453 réponses à ce sujet

[Rickin10]

sp0ck 06 wrote...

Rickin10 wrote...

Gigamantis wrote...


Also, auto-dialogue doesn't make any personality unplayable.  What you're doing there is called trollish hyperbole; acting like a few instances of auto-dialogue make the game completely non-interactive.  You're a bad source of objective opinion and a good example of why user reviews are useless. 

Auto-dialogue that comes out of Shepard's gob that directly contravines what the character you've built over 2 games would say doesn't make th egame unplayable, but it sure as hell renders 'your' character irrelevant. 

This would be a valid criticism, except Shepard isn't some blank slate character created completely by the player. He only exists within confines created by bioware. He's their character too. Not dictating everyy line he speaks does not mean shepard has been taken away from the player. We still control anything remotelt important. And because a lot of the "fluff" choices have been removed, conversations flow much better than the previous games. Shepard feels like a real character this time.

Is it a flaw in the game? Sure. But everyone needs to stop acting like this dialogue issue has utterly ruined the game. The story missions are frakking incredible, and I find it hard to see how any fan of the series can not enjoy them.

Things that you define as 'remotely important' and 'fluff'  are different to mine.  No Shepard wasn't a blank slate, but you could make him stay 'in character' and remain consistant.

[Gigamantis]

Il Divo wrote...

sp0ck 06 wrote...

This would be a valid criticism, except Shepard isn't some blank slate character created completely by the player. He only exists within confines created by bioware. He's their character too. Not dictating everyy line he speaks does not mean shepard has been taken away from the player. We still control anything remotelt important. And because a lot of the "fluff" choices have been removed, conversations flow much better than the previous games. Shepard feels like a real character this time.

Is it a flaw in the game? Sure. But everyone needs to stop acting like this dialogue issue has utterly ruined the game. The story missions are frakking incredible, and I find it hard to see how any fan of the series can not enjoy them.

I consider the autodialogue to have ruined the game. So no, I'm not going to stop with the criticism. Cut the whole "anyone who disagrees with me is wrong" attitude. It is a valid criticism, because some consider it important.

Ruined the game "for you."  That's the difference.  You can't objectively claim that a game is bad when it's only major issues are matters of personal taste for YOU. 

[Il Divo]

Gigamantis wrote...

Ruined the game "for you."  That's the difference.  You can't objectively claim that a game is bad when it's only major issues are matters of personal taste for YOU. 

Good, because objectivity is an illusion. I'd rather not have everyone attempting to grasp at something they'll never obtain. That's all a review ever will be: an opinion, regarding what a game did well and did not do well. There is nothing objective about it.

Modifié par Il Divo, 08 mars 2012 - 05:32 .

[Gigamantis]

Il Divo wrote...

Gigamantis wrote...

Ruined the game "for you."  That's the difference.  You can't objectively claim that a game is bad when it's only major issues are matters of personal taste for YOU. 

Good, because objectivity is an illusion. I'd rather not have everyone attempting to grasp at something they'll never obtain. That's all a review ever will be: an opinion, regarding what a game did well and did not do well. There is nothing objective about it.

There's never complete objectivity in anything.  However, more objectivity than "some auto-dialogue?!? the whole game is garbage!" is required to be taken seriously.   Professional reviewers have a process and standard criteria behind their "opinions."  You only have an apparent lack of perspective and lack of emotional control behind yours. 

Modifié par Gigamantis, 08 mars 2012 - 05:38 .

[Abirn]

Gigamantis wrote...

Odd Hermit wrote...

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.

The problem is that even the sparse actual points made by users are issues of personal taste, not game quality.  The slight shift away from detailed conversation and towards cinematics and gunplay isn't bad gameplay and doesn't make it a crappy RPG.  Day 1 DLC being a perceived cash grab has NOTHING to do with the actual game, and whether or not you liked the ending is irrelevant opinion as well.    

Beyond that we see professional critics crap on bad games all the time.  There's no causal or even correlative evidence of the impropriety you people accuse gaming journalists of; you just pretend they're bought off or blackmailed when you don't agree with them. 

If ME3 wasn't a good game it wouldn't be doing well with the critics. 

