453 réponses à ce sujet

[Soulwatcher1974]

Reading through these 8 pages leads me to believe most of you guys will rate any game 10/10 so long as Biowares name is on it.

[Rockworm503]

Soulwatcher1974 wrote...

Reading through these 8 pages leads me to believe most of you guys will rate any game 10/10 so long as Biowares name is on it.

And thats different from rating it a 0/10 because it has Bioware's name on it how?

As for me I don't do reviews.
I'm not pretentious enough to think my opinion is worth it.
But if I were to review it I'd be honest and I wouldn't even consider it until I've played through the ENTIRE game.

[muse108]

I think this is right. Metacritic to be valid needs a way of authenticating if you own the game or not, until this happens its not a valid representation of any game's goodness (or badness). A computer shop I shop at does this and it makes huge sense.

There are a few games I would actually give a zero to. FarCry2 - game was so dull that by the end I was about to gouge my own eyes out. DA2 - maybe not 0 but 1 or 2, after the epicness of DAO it was a huge letdown and ruined the series for me. Deus Ex Invisible war- again it was a sequel that did huge damage to the original games reputation for me.

Some games do certainly deserve 0, very few if any are worthy of a 10.

[Abirn]

10/10 by definition is perfect. What was the last game you played that is perfect. The review score inflating (bribing/blackmailing of game reviewers) has to stop. We need an honest source of reviews to let us know if we should buy the game.

[BuffPhantoms]

The /v/ raids have ruined metacritic, and now they simply want to be seen as a bit more legit.

more power to them.

[Justin2k]

Chris Priestly wrote...

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.

There are people that are a little upset about that you seem to care more about attracting new players to the game rather than delivering to the fans of the series, as evidenced by the ending, the action mode, the changes to characters sexual orientation, the shooter orientated gameplay, the multiplayer etc etc.... 

Those people aren't reviewing the game straight.  They are looking at what they expected from you as being a 10 and rating the game as a 3 or a 0 or whatever because you've delivered a shooter instead of an RPG.  Of course, that isn't the games realistic score, but they expected at least a decent ending, they didn't expect day 1 DLC or chargable multiplayer packs etc etc.

The game may very well be a 9 as a stand alone, but as the finale to something people have been playing and loving for years, you maybe spent a bit too much time appealing to a broader audience and not enough time giving the fans what they wanted (i.e a decent face for Tali, a decent ending and some sort of semblance that the choices they've been making mattered).

Same thing happened with Dragon Age 2.  It's a shame you seem more about squeezing every last dollar out of people than you do giving your core fan base what they've come to expect from you guys. 

[Rockworm503]

Abirn wrote...

10/10 by definition is perfect. What was the last game you played that is perfect. The review score inflating (bribing/blackmailing of game reviewers) has to stop. We need an honest source of reviews to let us know if we should buy the game.

Well I would argue that 10/10 doesn't have to be perfect... But you just cant find something wrong with it or you don't know how it could be approved on.
After careful consideration I would rate Batman Arkham City a 9.5 because as much as I love it I think they could've improved a little bit.
But a 0 = broken or unplayable.
I get it... Some people are angry over the endings.  If they don't meet your expectiations or they are just truly terrible than that takes the score down and thats fine..
But how in any reality does a bad ending = broken and unplayable?
Reviewers have given really broken and unplayable games better scores than that!

[Soulwatcher1974]

Rockworm503 wrote...

Soulwatcher1974 wrote...

Reading through these 8 pages leads me to believe most of you guys will rate any game 10/10 so long as Biowares name is on it.

And thats different from rating it a 0/10 because it has Bioware's name on it how?

As for me I don't do reviews.
I'm not pretentious enough to think my opinion is worth it.
But if I were to review it I'd be honest and I wouldn't even consider it until I've played through the ENTIRE game.

Its not different , and as I said to the other guy. Your in battle with in the first 5 minutes of the game. If you hate the game with in the first 5 minutes, playing it for the next 40hrs isnt going to change anything. The game isnt going to get any better for you because of play time.

[BuffPhantoms]

Soulwatcher1974 wrote...

Rockworm503 wrote...

Soulwatcher1974 wrote...

Reading through these 8 pages leads me to believe most of you guys will rate any game 10/10 so long as Biowares name is on it.

And thats different from rating it a 0/10 because it has Bioware's name on it how?

As for me I don't do reviews.
I'm not pretentious enough to think my opinion is worth it.
But if I were to review it I'd be honest and I wouldn't even consider it until I've played through the ENTIRE game.

