557 réponses à ce sujet

[TheBlackBaron]

BobSmith101 wrote...

DJBare wrote...

Giving a zero is just childish, giving a 10 is just letting the developers know they don't have to try harder next time, if you want more from your gaming experience, then use proper critique and not this childish back and forth.

I think people do it to balance out what they see as paid off reviews. The people who rally behind over inflated scores are no better.

Problem is, it doesn't "balance it out". You wind up with 9s on one end and 1s on the other, which balances out to a 5. I doubt every single game out there is a giant flaming ball of averageness as a 5 implies. 

Modifié par TheBlackBaron, 06 mars 2012 - 08:44 .

[DJBare]

BobSmith101 wrote...

I think people do it to balance out what they see as paid off reviews. The people who rally behind over inflated scores are no better.

Yeah, butthurts on both sides, "You gave it a 0!, screw you!, I'm giving it a 10!"
Childish and purile, people need to grow up.

[Sgt.Catman]

Cjail wrote...

No review was made on PS3 so no way to tell if the frame-rate problems encountered in demo are still there.

Played the Ps3 version at gamestop while waiting at the midnight release. framerate issues are still there.

[GipsyDangeresque]

Well, Bioware did re-use each of the multiplayer maps (Just one time each) for various side missions. (If we're arguing semantics )

Modifié par Atemeus, 06 mars 2012 - 08:44 .

[DrWilhelm]

Wow to the metacritic reviews. I mean, I'm all set to give ME3 a scathing review once I've had a chance to play through and see if my concerns are correct, but zeroes and ones? Let's face it, there isn't a triple-A game in, at the very least, the last 10 years that has been that bad. Any game with high production values is going to have at least some redeeming qualities. Dragon Age 2. the worst big budget game I've played in years, was at worst only average.

And I adore the guy who's ranting about "forced" Homosexual and Transgender romances. Really, dude? Come to think of it, I wasn't aware there even were Transgender characters in the game. Is it the Chobot character? I thought she looked odd, but I just figured she was a Husk in a skin suit.

[Weskerr]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Weskerr wrote...

No, it won't be damaging. If the game is as good as professional reviewers say it is, then the metacritic score will eventually reflect that. That's how statistics works.

Companies like EA use user scores to reflect how much money they throw on the next project, IIRC. 

Trust me, when most of the fans have finished the game, the metacritic score will adjust itself to be in the same range as the average of the professional reviews.

[The Last Guardian]

gamereactor.dk 10/10

[Warhawk137]

BobSmith101 wrote...

DJBare wrote...

Giving a zero is just childish, giving a 10 is just letting the developers know they don't have to try harder next time, if you want more from your gaming experience, then use proper critique and not this childish back and forth.

I think people do it to balance out what they see as paid off reviews. The people who rally behind over inflated scores are no better.

If there were aggregate scores MAYBE that MIGHT make some kind of convoluted sense, but doing it like this just makes everyone look stupid.

It's a pure user score - so, you have nothing to truly balance.  Give the game what you actually think it deserves, and then the user score will be an actual reflection of the quality of the game, instead of a patently absurd thing that's easy to ignore.

[laudable11]

Jarrett Lee wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...

PDesign wrote...

metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect-3 user score

I guess trolls have nothing better to do with their time.

It's disturbing and probably will be quite damaging.

Hi Jarrett. would you like to say anything about the face code issue?

[AlexXIV]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Warhawk137 wrote...

Honestly, I keep hearing about how the critic reviews on metascore are totally inflated and the user scores are the real measure of how good a game is.

And I see this and I go... honestly?

I mean, Dragon Age II wasn't the best game ever, but it didn't deserve the four-point-something it has on metacritic, and that ME3 is getting less than that is frickin' absurd.

I'll never understand the internet.

It kinda did. Certainly more than it deserved the 90's it got in some reviews.

