190 réponses à ce sujet

[MikeSunrider]

He was a bit under-educated about his fantasy though. Everyone knows Dragon Age is a Dark Fantasy and he still managed to call it High Fantasy just because it had dwarves and elves (Also the reason why he linked it to Lotr. Dwarves and Elves)



Silly Silly reviewer. But most of his points had merit.

[Dam Wookie]

It reads like a very fair, well thought out review and similar to other reviews. I know I will rate the game higher due to my own personal preferences. However I appreciate that the negatives are being noted. I don't need everyone else to review a game based on my own rose tinted viewpoint.

[Dam Wookie]

MikeSunrider wrote...

He was a bit under-educated about his fantasy though. Everyone knows Dragon Age is a Dark Fantasy and he still managed to call it High Fantasy just because it had dwarves and elves (Also the reason why he linked it to Lotr. Dwarves and Elves)

Silly Silly reviewer. But most of his points had merit.

Pedantic nitpicking on semantics. You clearly have no idea how the English language works. Not only that but you are wrong. The game has been linked to Lotr not just due to dwarves and elves but due to the situations they find themselves in. This as happened in a number of reviews now.

[K3m0sabe]

I don't get all this criticizing of the IGN AU xbox 360 review... Its one person giving his personal opinion on the game. If a review catered to what the public wants to read/hear/see, then that review is worthless.... anyone remember the GameSpot reviews controversy?

[RetrOldSchool]

Dam Wookie wrote...

It reads like a very fair, well thought out review and similar to other reviews. I know I will rate the game higher due to my own personal preferences. However I appreciate that the negatives are being noted. I don't need everyone else to review a game based on my own rose tinted viewpoint.

I can agree with that, the only thing that gets me is the score, compared to other games (whether it's Fable 2, GTA 4, HALO ODST, Eternal Sonata or any other IMO overrated game regardless of genre). Also I think that gameplay and lasting appeal should out weight graphics in the overall score, when it comes to an RPG. If it would've been a 10 hour FPS, then I understand.

The review in all is informative, which is as it should be, even though I'm pretty sure I won't agree with it.

I guess it's a result of the average score on IGN (and most sites) being way too high.  (Eternal Sonata 8,3 ffs)

[PROdotes]

As pointed out before... bad reviews are good...

I'm one of the people who really likes bioware games and atm I'm on the fence about this one... And reading all the 90%+ reviews didn't help... if you just hear good about a game it makes you suspicious

Voice acting is prolly not as bad as the score says... Graphics... well graphics are bad, sorry... i was looking at my char in the char creator... the armor is bland, bump mapping is close to non existent... and when he/she speaks the mouth just doesn't move right... It breaks the "immersion" just like when i was playing ME and i saw one npcs teeth arent modeled just a "block"... I was confused for at least the next 15 minutes



Yes i'm nitpicking... but if you read tons of good reviews and then you play the game and you get a "meh" feeling... you kinda think "why did i spend my 50 euros on this again?"

Instead if you read a lot of bad reviews and then play the game and say "hey... this isn't bad at all" it makes it even more fun



I'm still waiting on more reviews... 4 days and a few hours till steam "unlocks" so i have time to decide if i want to invest my 50 euros into the game or not... since EA isn't working for me and I can't buy anything from there... and CS is not helping



So... gimme more bad reviews please

[Athnamos]

Since it's AU review, somehow Yathzee crossed my mind. He did gave a review on Mass Effect.

http://www.escapistm.../18-Mass-Effect. Wait till he gets his hand on or.. if he willing to play Dragon Age. Harsh yet funny.

[Dranearian]

the person reviewing this is a braindead twit. End of story.



Bashing graphics because its not brand spanking new photorealistic zomgwtfbbq awesome?



Like I said in another thread, these tardmonkeys who rate graphics based on how good they look as opposed to graphical errors need to stab themselves in the face.



If Chrono Trigger were released today, would it be any less of a fantastic game because its 2d sprite based and not uberwtfbbq 3d graphics? Hell no.