Its not different , and as I said to the other guy. Your in battle with in the first 5 minutes of the game. If you hate the game with in the first 5 minutes, playing it for the next 40hrs isnt going to change anything. The game isnt going to get any better for you because of play time.

How about the fact that /v/ planned mc user review troll raids before launch?

[Rockworm503]

Soulwatcher1974 wrote...

Rockworm503 wrote...

Soulwatcher1974 wrote...

Reading through these 8 pages leads me to believe most of you guys will rate any game 10/10 so long as Biowares name is on it.

And thats different from rating it a 0/10 because it has Bioware's name on it how?

As for me I don't do reviews.
I'm not pretentious enough to think my opinion is worth it.
But if I were to review it I'd be honest and I wouldn't even consider it until I've played through the ENTIRE game.

Its not different , and as I said to the other guy. Your in battle with in the first 5 minutes of the game. If you hate the game with in the first 5 minutes, playing it for the next 40hrs isnt going to change anything. The game isnt going to get any better for you because of play time.

Then thats not a review.
You said yourself that you hate RTSes.
Do you make a point of reviewing RTSes?

[Soulwatcher1974]

BuffPhantoms wrote...

Soulwatcher1974 wrote...

Rockworm503 wrote...

Soulwatcher1974 wrote...

Reading through these 8 pages leads me to believe most of you guys will rate any game 10/10 so long as Biowares name is on it.

And thats different from rating it a 0/10 because it has Bioware's name on it how?

As for me I don't do reviews.
I'm not pretentious enough to think my opinion is worth it.
But if I were to review it I'd be honest and I wouldn't even consider it until I've played through the ENTIRE game.

Its not different , and as I said to the other guy. Your in battle with in the first 5 minutes of the game. If you hate the game with in the first 5 minutes, playing it for the next 40hrs isnt going to change anything. The game isnt going to get any better for you because of play time.

How about the fact that /v/ planned mc user review troll raids before launch?

I am not talking about troll reviews. What I am saying is you dont need to play a game for 40hrs to decide if you like it or not. I played Hunted "The Deamon's Forge" and I knew it was a bad game. I bought the game release day and drove from gamestop to my house. And back to gamestop with in 30 minutes because the game was just that bad. You either like a game or you dont like it. Saying you need 40hrs to make up your mind is just silly. It makes me wonder if the person is even able to think for them selves.

[Rockworm503]

I don't think anyone is saying you have to play the whole game to make up your mind about it.
What I think people are saying is you need to have played the whole game to have your opinion be called a review.

[Soulwatcher1974]

Rockworm503 wrote...

Soulwatcher1974 wrote...

Rockworm503 wrote...

Soulwatcher1974 wrote...

Reading through these 8 pages leads me to believe most of you guys will rate any game 10/10 so long as Biowares name is on it.

And thats different from rating it a 0/10 because it has Bioware's name on it how?

As for me I don't do reviews.
I'm not pretentious enough to think my opinion is worth it.
But if I were to review it I'd be honest and I wouldn't even consider it until I've played through the ENTIRE game.

Its not different , and as I said to the other guy. Your in battle with in the first 5 minutes of the game. If you hate the game with in the first 5 minutes, playing it for the next 40hrs isnt going to change anything. The game isnt going to get any better for you because of play time.

Then thats not a review.
You said yourself that you hate RTSes.
Do you make a point of reviewing RTSes?

No I never reviewed a single RTS. But I did review Hunted baised on my experience. The voice acting was horrid, the animation was some of the worst that I have seen. The first 15 minutes of the story was a joke. And the controls were terrible. No amount of play time would change my mind on that game.

[Rogue Eagle]

wijse wrote...

If they are going to remove all the 0's, they should remove all the 10's. No game deserves 0 or 10.

I know 0 and 10 are absolutes, but when it comes to reviews they really shouldn't be. Perhaps one could interpret a score as 0/10 - do not recommend and 10/10 - I recommend you pull a sickie and play this game instead.

[Davidicus]

Justin2k wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

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.

There are people that are a little upset about that you seem to care more about attracting new players to the game rather than delivering to the fans of the series, as evidenced by the ending, the action mode, the changes to characters sexual orientation, the shooter orientated gameplay, the multiplayer etc etc.... 

Those people aren't reviewing the game straight.  They are looking at what they expected from you as being a 10 and rating the game as a 3 or a 0 or whatever because you've delivered a shooter instead of an RPG.  Of course, that isn't the games realistic score, but they expected at least a decent ending, they didn't expect day 1 DLC or chargable multiplayer packs etc etc.

