453 réponses à ce sujet

[william.munden]

oh for gods sake

[Abirn]

Kilshrek wrote...

Rockworm503 wrote...

Just like every positive review is payed off by the develepor?

Paid off by the publisher, who knows? But we do know that publishers to use much indirect force to get what they want from gaming sites.

It's kind of like, we agree to give your games good reviews so long as you agree to give us advertising revenue and early/exclusive access to your products.

There are rumours of such things but without too many people coming out to confirm or deny, then the cynical minds of the world will surely take that silence as implied confirmation, no?

Although recently some french publication may or may not have gotten into hot water with Activision for outing BlOPs 2 before they were ready. The french were adamant that Activision was punishing them, but the PR took over and nothing much has happened after.

“I asked if we should consider ourselves blacklisted, and more precisely
if my journalist was still to attend a preview event that was planned
next week and to which we were already invited. Activision said no. They
also made clear that the relationship was to be severed, all
advertisement plans cancelled, games not sent, and invitations to later
events cancelled as well.

That apparently happened before the rest of the world picked up on the story and obviously sensing PR disaster, the sensible thing was said to be done.

THIS.  Basically I really don't understand how anyone in this thread can defend "professional" (and I use that term loosely) reviews.  If they aren't paid off they are strongarmed into giving high scores.  The whole industry is a joke.  Do yourselves a favor and go look up what happened with duke nukem Forever.

[Grimez7]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Well, I am glad they removed the reviews that are not accurate. For me, the problem is detecting what is or is not an "accurate" review.

As Jarrett mentioned, there were cases of people who had created accounts under names of BioWare staff and gave ME3 a zero. There were also cases that definitely were people deliberately trying to hurt ME3 for whatever reason without any actual validity to their complaint. However, it is possible that some "real" reviews were also deleted and this is wrong. While I would disagree with people who say ME3 is a bad game, I am for their ability to do so IF they have a valid complaint and can explain why it isn't good.

Personally, I think ME3 is a damned good game. I would give it a 9 or 9.5 overall (I am also of the opinion that a perfect 10 is pretty much unachievable). I would also say that no game deserves a zero and certainly not ME3. I can remember a semi-truck driving game where, among other problems, you could drive infinitely fast in revers, drive up the side of mountains, and have your head & tail lights leave your truck. This game only rated a 2 on metacritic, but it still wasn't a zero.

It is a problem on metacritic and similar sites that people with actual valid complaints and dislikes are having their complaints ignored due to "trolls" who are using the sites to only casue problems. Until thise can be fixed, I'm not sue what the solution can be.

As bad as this is, I think that would be pretty funny to read. "I'm jarrett lee and I hate the game I spent the past 2 years working on."

[guardian of hades]

Soulwatcher1974 wrote...

Great so they take the right of free speech away because EA complained?

Free speech rights do not exist on a private website.

I'm in favor of people being critical of the game if they've actually played the game or hell even if they talked about the game.  There were a great number of zero scores early on that had long rants that had absolutely nothing to do with the game.  It was just bizzare

[Squallypo]

most of the low reviews are caused by : day 1 dlc charged, auto dialog, "bad ending", and other stuff, which they have their right to do so in a constructive way of course.

[99DP1982]

As I wrote in another thread, I have yet to play this game myself (c'mon friday!), but I do believe, that unfortunately the critic has some merit.

I do not agree with 0-2 scores, because that means, that the game would be a total crap... (I agree on this one with Bioware reps.)

People should learn to critically approach their own review, and not let the emotional aspect lead the review...

To all people trying to make reviews, try to divide your opinion into sections, like some good old reviewing practice in the past.

1) Graphics
2) Sound
3) Immersion/replayability (or addiction factor )
4) Single player experience (Key genre points, AI)
5) Multiplayer experience
6) Technical quality (if it doesn't have any bugs, it gets 10)

Then take the average and you'll get the metric called "Overall score".

Based on what I read so far I'd give such evaluation:

1) Graphics - solid, but not earthshaking.The lack of High res textures for PCs is really not making this game any favor - "7"

2) Sound - very good quality - "9"

3) Immersion/replayability - it seems that choices of past games have became less meaningfull than one would expect, but they are present. Apparently there is enough material for 1 -2 playthroughs. As a result it gets "4"

4) SP experience - As an action game, it gets 9, as an RPG it gets 5 - overall score on this section "7"

5) MP experience - Map design, balance, weapon loadouts, are not perfect. as a shooter experience, it gets a solid. "8"

6) Technical quality. - something like problems with importing information from the previous games, should just not happen to an AAA title, which is built around the idea of story continuance of Your Shepard. All in all, other issues are not game breaking, but it just can't get more than "6"

Overall score (average) - 6,8 - A decent game, but not worth of AAA title hype that was produced for it. Wait for a while and get it at a discount price.


