557 réponses à ce sujet

[AkiKishi]

Rockworm503 wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Unfallen_Satan wrote...

A separate rating category for "value" or "DRM" seems like a necessity. A lot of users are giving games poor reviews for Day 1 DLC or Origin/SecuROM/Steam association. Though I share their sentiment, rating a game poorly for those reasons ruins the value of user ratings. A good game is a good game, regardless of any value issues associated with it.

Like this ?


vaatiel
0
Is this truly the state of the video game industry at present? It used to be consumer desire that shaped what was released, now we have day 1 DLC and companies like Bioware that go to great extremes to censor anything that even closely resembles criticism. Are you going to bend over and let this happen?

The game is not always about the content especially to users. Something you don't buy because of DRM or day 1 DLC is still a lost sale.

A 0 = broken and unplayable.
day 1 DLC is far from broken or unplayable......

Broken and unplayable on ethical grounds.

[AkiKishi]

Croak99 wrote...

So PC Gamer ("The global authority on PC games") gave DA2 94 and ME3 only 93? Good to know.

That's a good one, nice spot there.

[crazyrabbits]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Broken and unplayable on ethical grounds.

There is no such thing as an "ethically unplayable" game. A game either works or it doesn't.

[Wittand25]

misoretu9 wrote...

Acidrain92 wrote...

Bioware forum goer logic - every reviewer that gave ME3 a good score was paid off

I love how fans of the mass effect universe actually want ME3 to get a bad score xD

you guys are laughable

And of course proffesional reviewers gave DA2 only positive scores because it was high quality product and it deserved it, huh?

And of course a fact that much, much more people gave negative scores to ME3 than to ME1&2 combined and after all those years means nothing, it MUST BE just trolling and irrational hate to Bioware, right?

It pretty much is.
All those very lows scores for BioWare products started after the doctors gave the interview about broadening the target audience of their games.
Ever since then RPG players (here and elsewhere) started treating BioWare like an exgirlfriend who dumped then for a guy with a bigger "wallet".

Generally user scores are not trustworthy since they usually don´t rate the game but how the game lived up to the reviewers expectations and how the reviewer feels about the companies making the game.

Professional reviews are slightly better, though one always has to bear in mind that an AAA game will always get scores >75% by the virtue of being AAA (and having therefore enough resources to spend on graphic, sound and similar things).

[Wulfram]

Catsith wrote...

But, again, perhaps there wasn't enough of this alleged 'railroading' and auto-dialogue to bother these reviewers enough to remark on it. If they didn't notice a change, then they have no obligation to expose and comment on it.

They should have noticed the change.  Even if it's a change that only applies to the first few hours - since I can't comment on anything too deep in the game - it's something that to me should be mentioned in the review, to tell people that the initial period isn't reflective of the whole game.  It's what I'm really reading the reviews for - in the hopes of seeing if this change which threatens my enjoyment of the game is something which really persists.

I guess perhaps their memories of previous ME games have merged into all the many other games which offer even less control over the PCs dialogue.  Or maybe I just play Bioware RPGs for very different reasons to the reviewers.  But it makes the reviews of limited use in deciding how enjoyable the game will be for me.

[Sporothrix]

Acidrain92 wrote...

misoretu9 wrote...

Acidrain92 wrote...

Bioware forum goer logic - every reviewer that gave ME3 a good score was paid off

I love how fans of the mass effect universe actually want ME3 to get a bad score xD

you guys are laughable

And of course proffesional reviewers gave DA2 only positive scores because it was high quality product and it deserved it, huh?

And of course a fact that much, much more people gave negative scores to ME3 than to ME1&2 combined and after all those years means nothing, it MUST BE just trolling and irrational hate to Bioware, right?

yeah O.o pretty much. Do you honestly think that every major reviewer of Mass Effect 3 was paid off? (I say every major reviewer because so far every major reviewer has given it a good score) Thats just ridiculous conspiracy theory logic. The only reason you people will ever think a reviewer ISNT paid off is if they give out a score that you agree with.