The game may very well be a 9 as a stand alone, but as the finale to something people have been playing and loving for years, you maybe spent a bit too much time appealing to a broader audience and not enough time giving the fans what they wanted (i.e a decent face for Tali, a decent ending and some sort of semblance that the choices they've been making mattered).

Same thing happened with Dragon Age 2.  It's a shame you seem more about squeezing every last dollar out of people than you do giving your core fan base what they've come to expect from you guys. 

Hell hath no fury like a nerd scorned.

[Soulwatcher1974]

Rockworm503 wrote...

I don't think anyone is saying you have to play the whole game to make up your mind about it.
What I think people are saying is you need to have played the whole game to have your opinion be called a review.

So what your saying is a person is not allowed to give a first impression review of the game? They must be FORCED to play a game even though they dont like it. How many times have you sat through a movie that you didn't like just so you can post a review?

[Justin2k]

Davidicus wrote...

Justin2k wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

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.

There are people that are a little upset about that you seem to care more about attracting new players to the game rather than delivering to the fans of the series, as evidenced by the ending, the action mode, the changes to characters sexual orientation, the shooter orientated gameplay, the multiplayer etc etc.... 

Those people aren't reviewing the game straight.  They are looking at what they expected from you as being a 10 and rating the game as a 3 or a 0 or whatever because you've delivered a shooter instead of an RPG.  Of course, that isn't the games realistic score, but they expected at least a decent ending, they didn't expect day 1 DLC or chargable multiplayer packs etc etc.

The game may very well be a 9 as a stand alone, but as the finale to something people have been playing and loving for years, you maybe spent a bit too much time appealing to a broader audience and not enough time giving the fans what they wanted (i.e a decent face for Tali, a decent ending and some sort of semblance that the choices they've been making mattered).

Same thing happened with Dragon Age 2.  It's a shame you seem more about squeezing every last dollar out of people than you do giving your core fan base what they've come to expect from you guys. 

Hell hath no fury like a nerd scorned.

Lol not a nerd at all mate.  31 year old married with 2 kids, probably more than yourself. 

People who've been playing this game since the start cared more about the game staying true to the rest of the series, having dialogue, having a good ending etc, than they did multiplayer or gay relationships or Gears of War gameplay.

By adding all the above, Bioware were simply saying "we've already got your money, we're going to get someone elses".

I can understand why some people write bad reviews about them.  If you can't then you are just a blind fanboy to be fair.  Careful with the insults.

[Rogue Eagle]

If I were to give Mass Effect 1 an 8/10, ME2 a 9.5 out of 10, I'd probably only give ME3 a 6/10 at this stage
Sometimes I think the 'automated dialogue' is already on, and I sit in my seat going "oh this is going to be a fun decision - I can't wait!" and then shepard makes the decision for me >:Z

[Kilshrek]

So here we see an initial burst of activity by trolls or what have you, and then sensible people come forward and offer their reviews of the game on metacritic. It is by no means foolproof, but it surely can give you an idea of the thoughts of the community, such as it is.

You may argue that metacritic scores are useless, and that the trolls will win. How come Portal 2's metacritic user score is 8.4, while Dragon Age 2 hasn't gone past 5, right now? Portal 2 got bombed to hell by people who didn't understand the concept of decorative DLC. Hats. How can anyone hate on hats? But it was a good solid game right out of the box(download), and the DLC had absolutely nothing to do with your enjoyment of the full game, unless you really really need hats.

Anyway here comes Bioware, and look, it has DLC too, and not just any DLC, DLC that should in theory loop everything back to ME 1 and is a piece of the puzzle that hasn't been found for 50,000 years, yours for only $10!. On top of that DLC it has a nickle and dime system that I truly cannot fathom, I won't spend a single penny more than what I've already spent on this game to give myself an edge in co-operative multiplayer! Sure plenty of people will be buying it, and with it they are buying a quicker demise for the traditional game model I suppose.

None of this factors in to the SP game, in a manner of speaking, but I hope people notice this feature creep, first it's appearance packs, the next thing you know you're buying new endings and romance packs(because it [b]will[ sell/b]). Battlefield does something similar where you can purchase blinged out gear that has marginally better stats than the base weapons, nothing imbalancing, but that's because it's competitive multiplayer. I guess it's a genius system, with so many rich folk in the world today a DLC system where they can get what they want right away for a mere $1.50 is so very appealing, and who else is more than willing to oblige that, oh yes.

Well, off to wait for my game again...

Modifié par Kilshrek, 08 mars 2012 - 01:04 .

[Rockworm503]

Soulwatcher1974 wrote...

Rockworm503 wrote...

