224 réponses à ce sujet

[RocketManSR2]

That is just sad. That's the worst smear campaign I've ever seen on that site. Just another reason I'm glad I don't know any of those people IRL. I'm having a blast with the SP. 10/10

[Abraham_uk]

BatmanPWNS wrote...

I know that ME3 might not be the best game ever but really? Giving it a 0? So you're saying this game is worse than, oh I don't know, Superman 64 or something? I can see why there is criticism but I don't see how it can be 0/10.

Here is an example of a 0 scoring review. I can't quote word for word because of site rules.

"Oh this is the worst game of all of gaming history. In this game if you can call it that you do nothing but shoot things. Thingie things that move in a totally rubbish manner. Then you shoot more things and have ZERO CHOICES! Nothing you do matters and you have even less customisation than Mass Effect 2. Heck ET the video game gave you more choices to customise your character. That was a woeful game but Mass Effect 3 is worse.

Wow you've really dropped the ball here. Someone needs to pay for this because I'm going to sue you all! Yes you heard me. I am never going to be happy with life ever again. I've made a terrible mistake playing this poorly made film where you shoot a few shootie things and then shoot some more.

Poor AI, no choices, only five guns, no tech and biotic powers anymore. (you have tech and biotic powers but they've been so badly nerfed that you might aswell ignore them) and no sense of characters, direction and anything. COMPLETELY DEVOID OF MERIT!!!!! DON'T PLAY ANYMORE BIOWARE GAMES EVEEEERRRRRRRR!"

Is it just me or is there something a bit biased about this kind of review? Has the reviewer ever played Ninjabreadman, Sonic3D, Superman64, Bubsy 3D, CDI Mario and Zelda, Big Rigs Over the Road Racing, ET the video game, Elf Bowling 1 & 2. Is Mass Effect 3 really as bad as those games?

Maybe I should take this review seriously. If Metacritic says it who am I to argue. Mass Effect 3 is the worst game ever.

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 07 mars 2012 - 05:24 .

[Draythe]

A lot of those low reviews are rather well written actually if you read them. A lot of fair criticism of recent decisions. While 0 definitely isn't a fair score, have you considered these people might not just be "trolling"? That maybe they are trying to send a message to the devs in one of the few open forums where their voices won't be drowned out by endless praises or silenced by moderation? Not that I'm defending the guys who post "0/10 U MAD BRO?" garbage, but there's nothing wrong with free speech. Nothing stopping fans from going there and boosting the rating with positive reviews as much as they want.

Modifié par Draythe, 07 mars 2012 - 05:24 .

[AkiKishi]

Abraham_uk wrote...

BatmanPWNS wrote...

I know that ME3 might not be the best game ever but really? Giving it a 0? So you're saying this game is worse than, oh I don't know, Superman 64 or something? I can see why there is criticism but I don't see how it can be 0/10.

Here is an example of a 0 scoring review. I can't quote word for word because of site rules.

"Oh this is the worst game of all of gaming history. In this game if you can call it that you do nothing but shoot things. Thingie things that move in a totally rubbish manner. Then you shoot more things and have ZERO CHOICES! Nothing you do matters and you have even less customisation than Mass Effect 2. Heck ET the video game gave you more choices to customise your character. That was a woeful game but Mass Effect 3 is worse.

Wow you've really dropped the ball here. Someone needs to pay for this because I'm going to sue you all! Yes you heard me. I am never going to be happy with life ever again. I've made a terrible mistake playing this poorly made film where you shoot a few shootie things and then shoot some more.

Poor AI, no choices, only five guns, no tech and biotic powers anymore. (you have tech and biotic powers but they've been so badly nerfed that you might aswell ignore them) and no sense of characters, direction and anything. COMPLETELY DEVOID OF MERIT!!!!! DON'T PLAY ANYMORE BIOWARE GAMES EVEEEERRRRRRRR!"

Is it just me or is there something a bit biased about this kind of review? Has the reviewer ever played Ninjabreadman, Sonic3D, Superman64, Bubsy 3D, CDI Mario and Zelda, Big Rigs Over the Road Racing, ET the video game, Elf Bowling 1 & 2. Is Mass Effect 3 really as bad as those games?

Maybe I should take this review seriously. If Metacritic says it who am I to argue. Mass Effect 3 is the worst game ever.

