453 réponses à ce sujet

[Super.Sid]

Persephone wrote...

Super.Sid wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

Gigamantis wrote...

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. 

Links and explanations have already been provided for you on this topic and it is quite obvious you want to keep you head in the sand.

None of which contain actual PROOF, Joy. Proof that ALL 40++ glowing reviews this game got were bought or blackmailed. And again, at least those are coherent, mostly well structured, in depth and I know they have actually PLAYED the game. Unlike the fanbrats at MC.

Please reserve your review till you have finished a full walkthrough of the game.The game is great but some really bad things screw it up.

And I believe this link is not worth enough to be called an honest review.
http://www.pcpowerpl...-mass-effect-3/

I never review a game before I have finished the game at least once. Sorry you didn't like all of it. But don't assume that you speak for anyone but yourself.

The review you linked to...I stopped reading it because it contained spoilers. Couldn't care less about it though.

Yes it does but it hits at the facts. Everyone reading perfect reviews wanted facts why people are complaining and I have given u a link which contains facts.Just because it isn't as heard of like the others doesn't mean it cannot be trusted.

Modifié par Super.Sid, 08 mars 2012 - 10:21 .

[Persephone]

Super.Sid wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Super.Sid wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

Gigamantis wrote...

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. 

Links and explanations have already been provided for you on this topic and it is quite obvious you want to keep you head in the sand.

None of which contain actual PROOF, Joy. Proof that ALL 40++ glowing reviews this game got were bought or blackmailed. And again, at least those are coherent, mostly well structured, in depth and I know they have actually PLAYED the game. Unlike the fanbrats at MC.

Please reserve your review till you have finished a full walkthrough of the game.The game is great but some really bad things screw it up.

And I believe this link is not worth enough to be called an honest review.
http://www.pcpowerpl...-mass-effect-3/

I never review a game before I have finished the game at least once. Sorry you didn't like all of it. But don't assume that you speak for anyone but yourself.

The review you linked to...I stopped reading it because it contained spoilers. Couldn't care less about it though.

Yes it does but it hits at the facts. Everyone reading perfect reviews wanted facts why people are complaining and I have given u a link which contains facts.

No. You have given me an opinion. An opinion that is no more valid than another.

Fact: Leonardo da Vinci painted the Mona Lisa.

Opinion: The Mona Lisa is one hell of an ugly painting.

Another Opinion: The Mona Lisa's smile makes her beautiful.

See what I did there?

[Super.Sid]

Persephone wrote...

Super.Sid wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Super.Sid wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

Gigamantis wrote...

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. 

Links and explanations have already been provided for you on this topic and it is quite obvious you want to keep you head in the sand.

None of which contain actual PROOF, Joy. Proof that ALL 40++ glowing reviews this game got were bought or blackmailed. And again, at least those are coherent, mostly well structured, in depth and I know they have actually PLAYED the game. Unlike the fanbrats at MC.

Please reserve your review till you have finished a full walkthrough of the game.The game is great but some really bad things screw it up.

And I believe this link is not worth enough to be called an honest review.
http://www.pcpowerpl...-mass-effect-3/

I never review a game before I have finished the game at least once. Sorry you didn't like all of it. But don't assume that you speak for anyone but yourself.

The review you linked to...I stopped reading it because it contained spoilers. Couldn't care less about it though.

Yes it does but it hits at the facts. Everyone reading perfect reviews wanted facts why people are complaining and I have given u a link which contains facts.

No. You have given me an opinion. An opinion that is no more valid than another.

Fact: Leonardo da Vinci painted the Mona Lisa.

Opinion: The Mona Lisa is one hell of an ugly painting.

Another Opinion: The Mona Lisa's smile makes her beautiful.

See what I did there?

Yes opinions depend from individual to individual

[Persephone]

Super.Sid wrote...

Yes it does but it hits at the facts. Everyone reading perfect reviews wanted facts why people are complaining and I have given u a link which contains facts.

Persephone wrote...

No. You have given me an opinion. An opinion that is no more valid than another.

Fact: Leonardo da Vinci painted the Mona Lisa.

Opinion: The Mona Lisa is one hell of an ugly painting.

Another Opinion: The Mona Lisa's smile makes her beautiful.

See what I did there?