I don't think anyone is saying you have to play the whole game to make up your mind about it.
What I think people are saying is you need to have played the whole game to have your opinion be called a review.

So what your saying is a person is not allowed to give a first impression review of the game? They must be FORCED to play a game even though they dont like it. How many times have you sat through a movie that you didn't like just so you can post a review?

/facepalm
At this point I think your picking and chosing what people say vs what their actually saying.
first impressions are not reviews.
I've already said I don't write reviews.
Why should anyone take you seriously if you've already made up your minde before the game started?

[kofelover]

[/quote]

"Lol not a nerd at all mate.  31 year old married with 2 kids, probably more than yourself. 

People who've been playing this game since the start cared more about the game staying true to the rest of the series, having dialogue, having a good ending etc, than they did multiplayer or gay relationships or Gears of War gameplay.

By adding all the above, Bioware were simply saying "we've already got your money, we're going to get someone elses".

I can understand why some people write bad reviews about them.  If you can't then you are just a blind fanboy to be fair.  Careful with the insults."
[/quote]


Agreed.  Quite a few of the reviews are well-written and state why they have issues with the game.  It's very easy to distinquish between the trolls and those that have actually spent time playing the game.

I haven't played yet (maybe this weekend), but I'm becoming less enthusiastic by the moment.  The direction of Bioware has changed and is just not making games that appeal to me as much as those from the past.  I do want to finish my Shepard story so I will try playing the game.  I just hope it goes better than DA2 -- only made it to the end of the first chapter and shelved it (permanently).

Modifié par kofelover, 08 mars 2012 - 01:08 .

[JorgeMacD]

Justin2k wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

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.

There are people that are a little upset about that you seem to care more about attracting new players to the game rather than delivering to the fans of the series, as evidenced by the ending, the action mode, the changes to characters sexual orientation, the shooter orientated gameplay, the multiplayer etc etc.... 

Those people aren't reviewing the game straight.  They are looking at what they expected from you as being a 10 and rating the game as a 3 or a 0 or whatever because you've delivered a shooter instead of an RPG.  Of course, that isn't the games realistic score, but they expected at least a decent ending, they didn't expect day 1 DLC or chargable multiplayer packs etc etc.

The game may very well be a 9 as a stand alone, but as the finale to something people have been playing and loving for years, you maybe spent a bit too much time appealing to a broader audience and not enough time giving the fans what they wanted (i.e a decent face for Tali, a decent ending and some sort of semblance that the choices they've been making mattered).

Same thing happened with Dragon Age 2.  It's a shame you seem more about squeezing every last dollar out of people than you do giving your core fan base what they've come to expect from you guys. 

word
up

[Abraham_uk]

Here is what someone was saying in the sister thread.

This is from 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.

http://social.biowar...index/9670463/7


Can I ask you a question?

Why do you guys think it's unreasonable for someone to give 0/10.

Some people literally found nothing enjoyable about the game. I doubt I'll find it that lacklustre but some people would rather bash their heads against a brick wall because a particular game let them down that much. Are they not entitled to their opinion. What is so illegitimate about that kind of review?

How are 0/10 and 10/10 reviews less trustworthy than moderate reviews of 4/10 to 8/10. Just saying.

There are probably people who felt so betrayed by the Star Wars Prequels that they're still weeping over them to this very day. I would pretend to hate the Star Wars prequels just to avoid their rage if I ever meet those kind of people. Some people are still upset over Matrix Sequels and some people probably need therapy after an aweful experience with Dragon Age 2.

Do I dismiss those views? No. They are ligitimate opinions, even if they talk in extremes and secretly plan their revenge. Who am I to say that those films and games don't deserve a 0/10? I can only respectfully disagree with them.

Modifié par Abraham_uk, 08 mars 2012 - 01:16 .

[TwwlX]

If they don't want players expressing their opinions, then they shouldn't have a "User Reviews" section on their site. Either completely remove it or quit removing their reviews. What they have done is not ok. This will only hurt the site's reputation as well as BioWare's. There are already rumors that BioWare is manipulating reviews of the game. This will only further that point.

Modifié par TwwlX, 08 mars 2012 - 01:12 .

[Rockworm503]

Here's what people don't get.
A review should be the quality of the game.
It should NOT be how you complain about EA's practices.
Its not your time to say EA sucks because they suck.
Its time to talk about the game not what beef you have with Bioware or EA.
Thats just silly.
I thought a game review was to tell us what you thought about the game.
If I were to review this game I would treat the DLC like I do any DLC. Separate from the game and has no baring on my final verdict.
I don't care if your a professional getting payed to do it or a user angry at Bioware.
That should just be common sense!