[dynas2001]

I can say 1 thing for certain, unless the other IGN review comes out soon and is considerably more detailed and positive, it's going to hurt sales.  I got into the office this morning to a slew of emails saying the review was up and that it's a stinker.

So they are going to lose some buyers for sure unless some more reviews come out from IGN or Gamespot that are more positive.

[PROdotes]

dynas2001 wrote...

I can say 1 thing for certain, unless the other IGN review comes out soon and is considerably more detailed and positive, it's going to hurt sales.  I got into the office this morning to a slew of emails saying the review was up and that it's a stinker.

So they are going to lose some buyers for sure unless some more reviews come out from IGN or Gamespot that are more positive.

That reminds me... people who trust review sites are idiots... same as with people who dismiss them

[Foxd1e]

dynas2001 wrote...

I can say 1 thing for certain, unless the other IGN review comes out soon and is considerably more detailed and positive, it's going to hurt sales.  I got into the office this morning to a slew of emails saying the review was up and that it's a stinker.

So they are going to lose some buyers for sure unless some more reviews come out from IGN or Gamespot that are more positive.

Thank you! There seems to be a small group of people in this thread that seem to comprehend that statement. Lol I'll say it once more for good measure 8.4 good review, 8.4 for Dragon Age? Bad Review, you give an 8.4 to the new Rachet and Clank. Actually good games get rated higher than that, heck GTA4 was rated like 9.6 on gamespot and I'll sure as heck get more fun and playability out of DA

[Kemor]

Reviews with an overall score stopped meaning anything a long time ago since reviewer never have logical review ratings, leading to things like recently Uncharted 2 scoring 10/10 while it doesn't bring anything new to the genre, is very platform specific, quite short, offers very limited re-playability and overall is good for a weekend but hardly worth 60€.

Best reviews to me lately are totally un-rated ones (such as the video reviews they do on GiantBomb). They let you see the game, experience amusing and pertinent comments while giving you a background of information regarding the various problems the reviewers faced.

[dtsazza]

Dranearian wrote...

the person reviewing this is a braindead twit. End of story.

That's a bit over the top. I felt that the review was accurate based on his own values and tastes; I disagree with the importance of some of his assessments, but it was still a useful review.

Bashing graphics because its not brand spanking new photorealistic zomgwtfbbq awesome?

Like I said in another thread, these tardmonkeys who rate graphics based on how good they look as opposed to graphical errors need to stab themselves in the face.

If Chrono Trigger were released today, would it be any less of a fantastic game because its 2d sprite based and not uberwtfbbq 3d graphics? Hell no.

That's why they have an overall score, though, which isn't a simple average. If Chrono Trigger were released today, and were reviewing it in a format that requires you to give a separate score to graphics, would you give it a 9? No, you'd give it a 2 or so - but then go on in the review body to say it doesn't matter, and give an overall score that reflects the game as a whole and isn't skewed just because of a low graphics score.

The graphics are worse then a lot of contemporary games, and from everything we'd seen I'd think you'd struggle to justify a graphics score of 8.5+. 7.5 out of 10 is still "good", let's not forget, and reading the reviewer's description next to the score I find it hard to disagree with his justification of that figure.

It's not tardmonkeyism to rate graphics based on how they look (surely that's the point) - only to refuse to play/enjoy a game because it got a low graphics score. Or possibly to run a publication and insist all the reviews have these compartmentalised scores. But the reviewer needed to assess the graphics, and did so in what seems like a fair way. I don't see any indication in the text that he disliked the game because of the graphics.


Besides that, I get the feeling he'd have given the PC version around 0.4 points higher, as he was definitely coming up against some frustration with the interface. And more importantly some of his negatives sound like positives to me:

There are some inherent problems with RPGs in general that Dragon Age: Origins does little to address... pure dice-based role playing almost always feels like the tabletop game that the art department is trying to convince you it's not.

I want a CRPG to be heavily dice-based, but roll all those dice for me behind the scenes so I don't want to do it myself. This "complaint", especially in the context of others in the review, sound like the reviewer was complaining about how it's a thinking man's game and not console-y enough: "I want more style and less substance!"