I cant stand the amount of closed minded and selfish logic that you people fill your heads with.

I don't care why they give positive scores and never mention all those flaws. The fact is that - DA2 had positive reviews and was at very best an average game. User score reflected that perfectly and after first week there was major drop in sales (sales for 1 week were from preorders and hype in proffesional sites). Could you explain that situation to me? 

[AkiKishi]

crazyrabbits wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Broken and unplayable on ethical grounds.

There is no such thing as an "ethically unplayable" game. A game either works or it doesn't.

Sure there is people avoid games for all sorts of reasons, not all of them related to gameplay.

[Rockworm503]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Rockworm503 wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Unfallen_Satan wrote...

A separate rating category for "value" or "DRM" seems like a necessity. A lot of users are giving games poor reviews for Day 1 DLC or Origin/SecuROM/Steam association. Though I share their sentiment, rating a game poorly for those reasons ruins the value of user ratings. A good game is a good game, regardless of any value issues associated with it.

Like this ?


vaatiel
0
Is this truly the state of the video game industry at present? It used to be consumer desire that shaped what was released, now we have day 1 DLC and companies like Bioware that go to great extremes to censor anything that even closely resembles criticism. Are you going to bend over and let this happen?

The game is not always about the content especially to users. Something you don't buy because of DRM or day 1 DLC is still a lost sale.

A 0 = broken and unplayable.
day 1 DLC is far from broken or unplayable......

Broken and unplayable on ethical grounds.

That doesn't even make any sense.
Ethically I have a problem with the DLC but that can't factor into a review... Not if you want to be taken seriously.
Not even Angry Joe does that.  As much as DLC gets on his nerves he uses it in seperate videos or he gives it a better reason than that.
Even then it never gets that far.
His worst game he reviewed (Mindjack) was practically broken and almost unplayable and he gave that more than a 0.
http://angryjoeshow....k-angry-review/

Modifié par Rockworm503, 06 mars 2012 - 11:00 .

[Rickin10]

Catsith wrote...

Obro wrote...
But it is. They sais this is an RPG and then they remove RP with taking away the ability to controll what you way.

They did not. You can still make story choices and attitude choices in the game, which I believe is more important to most people including these reviewers than navigating the wheel for a few extra lines of dialogue, or having an additional neutral line that's a copy of the paragon line. I'm not dismissing the general complaint of auto-dialogue, I'm suggesting that it might not be as big an issue for most people as some would have you believe, as evidenced by the complete lack of mention in ANY of these reviews, even the 8's.

Whilst  whether the amount of auto-dialogue is great, not an issue, or the end of the world, is obviously subjective, it's a huge part of what Mass Effect was built on.  For the reviewers not to even mention in, even in passing, is boardering on incompetence .

[Acidrain92]

misoretu9 wrote...

I don't care why they give positive scores and never mention all those flaws. The fact is that - DA2 had positive reviews and was at very best an average game. User score reflected that perfectly and after first week there was major drop in sales (sales for 1 week were from preorders and hype in proffesional sites). Could you explain that situation to me? 

I dont know. I blame the fanbase honestly. Its like the whole Bioware fanbase is its own worst enemy, constantly fighting and damaging itself.

I honestly cant say much about Dragon Age or Dragon Age 2 because I never really liked them, but from what I can tell about Mass Effect, you guys are being needlessly paranoid and narrow minded.

ALSO a great review for ME3 is on Rock Paper Shotgun. He hasnt reviewed the multiplayer yet, but his singleplayer review seems very thoughtful and sincere. Plus it doesnt have a number score which I think is great.

We really need to get rid of all of these 1-10 number ratings for videogames. They do nothing but cause controversy.

Modifié par Acidrain92, 06 mars 2012 - 10:58 .