Note: Please bear in mind, that the above is just an example, and I have not played the game myself yet. The scores are derived from pieces of information here and there on the forums and reviews.

[Gatt9]

Jessica Merizan wrote...

Guys please quit the name calling. Whatever you think of 4chan, insulting people is not the way to express that.

And to answer an earlier comment, BioWare does not dictate how Metacritic runs their site, but we hope they will remove all erroneous or baseless reviews, no matter what the score is.

Lastly, I think that every fanbase has similar issues to the ones we are dealing with (and by we I'm counting you guys). Perhaps the issues in our community are getting reported on by the press more than others, but as someone who frequently looks at other gaming communities, I assure you, we're not alone in this problem of trolling and negativity. Mainly, I regard it as a side effect of being very passionate about something and that can sometimes lead to anger. Sometimes it just leads to awesome fan art

It is my personal desire Metacritic will uphold this policy for all entertainment on their site as accurate user reviews are very helpful for many when it comes to making consumer decisions.

I doubt you'll ever read this but...

The negativity isn't the result of trolling,  it's a symptom of the state of the industry.  The industry is stagnant,  releasing endless versions of the same game or two,  just Shooters essentially.  You know what I mean,  publishers will not listen to any idea that isn't Shooter or RTS,  or can't be made into one of those two.  Just in the past couple of weeks we've had Tim Caine,  Chris Avelone,  and Brian Fargo speaking about it publicly.

Gaming isn't about making great games right now,  it's not about developing great ideas,  it's about chasing blockbusters.

Further,  it doesn't help matters any when studios release games that are incorrectly catagorized,  and insist that they are now the defining characteristic of the genre.  A good example is Oblivion,  which is mechanically an Action-Adventure game,  but Bethesda screams that it's an RPG.  Or Fallout 3,  the same treatment for a Shooter, and the Press joined them in assaulting RPG fans.

What's happening is that people who crave different experiences have now been sidelined.  Worse,  they've been ridiculed and told they cannot ever have games they like anymore.  People are frustrated,  they want something other than a stereotypical shooter,  and they're tired of not seeing it,  tired of being ridiculed for it.

Another ingredient is that you're now hitting the point of gamer fatigue.  You can only sell the same game so many times,  and all we've had for years are endless shooters.  Even the once-defenders are sick of endless shooters,  as was displayed in the reception of announcements of FPS-Syndicate and FPS-Xcom.  Most of the responses were "Like we needed yet another shooter".

The final straw is studio heads like Ubisoft and the company EA had develop Syndicate publicly stating that the only game to make today is a Shooter.

This is where the Industry's strict adherence to sequels and "Me too!" has driven us.  The negativity is the outpouring of frustration with a market that just delivers one game,  and one game only,  20 times a year.  This is why the market is dropping double digit percentages month after month.

The crisis isn't the fans,  the crisis is the people making the decisions that refuse to "risk" making anything that isn't a shooter.

Continuing to treat this as anything but a wakeup call that people are frustrated with the Industry's direction is going to lead to epic collapse.  I've done the math,  I know how bad 2011 was for game sales,  and I'm sure you do too.  8% drop for all of 2011,  and if you cut out Call of Duty,  closer to 20%. 

The fans are trying to tell the Industry something,  they've been trying for years.  The Industry won't listen,  so now they're lashing out. 

Modifié par Gatt9, 08 mars 2012 - 05:44 .

[Wusword77]

Abirn wrote...

THIS.  Basically I really don't understand how anyone in this thread can defend "professional" (and I use that term loosely) reviews.  If they aren't paid off they are strongarmed into giving high scores.  The whole industry is a joke.  Do yourselves a favor and go look up what happened with duke nukem Forever.

Actually Duke got a 54 metacritic score and a 5.8 user score.  Pretty close.