It's incredibly exagerated of course but the points are valid.

If I rewrote if like this.

Situationally broken AI, lack of choice in weapon load outs, underpowered biotics in relation to basic weapons. Characters lack defined purpose and plot is disjointed.

For a AAA title this is seriously broken do not buy it ! Do not encourage games like this to be made by buying anything by Bioware ever!.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 07 mars 2012 - 05:30 .

[Cazlee]

Draythe wrote...
A lot of fair criticism of recent decisions. While 0 definitely isn't a fair score, have you considered these people might not just be "trolling"?

No. And that's because legitimate fans were still playing the game when most of the reviews came in. Too many of the reviews were posted before or only hours after release. 

Modifié par Cazlee, 07 mars 2012 - 05:36 .

[Abraham_uk]

I've played Mass Effect 1 & 2. I enjoyed the Mass Effect 3 demo. But if Mass Effect 3 has such negative user reviews then it can't possibly be very good. That is a pretty good rule of thumb.

Don't give me the AAA titles are bombarded with negative reviews aregument. Skyrim had lots of haters and had a 80% positive feedback.

The only possible explanation is that the game wasn't very good. This is from over 400 reviews. So I can't see how 400 reviews can be a mis representation of the game even if some of them are tolling like I mentioned in previous response.


As for critics reviews. Well that's just baffling. I am beginning to take user reviews more seriously.

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 07 mars 2012 - 05:35 .

[Draythe]

Cazlee wrote...

Draythe wrote...
A lot of fair criticism of recent decisions. While 0 definitely isn't a fair score, have you considered these people might not just be "trolling"?

No. And that's because legitimate fans are still playing the game. Too many of the reviews came in before or only hours after release. 

Your close-mindedness makes me sad. 

[AlexXIV]

Draythe wrote...

A lot of those low reviews are rather well written actually if you read them. A lot of fair criticism of recent decisions. While 0 definitely isn't a fair score, have you considered these people might not just be "trolling"? That maybe they are trying to send a message to the devs in one of the few open forums where their voices won't be drowned out by endless praises or silenced by moderation? Not that I'm defending the guys who post "0/10 U MAD BRO?" garbage, but there's nothing wrong with free speech. Nothing stopping fans from going there and boosting the rating with positive reviews as much as they want.

Everytime I hear 'free speech' I cringe. Because I know how important it is to some, especially in the USA. Yeah I like that people can have an opinion without being chased down and locked away or killed. That's free speech to me. But people just crap on the whole idea of it when they use their 'free speech' to terrorize, alienate and insult others. Free speech was never supposed to be a weapon to shoot down something you don't like for any reason.

That said, well written or not (didn't read them yet because of spoilers), someone who gives a 0/10 isn't creditable to me. Anyone with a sense of integrity would not rate a game worse than it is because he/she didn't like certain things about it. This is a weak attempt by minorities to force companies to neglect the majority of their customers in favor of this vocal minority. Companies always try to do what pleases as many people as possible. Because that's how you make profit, especially if you sell something that would be thousand times more expensive if not millions of people would buy it.

Bottomline, people who can't make a fair criticism shouldn't criticize at all. Just like people who don't know anything about a subject shouldn't try to lecture others about it.

[vinlandhammer]

sure there is fair criticism but this is for sure not fair. even with all the issues that this game have a reasonable low score would be 7, but this game well deserves a 9 (with few minor fixes a 10).

this low scores are just like CoD vs BF3 where each side injected as many 0's to make sure the score was low as possible, just like how is happening here.

spliting the reasons, many give 0's just because of day 1 dlc (wich nobody is forced to buy, its optional), some just give because its an EA game and they keep this vendetta, others are just kids having fun by spreading 0's scores, some are just nerd rage and i wouldnt take away the not so uncommon practise of people being paid to score 0's to make the game having a false reputation.......

Modifié par vinlandhammer, 07 mars 2012 - 05:37 .