[Canden_Zain]

It never fails. New Bioware game comes out... people who have already decided what is wrong with it based on pre-release speculation **** about biased reviews.

[Dean_the_Young]

squee365 wrote...

http://xbox360.ign.c.../1219445p1.html

 

While it's a good game, great even, but it certainly isn't a 10/10 game. It's dealing with some serious baggage, and some narrative flaws as a series, from the get go: not simply the endings, but as a trilogy as well.

[Rockworm503]

BobSmith101 wrote...

crazyrabbits wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Broken and unplayable on ethical grounds.

There is no such thing as an "ethically unplayable" game. A game either works or it doesn't.

Sure there is people avoid games for all sorts of reasons, not all of them related to gameplay.

Thats fine.
They can give any reason I'm holding off on buying it myself for that very reason but you can't review a game until you've played it.

[AkiKishi]

Rockworm503 wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Rockworm503 wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Unfallen_Satan wrote...

A separate rating category for "value" or "DRM" seems like a necessity. A lot of users are giving games poor reviews for Day 1 DLC or Origin/SecuROM/Steam association. Though I share their sentiment, rating a game poorly for those reasons ruins the value of user ratings. A good game is a good game, regardless of any value issues associated with it.

Like this ?


vaatiel
0
Is this truly the state of the video game industry at present? It used to be consumer desire that shaped what was released, now we have day 1 DLC and companies like Bioware that go to great extremes to censor anything that even closely resembles criticism. Are you going to bend over and let this happen?

The game is not always about the content especially to users. Something you don't buy because of DRM or day 1 DLC is still a lost sale.

A 0 = broken and unplayable.
day 1 DLC is far from broken or unplayable......

Broken and unplayable on ethical grounds.

That doesn't even make any sense.
Ethically I have a problem with the DLC but that can't factor into a review... Not if you want to be taken seriously.
Not even Angry Joe does that.  As much as DLC gets on his nerves he uses it in seperate reviews or he gives it a better reason than that.
Even then it never gets that far.
His worst game he reviewed (Mindjack) was practically broken and almost unplayable and he gave that more than a 0.
http://angryjoeshow....k-angry-review/

He's not a reviewer he's a user. He does not have to follow the same guidelines reviewers do. If you don't share his ethics it wont' bother you. If you do, it will.

ME3 was a hard one for me to let go because it's ME3. Which is why I'm glad I can rent it. Future Bioware products don't have that same investment. This is why user scores are useful.

[Rockworm503]

jreezy wrote...

Acidrain92 wrote...
We really need to get rid of all of these 1-10 number ratings for videogames. They do nothing but cause controversy.

This. Take them out and people will actually read through reviews to find out whether the game is worth paying for or not.

This.
Zero Punctuation doesn't use numbers and no one questions his reviews.
Of course half the time you don't know if he's hating the game or loving it lol.

[Killer Instinct]

mi55ion wrote...

Giorito, I think they are just upset and pouting because there is nothing they can do to save the galaxy in the end. hero complex.

Thanks.

[Sporothrix]

Wittand25 wrote...

It pretty much is.
All those very lows scores for BioWare products started after the doctors gave the interview about broadening the target audience of their games.
Ever since then RPG players (here and elsewhere) started treating BioWare like an exgirlfriend who dumped then for a guy with a bigger "wallet".

That's not true. Like I said, ME1 and ME2 combined don't have as much negative scores as ME3 has already. Even if you add to that DAO it's still pretty much the same. So it is not "products".
Of course you can try to rationalise it all the way you want.

[Rockworm503]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Rockworm503 wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Rockworm503 wrote...

BobSmith101 wrote...

Unfallen_Satan wrote...

A separate rating category for "value" or "DRM" seems like a necessity. A lot of users are giving games poor reviews for Day 1 DLC or Origin/SecuROM/Steam association. Though I share their sentiment, rating a game poorly for those reasons ruins the value of user ratings. A good game is a good game, regardless of any value issues associated with it.