Anyway the whole review process is grabage because most negative user reviews wind up like this gem:

So, there's a lot of problems, like Day 1 DLC of content that Bioware blatantly removed from the game to sell as DLC, trying to make us feel sorry for a kid when our Shepherd have probably encountered worse tragedies, the incredibly lazy photo of unmasked, which is pretty much just a stock photo of a woman that had twenty minutes max in photoshop, the depressingly disappointing endings, when Bioware told us that there would be a happy ending that we would have to fight hard for, and so many more. Not to mention being exclusive to Origin, which is a massive sin in itself. I would have given this game just a five, as it's just that, an average game. However, since it's clear that Bioware bribed journalists and reviewers to give their game a good review, I decided to counter the inflated reviewer scores and give this game a zero. Criticism and feedback is one of the most important things for a game developer. Unfortunately, it seems fanboys nowadays views criticism as a direct attack at them or the developers. Fanboys. Understand that criticism is the only way for a game developer to get better. Bioware probably suffered a overblown ego from the fanboys, which results in declining quality for their games. From a fan who enjoyed Baldur's Gate, KOTOR, Mass Effect and even Dragon Age: Origins, it's just depressing to see all of this unfold. I can only hope that Bioware will return to their senses and start making quality games without Day 1 DLC. Also, DLC is a horrendous blight on the gaming industry and should never be supported ever unless it's purely cosmetic. Sincerely, The Checker. 

Where they make no complaints about gameplay, graphics (a single photo looks bad?), storyline (beyond a single persons opinion of the ending no being what they wanted) or anything else of value to someone looking for information about the game.  Instead we get:

"HURR ORIGIN SUCKS!"
"Only fan boys like the game"
"They clearly bribed people to get good reviews"
"I don't like Day 1 DLC! So the game is bad"

Positive User reviews tend to be just as useless when we get gems like (gave 10/10):

Just finished first run of it. Great game, I really like the new characters and le add some new spice to the game, but I do miss some of the previous characters who are missing. The setting is, as usual, exquisite. It does feel a little bit like the first game, but I can excuse that if it's a good game in general. 

Which again tells us NOTHING about the game at all. 

User reviews are just as "worthless" as the Pro counterparts.

[Draemien]

Joy Divison wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

"Let's get rid of user reviews!" Really?

Why is it that recent Bioware games get hit with a flood of 0s and 1s whereas Skyrim and TW2 are in the green?

Because the is a conspiracy against Bioware or people had "unrealistic expectations" (right...and Skyrim didn't) or they're simply annoyed at the highly questionable business practices...

It's nothing to do with the games themselves...

User "reviews" that are posted 1 hour post launch, contain homophobia, spam, outright lies, impersonating devs etc. Yes, those have nothing to do with the games themselves.

Skyrim is "in the green" because TES has a fanbase that is MUCH larger than ME's or DA's and never mind that it's not currently cool to hate on Bethseda. (Despite their reusing their writing since Morrowind....in every TES title. Or their detached storytelling and subzero character development...) And TW2 is "in the green" because CDPR is the "cool Indie RPG developer" atm. Once they get BIG, they'll get their very own entitled, rude, obnoxious "core fanbase". Will they fall as far as threatening a dev with rape, death and commit libel, impersonation and other delightful behavior? No. That's what Bioware's "fanbase" (I am horrified to be attached to that mob, simply because I love these games) specializes in.

You're smarter than that...

You know that CoD crowd that is that huge demographic all the studios want so bad.  2.1 user review score for Modern Warfare 3.  So much for that theory.

It's "cool" to hate on Bioware?  Really?  You honestly believe that?  I must have not got the memo.

And even if you do, what has it done in the past 24 months since users gave Mass Effect 2 an 8.6 when I'm guessing from you're logic that it must of been "cool" to be a Bioware fanboy?  Could it have something to do with making sequels which make fundamental changes to beloved games and dubious business practices that the company knew would annoy their customers?

CD Projeckt is the "cool Indie RPG developer" and once thy get BIG then they'll get the rude core fanbase...but didn't you just say a few lines earlier that a MUCH larger fanbase was the reason Skyrim is in the green?

Exactly.

I just wrote on another topic something concerning the metacritic reviews. I quote myself:

"Despite people trying to prove otherwise, the reaction of a lot of core fanbase was pretty bad, specially when you take in consideration that everyone had great expectations for this game.

Just look at the metacritic user score (3.0 now): 
http://www.metacriti...c/mass-effect-3 

One could try to argue  that the user score is a result of a troll-job and therefore it is irrelevant but IT IS NOT. Checking on other games, you can see that many times the user score is close to the critics score. Mass Effect 1, for example, was consensually acclaimed by both users and critics. It's not the case with Mass Effect 3. 

Reading the user reviews you can see that almost all of the reviewers are people that LOVED the first two games, but were disappointed by ME3. This is absolutely unexpected considering these guys already invested a lot of time in the game, are familiar with the setting, like the story and gameplay, etc. 

Why, then, are some fans so unsatisfied? Clearly, something went wrong. The points mentioned by the OP are some of the issues. There are countless others. And while the obvious flaws might not bother everyone, some of us are pretty upset. 

That, itself, should already be a reason for concern by Bioware. Are the path they are taking a really positive one? Is going from a universally acclaimed ME1 to a contested ME3 a good sign? 