Super.Sid wrote..

Yes opinions depend from individual to individual

Exactly.

Modifié par Persephone, 08 mars 2012 - 10:28 .

[Conduit0]

Super.Sid wrote...

BuffPhantoms wrote...

You seem upset that I am putting more cred on tons of professional reviews over an organized 4chan raid.

This is laughable.

The user reviews are 80% and above on other sites.

Read this article about why professional aka paid reviews are inaccurate

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

So your "proof" that pro game reviewers are paid off, is a PR company getting pissy over a game that was absolutely destroyed by those paid off reviewers. A PR company that quite obviously got b**** slapped for their comments and were forced to apologize for it.

Yup, thats some solid proof right there, just too bad its proof for the opposite side of the argument.

[Super.Sid]

Read this too . It explains the review process
http://www.vg247.com...d-our-way-back/
This is a much more reliable source that will answer your query

[cljqnsnyc]

The real question is will this affect someone who has not bought the game. The answer is yes. The whole thing is getting a lot of attention and that isn't good in any way, shape, or form. It DOES matter and makes a difference.

Do you think any game publisher wants that kind of negative press? Not a chance. Critical reviews are nice but in this cynical world we live in, they aren't always believed, especially when this very same company has been here before. (DA2)

The problem for me is I really wanted to get this game being a HUGE fan of the series, spending HOURS with Shep and the gang on so many adventures. All that chatter has forced me to take pause and investigate.


So, I decided to watch a good amount of gameplay...and then came those endings!

I can't say how deeply depressing it was watching them play out on youtube. Like someone stabbed me in the chest with a jagged blade. To be completely honest, above all the negativity and discontent, this more than anything else is what is truly keeping me away. I couldn't bare to take my Shep on this third adventure knowing full well it can only end badly and very badly.

I think I'll spare them and myself the pain.

So, again, does all that bad blood on MC matter? Yes, I'm afraid it does,

Modifié par cljqnsnyc, 08 mars 2012 - 10:55 .

[Gatt9]

Gigamantis wrote...

Super.Sid wrote...

BuffPhantoms wrote...

You seem upset that I am putting more cred on tons of professional reviews over an organized 4chan raid.

This is laughable.

The user reviews are 80% and above on other sites.

Read this article about why professional aka paid reviews are inaccurate

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

Of course publishers will get pissy when journalists give bad reviews to high profile games.  The job of a journalist is to suck it up and continue being honest, and they have been.  Duke Nukem Forever got absolutely destroyed by journalists as did many other bad games. 

Skyrim shipped with a gamekilling bug on the PS3,  and has an average score of 92 despite the gamekiller.  How honest is that?  Magazines would've panned it immediately for it.  But because websites are dependent on advertisers for revenue,  it averaged a 92.

It's also interesting that you comment on Duke Nukem...

http://arstechnica.c...ive-reviews.ars

That firm got caught doing it.  I guarantee you this is why reviews are positive,  because the reviewers know what will happen if they don't give good scores.

I can do this all day.  I have links to sites that have admitted the unspoken rules of previews,  links to dissertations on how reviews are done,  links to the purpose the review embargo,  links to the gamespot firings,  links to other controversies.

Professional reviews are reviews of the company,  not the game.  We've more than enough evidence to know that gaming journalism doesn't exist anymore.

[Stanley Woo]

This discussion is quickly becoming off topic for the ME3 forum. Please get back on topic or this thread will be shut down. Thank you..

[Joy Divison]

Persephone wrote...

None of which contain actual PROOF, Joy. Proof that ALL 40++ glowing reviews this game got were bought or blackmailed. And again, at least those are coherent, mostly well structured, in depth and I know they have actually PLAYED the game. Unlike the fanbrats at MC.

Then explain to me this:

Bioware developers admit that DA2 divided the fanbase, that is while some devoted followers of the series did not like DA2, the game has attracted some new fans and some who liked DA:O liked DA:2 more.  That is not an opinion, that is easily substantiated by reading Bioware's own press releases, Laidlaw's post-release interviews, and by quick glance at BSN.