Like this ?


vaatiel
0
Is this truly the state of the video game industry at present? It used to be consumer desire that shaped what was released, now we have day 1 DLC and companies like Bioware that go to great extremes to censor anything that even closely resembles criticism. Are you going to bend over and let this happen?

The game is not always about the content especially to users. Something you don't buy because of DRM or day 1 DLC is still a lost sale.

A 0 = broken and unplayable.
day 1 DLC is far from broken or unplayable......

Broken and unplayable on ethical grounds.

That doesn't even make any sense.
Ethically I have a problem with the DLC but that can't factor into a review... Not if you want to be taken seriously.
Not even Angry Joe does that.  As much as DLC gets on his nerves he uses it in seperate reviews or he gives it a better reason than that.
Even then it never gets that far.
His worst game he reviewed (Mindjack) was practically broken and almost unplayable and he gave that more than a 0.
http://angryjoeshow....k-angry-review/

He's not a reviewer he's a user. He does not have to follow the same guidelines reviewers do. If you don't share his ethics it wont' bother you. If you do, it will.

ME3 was a hard one for me to let go because it's ME3. Which is why I'm glad I can rent it. Future Bioware products don't have that same investment. This is why user scores are useful.

He has his own website.
He's part of Blistered Thumbs and That Guy With The Glasses.
He has a fanbase that listens to what he says.
He's getting payed to review games.
If that doesn't qualify him as a reviewer I don't know what would 

[Sporothrix]

Acidrain92 wrote...

misoretu9 wrote...

I don't care why they give positive scores and never mention all those flaws. The fact is that - DA2 had positive reviews and was at very best an average game. User score reflected that perfectly and after first week there was major drop in sales (sales for 1 week were from preorders and hype in proffesional sites). Could you explain that situation to me? 

I dont know. I blame the fanbase honestly. Its like the whole Bioware fanbase is its own worst enemy, constantly fighting and damaging itself.

I honestly cant say much about Dragon Age or Dragon Age 2 because I never really liked them, but from what I can tell about Mass Effect, you guys are being needlessly paranoid and narrow minded.

ALSO a great review for ME3 is on Rock Paper Shotgun. He hasnt reviewed the multiplayer yet, but his singleplayer review seems very thoughtful and sincere. Plus it doesnt have a number score which I think is great.

We really need to get rid of all of these 1-10 number ratings for videogames. They do nothing but cause controversy.

Sorry, my distaste comes from a fact I've seen gameplay and endings on YT and talked to people who played it. And it's a good game only if all you want from it is shooting, explosions and sexbots on high heels (EDI). 

Modifié par misoretu9, 06 mars 2012 - 11:10 .

[Acidrain92]

misoretu9 wrote...

Sorry, my distaste comes from a fact I've seen gameplay and endings on YT. And it's a good game only if all you want from it is shooting, explosions and sexbots on high heels (EDI). 

I guess all I can really expect from forum goers like you are sarcastic remarks, a condescending attitude, and closed mindedness about a game you havent even played.

the human race makes me sick sometimes.

but hey. I guess we all have an opinion.

Modifié par Acidrain92, 06 mars 2012 - 11:14 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Or, you know, everything BUT the last five-odd minutes of the game.

Geeze, dissatisfied ending projection, much?

[Beard_of_Bees]

I have issues with some aspects of ME3, I have posted on the boards before. But spamming 0/10 scores is really immature. It seems like they were waiting until metacritic opened the review section so they could cry like spoiled children. (I will admit that 10/10 also seems a bit unrealistic).

Could people wait until they have properly played the game before reviewing?

Could they give a balanced score, not just an emotional attack (positive or negative)?

Could they consider that metacritic could be a useful source of information if people gave fair, open-minded reviews? And that the current scores and reviews just turn it into a place to cry and rant?

Or is this expecting too much?