For me, the retarded plot and the horrible (and by horrible I don't mean sad, but ridiculously poorly written) endings made me like the game a lot less (if you want to read my short critique of the plot go to http://social.biowar...-9632916-1.html *warning - contain spoilers*). It feels that the game was written separately by lots of different unimaginative bad writers. Plot holes, "deus ex machina", etc.

Then, the auto-dialogue, lack of neutral choices (I used to choose neutral - ofttimes being paragon or renegade felt forced) and irrelevance of all my major choices to the final outcome pretty much sealed the deal. I didn't enjoy this game as much as I thought I would. Bioware promised us a lot, but didn't deliver it." 

[Persephone]

Draemien wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

"Let's get rid of user reviews!" Really?

Why is it that recent Bioware games get hit with a flood of 0s and 1s whereas Skyrim and TW2 are in the green?

Because the is a conspiracy against Bioware or people had "unrealistic expectations" (right...and Skyrim didn't) or they're simply annoyed at the highly questionable business practices...

It's nothing to do with the games themselves...

User "reviews" that are posted 1 hour post launch, contain homophobia, spam, outright lies, impersonating devs etc. Yes, those have nothing to do with the games themselves.

Skyrim is "in the green" because TES has a fanbase that is MUCH larger than ME's or DA's and never mind that it's not currently cool to hate on Bethseda. (Despite their reusing their writing since Morrowind....in every TES title. Or their detached storytelling and subzero character development...) And TW2 is "in the green" because CDPR is the "cool Indie RPG developer" atm. Once they get BIG, they'll get their very own entitled, rude, obnoxious "core fanbase". Will they fall as far as threatening a dev with rape, death and commit libel, impersonation and other delightful behavior? No. That's what Bioware's "fanbase" (I am horrified to be attached to that mob, simply because I love these games) specializes in.

You're smarter than that...

You know that CoD crowd that is that huge demographic all the studios want so bad.  2.1 user review score for Modern Warfare 3.  So much for that theory.

It's "cool" to hate on Bioware?  Really?  You honestly believe that?  I must have not got the memo.

And even if you do, what has it done in the past 24 months since users gave Mass Effect 2 an 8.6 when I'm guessing from you're logic that it must of been "cool" to be a Bioware fanboy?  Could it have something to do with making sequels which make fundamental changes to beloved games and dubious business practices that the company knew would annoy their customers?

CD Projeckt is the "cool Indie RPG developer" and once thy get BIG then they'll get the rude core fanbase...but didn't you just say a few lines earlier that a MUCH larger fanbase was the reason Skyrim is in the green?

Exactly.

I just wrote on another topic something concerning the metacritic reviews. I quote myself:

"Despite people trying to prove otherwise, the reaction of a lot of core fanbase was pretty bad, specially when you take in consideration that everyone had great expectations for this game.

Just look at the metacritic user score (3.0 now): 
http://www.metacriti...c/mass-effect-3 

No. I actually do not trust any reviews. Professional or otherwise. The only person I trust, the only opinion that matters to me is....mine.

As for these "reviews".... Laughable. Both the 10s AND the 0s. :innocent:

[HolyAvenger]

Simple solution. Keep all reviews, remove number scores. Let people read and decide for themselves what to believe or not.

[slimgrin]

HolyAvenger wrote...

Simple solution. Keep all reviews, remove number scores. Let people read and decide for themselves what to believe or not.

I agree with this.

[RiouHotaru]

Cody211282 wrote...

My problem as stated above isn't that the scores are high, it's that a lot of things are glossed over or not mentioned in the critic reviews.

Probably because they weren't issues for the critics

[AkiKishi]

RiouHotaru wrote...

Cody211282 wrote...

My problem as stated above isn't that the scores are high, it's that a lot of things are glossed over or not mentioned in the critic reviews.

Probably because they weren't issues for the critics

Reading the various issues that people have reported I find that highly unlikely.

[cljqnsnyc]

...but what do you do when you are one of those people who have invested so much time into this series and have yet to purchase ME3? Buy the game, take a chance, or stay away? I'd hate to get burned...again....by EA/Bioware. I'm at odds because I really loved the series a great deal.

My fear is no longer being able to play the character I created in 2007, control him, and worst of all, see his story end in such a ridiculous way, effectively tainting the entire series in the process.

I guess I'll just have to wait a lot longer to make a final decision. For now, I'm standing on the sidelines to see how this plays out.

Modifié par cljqnsnyc, 08 mars 2012 - 01:56 .

[BiO]

That's good news.

It's cute that people are taking meta-critic user review scores seriously, though.