The "inherent problems with RPGs in general" is that it seems Patrick Kolan doesn't like RPGs.

[dynas2001]

As I said up above, this score is going to hurt sales without a doubt. At least in some small part.

[Foxd1e]

Oh I am not saying his review doesn't expose a few negatives, it's good to get the negatives out in the open in there is any, it;s how harshly he berated the negatives that gets me. Like my point on the sound he rated it a 7.5 and I challenged people to look up the games in the last few years that got below a 8 in sound. They are mostly going to be small-budget publishers that actually couldn't afford to make good sound effects. Bioware on the otherhand did a commendable job if you ask me. If you really want an example of bad voice-acting go check out Resident Evil 1. "Barry... Where's Barry?...." "He's probably...." "Nooooo.........Nooooooo" classic

[McAdams]

Many people here are thinking Baldur’s Gate and comparing this with that. Are we really expecting a game that is like Baldur’s Gate? Dragon Age was never Baldur’s Gate. When Bioware used the term ‘spiritual successor’ it implies to me they are trying to step into the shoes of a legend, and it is hard to have such high expectations and not have it come out a bit short. Many game productions nowadays try to outdo each other but there are limitations like budget for instance. Some things the developers thought of that may put the product over the top may not be able to be realized due to constraints. The manual is an example. As the reviewer wrote in his conclusions, Dragon Age is worth buying. It is a polished product in its own right.

[Foxd1e]

McAdams Bioware has legend-making shoes, see BG2, KOTOR, and Mass Effect

[viking135]

Hmm i don`T really care what numbers te reviewers give the game. Based on what they wrote i got the impression that the reviewer was posetive toward the game.

[Niten Ryu]

Good review but it didn't give anything that we didn't know years ago. Bioware smartly chose to go with generic fantasy as it's very popular. Long development time left graphics years behind the state of the art and art direction overall is rather bland too. AI can't be that smart as there haven't been need for improvement in 10 years because most players are terrible at all computer games and especially in CRPGs.



8.4 is fine score for any game.

[digitalforceq]

Another review... another complaint about the graphics... let's hope PC version scores a bit higher.

[FKSSR]

I agree the graphics aren't the level of new FPS, but that's because it's a RPG. RPGs should not have the same standards for graphics considering the amount of time put into their stories and worlds, instead.

[digitalforceq]

Yeah, but Oblivion, Witcher and Mass Effect all had great graphics for RPGs. I am hoping it's just the console version but I'll see soon

[Count Viceroy]

I couldn't care less what one guy in australia think (unless it's yathzee). As long as the Graphics are passable I don't mind. Never expected them to complain about the sound however. Though then again that makes them stand out from the crowd. We'll see soon enough.

[Savey Anchev]

I happen to have a few friends in the industry and lets just say that KVO and JH of Gamespot and IGN might've liked DAO a tiny bit more than a 8.4.

[Frozenflamekid]

Dam Wookie wrote...

It reads like a very fair, well thought out review and similar to other reviews. I know I will rate the game higher due to my own personal preferences. However I appreciate that the negatives are being noted. I don't need everyone else to review a game based on my own rose tinted viewpoint.

I agree. The reviewer pointed out everything I was skeptical about. The graphics truly are a bit 2004. The recommended settings for PC are lower than what my 4 year computer is. That sure tell you something. The Witcher came out in 2007 and it kicked my PCs ass.

Also, looking from the videos this game surely feels like a merging of Lord of the Rings and World of Warcraft, plus some other games thown in (including Mass Effect).

Ogrimmar here is called Orzimmar? And I saw a video on Gamespot yesterday where you fight Treebeard from LOTR.....he even talked slowwwllly and deeeply....pretty much the same character.

Now, I am a huge RPG fan and I don't see those things as negatives. I will buy the game and love every second of it. But I do agree with the review and I think 8.4 is a fairly decent score here.

What did you guys expect? A perfect 10 for an RPG in the era of First Person Shooters? Common now. Grand Theft Auto IV got a perfect 10 on IGN. A 10! The most overrated game ever. ANd from what I rememeber, the graphics in that game were not Crysis quality either....