[Cody211282]

vinlandhammer wrote...

sure there is fair criticism but this is for sure not fair. even with all the issues that this game have a reasonable low score would be 7, but this game well deserves a 9 (with few minor fixes a 10).

this low scores are just like CoD vs BF3 where each side injected as many 0's to make sure the score was low as possible, just like how is happening here.

spliting the reasons, many give 0's just because of day 1 dlc (wich nobody is forced to buy, its optional), some just give because its an EA game and they keep this vendetta, others are just kids having fun by spreading 0's scores, some are just nerd rage and i wouldnt take away the not so uncommon practise of people being paid to score 0's to make the game having a false reputation.......

Umm I think the game deserves a low score and not because the day 1 dlc, and I'm sure as hell not getting paid to say that. Is it so hard to think that there are people out there who are just that disapointed in this game?

[Cazlee]

Draythe wrote...

Cazlee wrote...

Draythe wrote...
A lot of fair criticism of recent decisions. While 0 definitely isn't a fair score, have you considered these people might not just be "trolling"?

No. And that's because legitimate fans are still playing the game. Too many of the reviews came in before or only hours after release. 

Your close-mindedness makes me sad. 

ME3 deserves criticism, but if these reviewers have not played the game yet then their reviews are a bad joke.

[Alien1099]

Most Metacritic users are stupid. End of story.

[Abraham_uk]

vinlandhammer wrote...

sure there is fair criticism but this is for sure not fair. even with all the issues that this game have a reasonable low score would be 7, but this game well deserves a 9 (with few minor fixes a 10).

this low scores are just like CoD vs BF3 where each side injected as many 0's to make sure the score was low as possible, just like how is happening here.

spliting the reasons, many give 0's just because of day 1 dlc (wich nobody is forced to buy, its optional), some just give because its an EA game and they keep this vendetta, others are just kids having fun by spreading 0's scores, some are just nerd rage and i wouldnt take away the not so uncommon practise of people being paid to score 0's to make the game having a false reputation.......

Let's see.3.4 user score on the PS3
              4.9 user score on the XBOX360
              2.7 user score on the PC


There are hundreds of votes. So the only logical conclusion was that the game wasn't very good.

How many games have you know have had poor user scores in the first week that later transformed into positive overall scores? I don't think that's ever happened in the history of metacritic

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 07 mars 2012 - 05:42 .

[squee365]

Abraham_uk wrote...

I've played Mass Effect 1 & 2. I enjoyed the Mass Effect 3 demo. But if Mass Effect 3 has such negative user reviews then it can't possibly be very good. That is a pretty good rule of thumb.

Don't give me the AAA titles are bombarded with negative reviews aregument. Skyrim had lots of haters and had a 80% positive feedback.

The only possible explanation is that the game wasn't very good. This is from over 400 reviews. So I can't see how 400 reviews can be a mis representation of the game even if some of them are tolling like I mentioned in previous response.


As for critics reviews. Well that's just baffling. I am beginning to take user reviews more seriously.

What about Portal 2? I clearly remember seeing the same exactly thing happening, and its a good great game. Just wait a month or so after this day 1 DLC heat cools off. The score will even itself out.

and for the record, you really think those 400 reviews are from people who have actually played the game start to finish and thought hard about what they thought of it? No. Truth is, 80% of them are trolls, and the other 20% are just rageaholics who cant be pleased about anything.

Modifié par squee365, 07 mars 2012 - 05:47 .

[AlexXIV]

Cody211282 wrote...

vinlandhammer wrote...

sure there is fair criticism but this is for sure not fair. even with all the issues that this game have a reasonable low score would be 7, but this game well deserves a 9 (with few minor fixes a 10).

this low scores are just like CoD vs BF3 where each side injected as many 0's to make sure the score was low as possible, just like how is happening here.

spliting the reasons, many give 0's just because of day 1 dlc (wich nobody is forced to buy, its optional), some just give because its an EA game and they keep this vendetta, others are just kids having fun by spreading 0's scores, some are just nerd rage and i wouldnt take away the not so uncommon practise of people being paid to score 0's to make the game having a false reputation.......

Umm I think the game deserves a low score and not because the day 1 dlc, and I'm sure as hell not getting paid to say that. Is it so hard to think that there are people out there who are just that disapointed in this game?

But that's the problem with it. If you're emotionally involved you are acting irrational. Thus you give a 0 because feel betrayed, not because the game is a 0. Same reason why people start to hate someone they loved just because the person broke up. It's the same person, but just because you're disappointed it drops from 10 to 0. It's understandable but it is really a bad human behaviour. Professional reviewers may be paid off, but they at least try to get it across in a professional fashion. So with that in mind I'd still trust a professional reviewer more than a player review. Because the player doesn't have to fear any sort of repercussion because they are anonymous anyway. A professional reviewer at least puts his or her name under it.