Naw I am one of those people gravely disappointed of DA2. But there is giving a honest opinion and there is throwing dirt at something because it disappointed me. I wish DA2 didn't exist but still I would give the game at least a 6/10 because I have to admit that other people could like it despite flaws. It is just as some people said, some 'users' are biased and try to harm the game as much as possible because the devs didn't do everything their way.

[The Last Guardian]

Sgt.Catman wrote...

Cjail wrote...

No review was made on PS3 so no way to tell if the frame-rate problems encountered in demo are still there.

Played the Ps3 version at gamestop while waiting at the midnight release. framerate issues are still there.

Reivewers say that frame rate issues apply to the beginning, but quickly stop after the 1st level or so. 

[k177sh0t]

PDesign wrote...

metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect-3 user score

oh my

no surprise lol

[The Last Guardian]

Love this hyperbolic quote from a review:

"It’s a game that you simply must play; one of those titles that will be remembered alongside GoldenEye, Metal Gear Solid, Halo and Ocarina of Time as one of the greatest games of all time. BioWare hasn’t just raised the bar; it’s sent it thundering into orbit."

[Warhawk137]

Half the 0s are just complete spam, anyway.

[The Last Guardian]

The Reviews so Far:

IGN - 9.5/10
Eurogamer - 10/10
Giant Bomb - 4/5
1up - A
GameTrailers - 9.5/10
Gamespot - 9/10
10/10 from Voxgames
4/4 - USA Today
Game Informer - 10/10
Rock Paper Shotgun Review
G4TV - 5/5
The Guardian - 5/5
The Escapist - 4.5/5
pittsburgh post gazette - 10/10
EGM - 9/10
Destructoid - 8.5
GamerZines: 98%
gamereactor.dk 10/10
CVG - 9.4/10
NowGamer - 9.2/10
The Verge - 10/10

[Dave of Canada]

nvm.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 06 mars 2012 - 08:49 .

[fropas]

Woops misguided rant. LOL

Modifié par fropas, 06 mars 2012 - 08:51 .

[Catsith]

Oh wow. Bioware is cleaning it up with ME3. Not that I expected anything less, but gotdamn.

[H1natachan]

Game informer review seems solid enough, and i couldnt believe that us x box owners are looking at a disc swapping 5 times ?

[The Last Guardian]

PC Gamer Review: 9.3/10
http://www.pcgamer.c...ffect-3-review/

[Reptillius]

of course they deleted half of them. It's the only way that metacritic could still call themselves legitimate this early into things... Considering the game is barely out. Most are barely getting it installed and up and running past maybe the first area or two. Anything that doesn't come with something constructive either for or against the game will probably get shot down for the next day or two for their own sake more than that of the game.

[Terror_K]

So clearly none of these reviewers played with an imported Shepard that went all the way back to ME1 then.

[humes spork]

TheBlackBaron wrote...

So it's safe to conclude that, outside of the "they're getting paid to give a good review!!1!11!" conspiracy theories (which I'm sure happens, just not to the extent typically claimed) and the face import issue, this game is pretty good.

The issue isn't that reviewers and sites are being paid off. The issue is that because game journalism lives and dies on pre-release information, exclusives, and getting early review copies -- that itself a function of the preorder schtick -- review sites can't invoke the wrath of the publishers who are capable of blacklisting them which seriously hurts if not kills the game site itself. And, because the sites and their parent companies are loathe to risk the wrath of the publisher, they keep tight reins on their reviewers.

Let's, for example, say a hypothetical major review site, GameWizard, had panned Dragon Age 2. EA then says "well, you panned DA2, so when it comes time for ME3 or SWToR you're getting jack!". Since GameWizard ends up being behind the curve compared to competing sites thanks to not getting a review out promptly or exclusive info, they lose traffic and revenue. GameWizard can't afford to do that, so they attempt to garner goodwill with EA by giving their games good reviews when they otherwise might not deserve them.

Modifié par humes spork, 06 mars 2012 - 08:55 .