high grades from both professional reviews and user reviews
- TW2 has (so far) got generally good grades from both of those
- DA2 has received sub-par pro reviews (for a BW game) and absolutely horrible user reviews
 

How are those not facts?
It's black on white, they're numbers.
You can argue that every single of those reviews are fake and phoney, but the FACT is that those numbers are there.

They may be facts of the Metacritic site; does not make them accurate. Pass.

[abaris]

Elhanan wrote...


But perhaps we need more modesty, esp as we are not living in olden times;  just playing games set in them. I am all for immsersion, but in doing so prefer to avoid viewing the nudity, sex, profanity, eating, and bathroom habits of the setting, and leave the characters in the dep end. That is immersion humor....

Yeah, but still, no problem with gore, blood, chopped off heads, exploding bodies. That's what I find hilarious - in a disturbing way. And not just with the above mentioned, but with every discussion taking this path.

[Elhanan]

abaris wrote...

Yeah, but still, no problem with gore, blood, chopped off heads, exploding bodies. That's what I find hilarious - in a disturbing way. And not just with the above mentioned, but with every discussion taking this path.

Then you must have skipped the part when I said I reduce gore function, as I dislike slasher films and animations. But as long as you are able to keep your absolutes

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

They are accurate as far as the critic reviews go.

On the issue of sexuality and violence, I wouldn't mind less of both, on the other hand, I won't get defensive if both are shown. What I do find weird amongst some people though that people playing mass murdering butchers somehow find naked men and women distasteful or going too far. Lol.

It's a shame Bioware lost out to social conversatives of Fox News, who were apparently okay with Shepard blasting his way through dozens if not hundreds of foes, yet got pissy when they showed a pretty tastefully done love scene.

Modifié par mrcrusty, 26 mai 2011 - 11:03 .

[Corto81]

Elhanan wrote...

Corto81 wrote...

You can spin the bad ratings this way and that but the FACTS are:
- most BW games get high grades from both professional reviews and user reviews
- TW2 has (so far) got generally good grades from both of those
- DA2 has received sub-par pro reviews (for a BW game) and absolutely horrible user reviews
 

How are those not facts?
It's black on white, they're numbers.
You can argue that every single of those reviews are fake and phoney, but the FACT is that those numbers are there.

They may be facts of the Metacritic site; does not make them accurate. Pass.

Wow, the Denial in you is strong.

There's a reason why most games considered good get good ratings.
And why most games considered bad... get bad ratings.
Same goes for books and movies, etc.

You can either believe that for every average rating you don't agree with there's a huge conspiracy and/or fan backlash/fanboyism or...
Accept that maybe the majority of people simply doesn't see it your way and that the average rating in question, is, in fact, a fairly accurate indicator of how good or bad the product in question is.

Bottom line?
Gaming companies DO care about Metacritic score as different intros/previews/etc. clearly show.

example:

Modifié par Corto81, 26 mai 2011 - 11:01 .

[Elhanan]

Personally, I do not care if Bioware and the entire gaming community ascribes to Metacritic or not; just know false data when I see it. Pass.