Likewise, Bioware developers have admitted the game was not as polished as they would have liked it to be and they have had to make design decisions to cut some desired content, reuse assets more than they would have liked, and due to circumstances beyond their control such as the release date and EA's oversight, had to make adjustments to the story, particularly with ACT III, they would rather not have had to.  Evidence for this can be seen with the recycled environments, the generally accepted notion that ACT III felt disjointed, and the controversial ending [cant post spoilers] if you side with the Mages.  Again, even most of the games ardent defenders will admit the veracity of this and it's reflective of reality as opposed to an opinion.

In short, even Bioware will admit opinion on the game is divisive, even the game's passionate defenders will admit the game has flaws and could be improved, and it would be highly inaccurate to characterize the game or the game's reception as wholly positive or negative. 

As eloquently expressed by Moderator casamar, "Personally, I think the opinions on DAII are too varied to reach an acceptable consensus" social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/9590293/9#9653475

Yet if I go to the "professional" reviews, I do see consensus.  As you say, the "40++ glowing reviews the game got."

So I'm guessing according to you as long as a reviewer uses proper sentence structure, it's perfectly acceptable that their reviews are in no way reflective of how a game is actually received.

You don't have to believe in Area 51 or the CIA took out JFK to see to wonder why AAA games like CoD Modern Warfare 3 and DA:2 have no negative reviews when their own developers admit they have flaws and have divided their own fanbase.

Modifié par Joy Divison, 09 mars 2012 - 01:27 .

[Wusword77]

Gatt9 wrote...

Skyrim shipped with a gamekilling bug on the PS3,  and has an average score of 92 despite the gamekiller.  How honest is that?  Magazines would've panned it immediately for it.  But because websites are dependent on advertisers for revenue,  it averaged a 92.

To be fair, thats just about every Bethesda game.  Fallout 3 had a similar bug, and I'm pretty sure Oblivion did as well.

All 3 of which got game of the year from many different places, websites and magazines.  As a publisher Bethesda can't even compare to the likes of EA and Activsion so making the claim that they "bought" those game of the year awards over other titles released by EA and Activision is just absurd.

Claiming that Bethesda also pays for the review in advertising dollars is foolish as well, considering they come out with a EXTREMELY limited number of games per year (normally 2, last year 4), pulling advertising from any high traffic gaming website would be foolish.  There is also little evidence they pay for good reviews Rage didn't break past 80 as a metacritic average, Brink barely broke 70, and Hunted didn't even make it past 60 as an average.

Edit: Also if you think Magazines aren't dependent on advertisers for revenue your sadly mistaken.

Modifié par Wusword77, 09 mars 2012 - 05:04 .

[Abraham_uk]

Stanley Woo wrote...

This discussion is quickly becoming off topic for the ME3 forum. Please get back on topic or this thread will be shut down. Thank you..

Thank you for the warning.  Many threads are shut down without a warning. So I really do appreciate what you've done.


So back on topic.

Here is a simple rule. Either you accept all user reviews or scrap that feature all together.

You can't just scrap some and not scrap others. Metacritic is now even less trustworthy than before the announcement to scrap reviews. I'm sure that Mass Effect 3 will be a fun game (I'm going to start my first playthrough in a few minutes) and I'm basing that on the fact I enjoyed Mass Effect 1 & 2.

I'd be lying if I said Bioware doesn't get enough praise. Bioware is flooded with praise all the time. So maybe 9/10 and 10/10 reviews are too much. There is room for improvements. You know what criticisms have been raised against the company. If nothing is done about them, expect video game critics to soon follow with negative reviews.

That said, I loved Dragon Age Origins, Mass Effect 1 & 2 and Bauldur's Gate 1. Given Bioware's dedication towards quality games, I generally dismiss review scores of 0-3 out of 10 range ass spam. I love Bioware and I want Bioware to continue to evolve and excel. Because guess what, Bioware is actually that good.

I don't care about the notorious game developers that brought us Ningerbread Man and Anubis 2. I don't bother giving those people any feedback. Why? Because they don't try and they won't listen.

Bioware cares and does listen. So please read the negative remarks on Metacritic (not the negative scores just the negative remarks) and try and improve on the weaknesses that have been highlighted.

That's my 2 cents. (Is that what people say these days)?

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 09 mars 2012 - 09:39 .