No evidence huh:

http://www.gamerevol...em-reviews-6199

http://en.wikipedia..../Jeff_Gerstmann

Face it you dismiss the corruption in the industry.  Despite the fact that at this point its practically well known.  The entire industry is a joke and trusting it would be just plain ignorant.

[Il Divo]

Gigamantis wrote...

There's never complete objectivity in anything.  However, more objectivity than "some auto-dialogue?!? the whole game is garbage" is required to be taken seriously.   Professional reviewers have a process and standard criteria behind their "opinions."  You only have an apparent lack of perspective and emotional control behind yours. 

Had to fix that. It's best if we got that out in the open. If you're asking me whether I can analyze all the different elements of Mass Effect 3 and come to a conclusion regarding their quality, it's not difficult. The graphics are fantastic, the gameplay is great. But why should any of that be relevant when the sum total experience failed?

But your imaginary world of objectivity assumes everything being weighted equally in terms of what people desire from an experience. And unfortunately, not all elements of a game are created equal to all.  This is exactly why crap like numerical reviews need to be removed. They tell us nothing important. Words are everything, giving greater context, which numbers do not allow.  

And I am nothing if not controlled in my emotions. You'd do well to remember that.

Modifié par Il Divo, 08 mars 2012 - 05:45 .

[Joy Divison]

Gigamantis wrote...


There's never complete objectivity in anything.  However, more objectivity than "some auto-dialogue?!? the whole game is garbage!" is required to be taken seriously.   Professional reviewers have a process and standard criteria behind their "opinions."  You only have an apparent lack of perspective and lack of emotional control behind yours. 

Yep.  The process is give all AAA games from major studios good - great scores so we will continue to get advanced copies, offer previews, interviews, and remain relevant.  And put up advertisments for the game/company we are reviewing.

Modifié par Joy Divison, 08 mars 2012 - 05:49 .

[sp0ck 06]

Il Divo wrote...

sp0ck 06 wrote...

This would be a valid criticism, except Shepard isn't some blank slate character created completely by the player. He only exists within confines created by bioware. He's their character too. Not dictating everyy line he speaks does not mean shepard has been taken away from the player. We still control anything remotelt important. And because a lot of the "fluff" choices have been removed, conversations flow much better than the previous games. Shepard feels like a real character this time.

Is it a flaw in the game? Sure. But everyone needs to stop acting like this dialogue issue has utterly ruined the game. The story missions are frakking incredible, and I find it hard to see how any fan of the series can not enjoy them.

I consider the autodialogue to have ruined the game. So no, I'm not going to stop with the criticism. Cut the whole "anyone who disagrees with me is wrong" attitude. It is a valid criticism, because some consider it important.

Divo, I've seen you around here for a long time, I know you're a reasonable fellow. Have you played through the whole game? And you did not enjoy it?

I just think ultimately, this series has always been about story and character, and that the payoff of the story moments in ME3 outweighs the loss of controlling the full exyent of every conversation. People are saying "they've ruined MY shepard, MY shepard wouldn't say that". Ok...but hasn't MY shepard always been picking from a list of 3 choices created by bioware from the start. There's a ton of lines from ME1 and 2 that if I reallt had total control over my shepard, he wouldn't have said. All BW has done is take away a lot of those choices. It IS an issue, but this isn't some drastic departure from the character philosophy of the first two games.

I'm really not saying "everyone who disagrees with me is wrong.". I'm just trying to defend my opinion of the game, because I think its being met with unfair negativity (as ME2 was), but more importantly, I think longtime fans (like you divo) are selling themselves short on the conclusion to the series we all love.

[Gigamantis]

Il Divo wrote...

Gigamantis wrote...

There's never complete objectivity in anything.  However, more objectivity than "some auto-dialogue?!? the whole game is garbage" is required to be taken seriously.   Professional reviewers have a process and standard criteria behind their "opinions."  You only have an apparent lack of perspective and emotional control behind yours. 

Had to fix that. It's best if we got that out in the open. If you're asking me whether I can analyze all the different elements of Mass Effect 3 and come to a conclusion regarding their quality, it's not difficult. The graphics are fantastic, the gameplay is great. But why should any of that be relevant when the sum total experience failed?

But your imaginary world of objectivity assumes everything being weighted equally in terms of what people desire from an experience. And unfortunately, not all elements of a game are created equal to all.  This is exactly why crap like numerical reviews need to be removed. They tell us nothing important. Words are everything, which numbers do not allow.  