[BatmanPWNS]

Hmm, there seems to be more positive than negatives now for the Xbox version. Anyway I am sure the user score will increase. Arkham City had a mix user score when it came out and now it has a higher user score than Skyrim.

[Draythe]

AlexXIV wrote...

Everytime I hear 'free speech' I cringe. Because I know how important it is to some, especially in the USA. Yeah I like that people can have an opinion without being chased down and locked away or killed. That's free speech to me. But people just crap on the whole idea of it when they use their 'free speech' to terrorize, alienate and insult others. Free speech was never supposed to be a weapon to shoot down something you don't like for any reason.

That said, well written or not (didn't read them yet because of spoilers), someone who gives a 0/10 isn't creditable to me. Anyone with a sense of integrity would not rate a game worse than it is because he/she didn't like certain things about it. This is a weak attempt by minorities to force companies to neglect the majority of their customers in favor of this vocal minority. Companies always try to do what pleases as many people as possible. Because that's how you make profit, especially if you sell something that would be thousand times more expensive if not millions of people would buy it.

Bottomline, people who can't make a fair criticism shouldn't criticize at all. Just like people who don't know anything about a subject shouldn't try to lecture others about it.

Free speech should be supported in all situations, not on a case to case basis. People are free to say whatever the hell they want. If something is "shot down" by free speech it is because nobody bothered or was able to offer a worthy counter argument. As for the claim that this is a "vocal minority" posting the reviews on Metacritic, well, I'm not so sure about that. I'm surprised the ratings haven't jumped up after news of all the "trolling" hit. Why aren't the majority taking 5 seconds to spring to the defense of the game they like so much?

http://www.whatdoest....net/?s=bioware 

What is your definition of fair criticism anyway?

Modifié par Draythe, 07 mars 2012 - 05:50 .

[BuffPhantoms]

the metacritic trolls win again, there are people in this thread who actually don't think it was a review bomb/raid.

GG trolls, GG.


93% at Gamerankings. 94% at Metacritic.  The actual reviews > metaraidbombing.

Modifié par BuffPhantoms, 07 mars 2012 - 05:49 .

[AkiKishi]

squee365 wrote...

Abraham_uk wrote...

I've played Mass Effect 1 & 2. I enjoyed the Mass Effect 3 demo. But if Mass Effect 3 has such negative user reviews then it can't possibly be very good. That is a pretty good rule of thumb.

Don't give me the AAA titles are bombarded with negative reviews aregument. Skyrim had lots of haters and had a 80% positive feedback.

The only possible explanation is that the game wasn't very good. This is from over 400 reviews. So I can't see how 400 reviews can be a mis representation of the game even if some of them are tolling like I mentioned in previous response.


As for critics reviews. Well that's just baffling. I am beginning to take user reviews more seriously.

What about Portal 2? I clearly remember seeing the same exactly thing happening, and its a good great game. Just wait a month or so after this day 1 DLC heat cools off. The score will even itself out.

and for the record, you really think thos 400 reviews are from people who have actually played the game start to finish and thought hard about what they thought of it? No. Truth is, 80% of them are trolls, and the other 20% are just rageaholics who cant be pleased about anything.

Portal left a lot of people feeling ripped off.

[AkiKishi]

BatmanPWNS wrote...

Hmm, there seems to be more positive than negatives now for the Xbox version. Anyway I am sure the user score will increase. Arkham City had a mix user score when it came out and now it has a higher user score than Skyrim.

It will probably climb to something a bit more reprentative of the game. Rather than the over inflated review scores.

[squee365]

BobSmith101 wrote...

squee365 wrote...

Abraham_uk wrote...

I've played Mass Effect 1 & 2. I enjoyed the Mass Effect 3 demo. But if Mass Effect 3 has such negative user reviews then it can't possibly be very good. That is a pretty good rule of thumb.

Don't give me the AAA titles are bombarded with negative reviews aregument. Skyrim had lots of haters and had a 80% positive feedback.