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

All 0 or 10 reviews are junk. 3 days ago, StanleyRoo (the spamming troll a week or two weeks ago) has the most popular 10 points review!
I'm going to take the reviews with 5 - 9 score seriously and worthy of reading.

[Rex326111]

I wrote a review about a week ago giving the game a 10 score bu now "You may no longer submit a review due to the content of your previous comments or reviews." I am very confused.

[Legendaryred]

I bet EA is paying them under the rug.

[Texhnolyze101]

They should remove the "professional" reviews then as well.

[MICHELLE7]

I think the professional reviews aren't any more trustworthy than the user reviews. Some games I've loved got bad reviews while others that they raved about I couldn't stand. It just their personal opinion anyway. Throw out the 10's and 0's and keep the rest...no game is that perfect or that bad. What I don't get though is some of the weird user reviews where they point out everything wrong in the game and say that they hate it but give it a 10...do they not understand the rating scale or something?

[Abirn]

Super.Sid wrote...

Read this too . It explains the review process
http://www.vg247.com...d-our-way-back/
This is a much more reliable source that will answer your query

And that doesn't even touch the issue of people who get fired for putting a game down even if it deserves it.  Really,  how can anyone with a straight face defend the game reviewers and say they are objective and unbiased.

[Weskerr]

I've read about how the chief editor at Gamespot got fired a few years ago for giving a bad review to a game that supplied the site with a lot of advertisements. That's it.
Does anyone have any proof that game review sites are bribed by gaming companies to give good reviews? How widespread is the problem if it actually exists?

[Abirn]

Weskerr wrote...

I've read about how the chief editor at Gamespot got fired a few years ago for giving a bad review to a game that supplied the site with a lot of advertisements. That's it.
Does anyone have any proof that game review sites are bribed by gaming companies to give good reviews? How widespread is the problem if it actually exists?

I cannot comprehend how you can type that sentence without your brain shorting out.  You gave an example in your first sentence then claimed you don't have any examples!

[Weskerr]

Abirn wrote...

Weskerr wrote...

I've read about how the chief editor at Gamespot got fired a few years ago for giving a bad review to a game that supplied the site with a lot of advertisements. That's it.
Does anyone have any proof that game review sites are bribed by gaming companies to give good reviews? How widespread is the problem if it actually exists?

I cannot comprehend how you can type that sentence without your brain shorting out.  You gave an example in your first sentence then claimed you don't have any examples!

That's the only example I've read about where a review site's integrity was compromised. I thought I made that clear. And even then, the proof that anything unethical occured at all is conjectural and circumstantial - although the circumstances of the firing are suspcious.

There is an obvious conflict of interest with game review sites because the bulk of their income is from the very game companies that they critique. However, people never provide proof or evidence that anything corrupt or unethical exists between review sites and gaming companies. It's always surmising.

I'm asking if anyone has proof - irrefeutable evidence - that game review sites are corrupt.

[SyyRaaaN]

The reviews are part of the marketing. It's obvious. The reviewers aren't even pointing out obvious gamebreaking bugs or flaws. I mean, how many of the reviews pointed out the obvious face import bug of ME3? Or how many mentioned the lack of dialogue wheel? Hmfs... 2 huge things are important. 

After the SC2 review i stopped trusting all the review-sites who didn't mention the broken state of battle.net.

Also, this is a classic: In the IGN review of ME2 the reviewer says something like this about the combat in the game: That the combat system is one that both the **hardcore** RPG fans and shooter fans can get behind. Wow, really? How is that not marketing ? Everybody knows this can impossibly be true.

Modifié par SyyRaaaN, 12 mars 2012 - 09:58 .

[Foxhound2020]

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.

We give you guys harsh criticism sometimes (ok lots of times), but it's only because we love BIoware and your products. That's a good thing honestly. You wouldn't be a successful company if people didn't care about your products.

When you see us venting, I wouldn't take it personally. I have said lots of mean things about many products or companies like Ford, but every now and then, they turn around and surprise me like when Ford refused to accept government bailouts. Bioware is usually that company that continues to surprises me regardless.

[CerberusSoldier]

I fully support review bombing of this game since the games media has failed to do its dam job and call Bioware out on this garbage . I hope they keep bombing this game . It has no business getting all these 10 / 10 crap . it is a game at best a 6.0

[Quionic]

 EA has a lot of money.