[cljqnsnyc]

You have to admit though...all that negativity will have an effect and will at least be taken into consideration by someone who hasn't bought the game yet. People may think it's just a lot of hyperbole, but someone will wonder what it's about...especially when you see some of the same themes repeated over and over again.

[AkiKishi]

BiO_MaN wrote...

That's good news.

It's cute that people are taking meta-critic user review scores seriously, though.

made very little difference really.

360 went up .2 to 5
PC and PS3 still in the toiler 2-3 likely because less people care enough,or are largely in agreement.

After the dust settles I find myself largely in agreement with the user scores on MC.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 08 mars 2012 - 02:05 .

[BiO]

All it seems to happen is:

Someone is not happy - rate 0
Someone is happy - rate 10

Would you trust this?

[Travie]

BiO_MaN wrote...

All it seems to happen is:

Someone is not happy - rate 0
Someone is happy - rate 10

Would you trust this?

I'd trust it more than the 7 100% 'professional' reviews currently displayed with top billing on each ME3 page.

At least if you read the reviews on metacritic (the user reviews mind you) you can see valid criticisms and real gameplay experience.

[Bundin]

It's happened before with other games, it'll happen again. I tend to only read the "yellow" reviews on metacritic anyway because that tends to filter out both fanboys and haters. The same goes for "pro" reviews: anything above 90 is not interesting to me. Regardless, any review is nothing more than an impression of some good and bad points. I'll make up my mind while playing the game.

Should metacritic remove reviews? Only when they are obviously fake. That includes those posted with fake names, those claiming to be written by staff (and those actually written by staff, self-promotion shouldn't be welcome). As for the other 0 and 10 scores: allow everyone to give an overall score, but also force them to give separate marks for graphics/gameplay/sound/replayability. The 0-0-0-0-0 reviews will be easily recognised as what they are: a ragepost.
 Same for the 10-10-10-10-10 reviews (user as well as  "pro"), they'll be easily recognisable as non-objective.

Modifié par Bundin, 08 mars 2012 - 03:20 .

[Odd Hermit]

I have no stance on the game yet as I've only gotten a small way through, but there's no way any reasonable person would rate the game a 0 I can tell already.

However, I think it's pointless for them to even try to filter the bad reviews out. Most people who pay a fair amount of attention to gaming knew it was going to happen and they knew why it was going to happen. The pre-order and DLC issue, EA and/or Origins hate, on top of extremely high expectations for this particular series.

I've read that it's -less- of a hassle to get the game illegitimately, that you shouldn't need to be online to access parts of a single player game, that the game was intentionally split in pieces to nickel and dime people, that EA is a terrible company, Bioware sold out, etc. etc. True or false, those issues say nothing about the actual game's quality but you know people are just itching to hate this game for such reasons. It's pretty much a waste of their time trying to stop the flood of negative reactions.

[Joy Divison]

BiO_MaN wrote...

All it seems to happen is:

Someone is not happy - rate 0
Someone is happy - rate 10

Would you trust this?

Yep. 

If I see lots of 0s that tells me people generally don't like something for whatever reason.  If I see losts of 10s then there is something good about the product that is eliciting positive feedback

[Gigamantis]

Travie wrote...

BiO_MaN wrote...

All it seems to happen is:

Someone is not happy - rate 0
Someone is happy - rate 10

Would you trust this?

I'd trust it more than the 7 100% 'professional' reviews currently displayed with top billing on each ME3 page.

At least if you read the reviews on metacritic (the user reviews mind you) you can see valid criticisms and real gameplay experience.

Why would you trust trolls who give no examples or detail over 7 reviews that actually address the game categorically in a calm and concise manner?  

[Odd Hermit]

Gigamantis wrote...

Travie wrote...

BiO_MaN wrote...

All it seems to happen is:

Someone is not happy - rate 0
Someone is happy - rate 10

Would you trust this?

I'd trust it more than the 7 100% 'professional' reviews currently displayed with top billing on each ME3 page.

At least if you read the reviews on metacritic (the user reviews mind you) you can see valid criticisms and real gameplay experience.

Why would you trust trolls who give no examples or detail over 7 reviews that actually address the game categorically in a calm and concise manner?  

There are good reasons not to trust reviews from most popular game review sites. They often don't play the whole game since they want the review out asap, there are integrity concerns since the sites they write for have mutually benefitial relationships with some game companies, and some of them are really just writers not gamers.

He does have a point that if you actually read the metacritic reviews you might find various real issues that other critics might not address or gloss over. But right now you have to wade through so much garbage that you'd really have to sift through it to find the minority that are reasonable reviews.