The only possible explanation is that the game wasn't very good. This is from over 400 reviews. So I can't see how 400 reviews can be a mis representation of the game even if some of them are tolling like I mentioned in previous response.


As for critics reviews. Well that's just baffling. I am beginning to take user reviews more seriously.

What about Portal 2? I clearly remember seeing the same exactly thing happening, and its a good great game. Just wait a month or so after this day 1 DLC heat cools off. The score will even itself out.

and for the record, you really think thos 400 reviews are from people who have actually played the game start to finish and thought hard about what they thought of it? No. Truth is, 80% of them are trolls, and the other 20% are just rageaholics who cant be pleased about anything.

Portal left a lot of people feeling ripped off.

From what? Hats?
The whole debacle was silly. As a GAME though, it was a very rewarding experience. If you played it you know what I mean. 

[AlanC9]

Why does anyone care about Metacritic user reviews, ever?

[AlexXIV]

Draythe wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

Everytime I hear 'free speech' I cringe. Because I know how important it is to some, especially in the USA. Yeah I like that people can have an opinion without being chased down and locked away or killed. That's free speech to me. But people just crap on the whole idea of it when they use their 'free speech' to terrorize, alienate and insult others. Free speech was never supposed to be a weapon to shoot down something you don't like for any reason.

That said, well written or not (didn't read them yet because of spoilers), someone who gives a 0/10 isn't creditable to me. Anyone with a sense of integrity would not rate a game worse than it is because he/she didn't like certain things about it. This is a weak attempt by minorities to force companies to neglect the majority of their customers in favor of this vocal minority. Companies always try to do what pleases as many people as possible. Because that's how you make profit, especially if you sell something that would be thousand times more expensive if not millions of people would buy it.

Bottomline, people who can't make a fair criticism shouldn't criticize at all. Just like people who don't know anything about a subject shouldn't try to lecture others about it.

Free speech should be supported in all situations, not on a case to case basis. People are free to say whatever the hell they want. If something is "shot down" by free speech it is because nobody bothered or was able to offer a worthy counter argument. As for the claim that this is a "vocal minority" posting the reviews on Metacritic, well, I'm not so sure about that. I'm surprised the ratings haven't jumped up after news of all the "trolling" hit. Why aren't the majority taking 5 seconds to spring to the defense of the game they like so much?

What is your definition of fair criticism anyway?

A fair criticism is when an average game is rated with an average score. Easy as that. No, free speech should not be supported in any situation, and it is not if you look at it. You can't say what you want, nowhere in the world. And that's a good thing in many cases. Just because you are smarter or more eloquent you don't have the right to spread lies and harm people's reputation. Or ruin them for that matter. If your colleague is spreading rumors about you that you are lazy and a thief and liar etc. to get your boss to fire you, do you support this case of free speech? If you do then I really don't want to know what your life looks like. You cannot tolerate everything. Not ever.

Modifié par AlexXIV, 07 mars 2012 - 05:55 .

[TheBlackBaron]

Abraham_uk wrote...

Let's see.3.4 user score on the PS3
              4.9 user score on the XBOX360
              2.7 user score on the PC


There are hundreds of votes. So the only logical conclusion was that the game wasn't very good.

How many games have you know have had poor user scores in the first week that later transformed into positive overall scores? I don't think that's ever happened in the history of metacritic

The logical conclusion is that nobody knows if the game is any good because it's been out for a grand total of 36 hours. Maybe that's enough to beat Modern Warfare 3 - that's not long enough to play ME3 in any meaningful way. 

A more likely scenario is that you've got a small handful of people genuinely disappointed in the game, for whatever reason, and a large majority of people trolling, grinding a personal gear, or otherwise think they're on a crusade to balance out the professional reviews because they're all just bought and paid for. 

Put more simply, people are idiots. 

EDIT: This is a rant from another thread, but by and large numbers from professional reviews are overrated and the ones from user reviews are pointless. You're going to have people that can't look past their biases and give a game that's otherwise worthy of an 8 a 4 or 5 because of some little thing that they really hate and think that means it's a bad game. 

To use an analogy, there are a great many features of Final Fantasy XIII that I would hate, and that would turn me off from enjoying it, but that doesn't mean it's a bad game. 

Modifié par TheBlackBaron, 07 mars 2012 - 05:59 .