And I am nothing if not controlled in my emotions. You'd do well to remember that.

The numbers are the industry standard quality of the game, and that is the best way to hit on every aspect of the game people could care about and sum the game up for everyone.  You say the good points are irrelevant because the sum total experience failed, but again forget to qualify that you're only stating your opinion. 

That's the problem with user reviews; users will declare a game a complete failure based on their opinion of only ONE element of the game.  That's not helping people who want feedback on the quality of the game, that's just a high-five to the people out there who think exactly like you.  It's useless as feedback. 

Reviewers attempt to hit on everything; not just what they're pissed off about.  That kind of thing is why objectivity is the goal; you get better feedback when objectivity is attempted. 

[Gigamantis]

Joy Divison wrote...

Gigamantis wrote...


There's never complete objectivity in anything.  However, more objectivity than "some auto-dialogue?!? the whole game is garbage!" is required to be taken seriously.   Professional reviewers have a process and standard criteria behind their "opinions."  You only have an apparent lack of perspective and lack of emotional control behind yours. 

Yep.  The process is give all AAA games from major studios good - great scores so we will continue to get advanced copies, offer previews, interviews, and remain relevant.  And put up advertisments for the game/company we are reviewing.

Yawn, prove that these journalists are being blackmailed or just stop.  Oh, and don't link a blog with some kids theory on the industry. 

Modifié par Gigamantis, 08 mars 2012 - 05:54 .

[DJBare]

Say what you will about meta critic, I will probably agree, but that's a bad start for a triple A title.
I once called those who spammed zero's and ten's children, but not all of them, I can now see passionate genuine disappointment in many of them.

[BuffPhantoms]

So let me get this straight.

Professional reviewers all giving it around 94% on MC and 93% on Gamerankings.com is unreliable.

An organized (and proven) 4chan raid that had 200+ people give it 0's before playing it, on a known troll bomb user review section, is reliable.




This forum amuses me.

[DJBare]

This forum amuses me.

Hope you find the game likewise.

[Super.Sid]

BuffPhantoms wrote...

So let me get this straight.

Professional reviewers all giving it around 94% on MC and 93% on Gamerankings.com is unreliable.

An organized (and proven) 4chan raid that had 200+ people give it 0's before playing it, on a known troll bomb user review section, is reliable.




This forum amuses me.

You will be amused at yourself after you play it,not amused let me put it as confused. Lets see u in a few days after u complete the game.

[BuffPhantoms]

DJBare wrote...

This forum amuses me.

Hope you find the game likewise.

Low MC user review from organized review is not " a bad start " for a tripple A game.

The game is a 93 and 94% review rating, and 80%+ at all other user review sites that don't allow troll bombing.  Its doing amazingly well.

[MingWolf]

Gigamantis wrote...

The numbers are the industry standard quality of the game, and that is the best way to hit on every aspect of the game people could care about and sum the game up for everyone.  You say the good points are irrelevant because the sum total experience failed, but again forget to qualify that you're only stating your opinion. 

I'd throw objectivity out the door.  There are no industry standards on quality of games.  Reviews, whether professional or not, are disproportionately subjective.  Games are like art, and are difficult to quantify.  One can give a game between a 0 and a 1 for little things like graphics, sounds, gameplay, etc., but those are subjective criteria as well, because every game is different.  A game could get a 10 for great graphics and sounds, but they might not be all that important for a certain games, depending on what your looking at.

Take Dragon Age 2.  The initial PC Gamer review praised it like the revolution of the RPG genre.  Then, the Witcher 2 was on the horizon, and another journalist on PC Gamer pretty much smashed DA2 down to it's roots.  Whose more objective?  Where are the standards there?

But really, one shouldn't get too worked up on what other people thinks of a game, whether they are from the "professionals" or the customer.  It's what YOU the gamer thinks that matters.  And really, sometimes the negative rants on metacritic can be a good thing, it helps points to problems one might not think about, especially when they come in masses.  But whether you care much about them or not, ultimately, it's your choice whether you decide to read these reviews.  Personally, I don't even look at the numbers, but I do believe that when people in the masses harp over something, and even go outright to give 0s and 1s, it might be worth more than a glance.  Just let it be.

Modifié par MingWolf, 08 mars 2012 - 06:18 .

[BuffPhantoms]

Super.Sid wrote...

BuffPhantoms wrote...

So let me get this straight.

Professional reviewers all giving it around 94% on MC and 93% on Gamerankings.com is unreliable.

An organized (and proven) 4chan raid that had 200+ people give it 0's before playing it, on a known troll bomb user review section, is reliable.




This forum amuses me.

You will be amused at yourself after you play it,not amused let me put it as confused. Lets see u in a few days after u complete the game.

What does this have to do with what I said?


Professional reviews > a 4chan troll raid who didn't play it. Fact.

Modifié par BuffPhantoms, 08 mars 2012 - 06:18 .

[Super.Sid]

BuffPhantoms wrote...

Super.Sid wrote...

BuffPhantoms wrote...

So let me get this straight.

Professional reviewers all giving it around 94% on MC and 93% on Gamerankings.com is unreliable.

An organized (and proven) 4chan raid that had 200+ people give it 0's before playing it, on a known troll bomb user review section, is reliable.




This forum amuses me.

You will be amused at yourself after you play it,not amused let me put it as confused. Lets see u in a few days after u complete the game.

What does this have to do with what I said?


Professional reviews > a 4chan troll raid who didn't play it. Fact.

Wanted to say it to the doubters,who think that the game is great,in general not aimed at anyone specific. I think I could have been clearer.The majority of the people who have finished the game have not liked it. The rest have just meekly accepted it and try to defend their point of view.

Modifié par Super.Sid, 08 mars 2012 - 06:22 .

[BuffPhantoms]

The majority of the people who have finished the game have not liked it

Proof? And please don't link MC user reviews as proof, since that was proven as raided.

[Super.Sid]

BuffPhantoms wrote...

The majority of the people who have finished the game have not liked it

Proof? And please don't link MC user reviews as proof, since that was proven as raided.

Go and look at the spoiler section if u must.

[BuffPhantoms]

Super.Sid wrote...

BuffPhantoms wrote...

The majority of the people who have finished the game have not liked it

Proof? And please don't link MC user reviews as proof, since that was proven as raided.

Go and look at the spoiler section if u must.

Most people who played the game post there? Maybe like 1% at most...

Gamerankings.com is still the most trustworthy.  93%. 

[Super.Sid]

BuffPhantoms wrote...

Super.Sid wrote...

BuffPhantoms wrote...

The majority of the people who have finished the game have not liked it

Proof? And please don't link MC user reviews as proof, since that was proven as raided.

Go and look at the spoiler section if u must.

Most people who played the game post there? Maybe like 1% at most...

Gamerankings.com is still the most trustworthy.  93%. 

Don't be delusional. The truth is already out in the open on the forums.It has started flooding over the past few days.

Would you rather be disappointed now and accept it or complete the full game and then refuse to accept it.

Modifié par Super.Sid, 08 mars 2012 - 06:33 .

[Gigamantis]

Super.Sid wrote...

BuffPhantoms wrote...

The majority of the people who have finished the game have not liked it

Proof? And please don't link MC user reviews as proof, since that was proven as raided.

Go and look at the spoiler section if u must.

That doesn't really prove anything.  10-15 people spamming up the spoiler section are hardly proven to be the majority in a game that likely sold millions. 

Honestly, 10-15 people is probably too generous.  It's usually like 5-6 people who just refuse to stop making threads and posting in other threads. 

Modifié par Gigamantis, 08 mars 2012 - 06:34 .

[Super.Sid]

Gigamantis wrote...

Super.Sid wrote...

BuffPhantoms wrote...

The majority of the people who have finished the game have not liked it

Proof? And please don't link MC user reviews as proof, since that was proven as raided.

Go and look at the spoiler section if u must.

That doesn't really prove anything.  10-15 people spamming up the spoiler section are hardly proven to be the majority in a game that likely sold millions. 

Its not 10-15 people its a lot more. Besides they are not the same company any more, their ideals have changed.
Accept it now or face huge disappointment later.

Modifié par Super.Sid, 08 mars 2012 - 06:34 .

[BuffPhantoms]

93.5% and 95%. Thats the official ME3 average review ratings.

Anything else is you guessing.