451 réponses à ce sujet

[calabain]

Arokel wrote...

It seems to me that critics of all kinds have a different view of their chosen field compared to the average consumer of whatever it is they review.

They have to go through thousands (not each person obviously) of games every year and assign them a rating. I imagine your perspective of things would change.

Also keep in mind that critics are hard pressed to provide any sort of actual criticism toward the big publishers.  Its well documented that gaming journalism sites get copies faster and more interviews if they give games good scores.  Giving big name games bad scores gets you blacklisted.

Makes sense, but always take gaming journalism with a huge bag of salt.

Obviously I can't really blame Bioware for this, cause its not them.  But EA doesn't have its reputation for nothing.

[Plaguemaster]

Want review from those who really played the entire game?
http://www.metacriti...c/mass-effect-3
Enjoy, Metacritic. Like they say Vox Populi. now see the difference
Critic Reviews - Average - 93 from 13 reviewers, IGN, PC-Gamer etc.
User Reviews - Average 3,6 from 1992 reviews.
just a bit information:
Dragon age 2
Critic average 79 (75 reviewers)
User average 4,3 (2010 reviewers)

[Stanley Woo]

EJ107 wrote...

But would you give a game with a terrible ending 100/100 and say it was a fantastic ending to the series? I'd deduct at least 10/100 from the score if the ending was as bad as mass effect 3's. 

Would I? Maybe. Would you? Obviously not. But would that reviewer you're talking about? Obviously he would and he did. Remember that the review you're reading isn't your opinion (though yuou might agree and disagree with different parts of it), it is the opinion of someone else who potentially does this as a job.

It doesn't mean the reviewer is right or wrong. You just decide whether you agree with him or not.

[Kanner]

Obrusnine wrote...

While I don't think DA2 QUITE deserved a 9 (my preferred score is 8), it's not a bad game in any respect. The story was a little weak compared to the first, same with the length, but it's still loads better then other RPG's on the market. They also really did make some really notable improvements to the gameplay. I loved the new things they did with the dialogue wheel and the gameplay was A LOT better then in the first.

Honestly, I think both games (DA:O and DA2) have their own strengths and weaknesses.

Okay, for me, DA2 had all the charm of a dead fish.  There was no reason to care about the characters, the gameplay was WoW-lite with taunting endless respawns being the ONLY mechanic that mattered, ever.  And the story... didn't grab me.  Ever.  I'd give it 4/10 on a good day, and I definitely couldn't finish it.

So between the two of us, we've already arrived at an average of 6-7/10.  Not consistant 9/10, 10/10, 5/5 marks like the reviewers all gave.

Basically, you just can't trust those guys.

[Derengard]

Well, they also wouldn't say anything about the Chobot character, for one thing, so don't expect to get much substantial criticism from major magazines.

[Salvatore510]

Stakis wrote...

Salvatore510 wrote...

thunderhawk862002 wrote...

Salvatore510 wrote...

An ending does not make a game, and despite most people not wanting to admit it, it's the best game in the series

If a horrible game had an amazing ending, should it be an amazing game? That's the logic you guys are using, because most of you seem to think because the ending sucks, doesn't matter if the game is great, the game has to suck.

An ending absolutely makes a game.  If you're playing a Mario game and you start going up the castle to fight Bowser.  You beat him but just as you rescue Peach he wakes up, throws you into a reinforced steel cage and runs off with the princess.  Game over.    The ending absolutely makes a difference.  

Than you must believe a horrible game can become a great game with a great ending.

The ending is just that, an ending. People didn't like the ending of The Empire Strikes Back, but now its universally considered the best Star Wars movie. Mass Effect 3 is the best Mass Effect game, even if the ending sucks.

say what ? you do realize ppl knew empire was the middle movie right ? this ending we get in ME3 is suppose to finish the series, not setting up the story.

People didn't know what the ending to Return of the Jedi was going to be, and we don't know what happens after Mass Effect 3. It's the end of the triology, not the series. Maybe a new Mass Effect game comes out and it turns out they figured out how to turn the Mass relays back on.

The fact remains, The Empire Strikes Back is the best Star Wars movie, by far, but when it came out, almost no one liked the ending (Except if you liked when the Empire won). Mass Effect 3 is the best Mass Effect gave, and I think by a healhy margine, but the ending sucks and is disappointing to most. Doesn't change the fact it's the best game in the series though.

[TUHD]

Salvatore510 wrote...

EJ107 wrote...

Salvatore510 wrote...

CompositeGNR wrote...

Salvatore510 wrote...

An ending does not make a game, and despite most people not wanting to admit it, it's the best game in the series

If a horrible game had an amazing ending, should it be an amazing game? That's the logic you guys are using, because most of you seem to think because the ending sucks, doesn't matter if the game is great, the game has to suck.

Well it completly invalidates any reason to play the two previous games, because none of those choices matter, heck it even invalidates replaying 3

Irrelevant. That doesn't make it a bad game, and the reviewers are judging the quality of the game, and if you liked Mass Effect before (IE it's your type of game) you would be lying if you think it's anything less than a great game. Sure the ending is a massive letdown, but it doesn't detract from the game.

I got so deflated after the ending I didn't touch my Xbox for 3 days but it doesn't change the fact it's still an awesome game and deserving of all the high praise it's getting.

And people seem to forget, that some people actually do like the ending. But in the end, peoples opinions of the ending are irrelevant when discussing the quality of the game. It's just bitterness if you think it changes an amazing game into an awful game.

But would you give a game with a terrible ending 100/100 and say it was a fantastic ending to the series? I'd deduct at least 10/100 from the score if the ending was as bad as mass effect 3's. 

If the game was amazing yes I would give it 100/1000 even if I didn't like the ending. And yeah Mass Effect 3 is a great ending to the series, gameplay wise.  Look how many 3rd game in a series really drop the ball and don't improve or even move backwards (Uncharted 3 for example), while Mass Effect 3 significantly improved on everything.

Peoples opinions on the ending are just that opinions. How good a game is isn't opinion, it's fact. People that don't like great games will often say the game sucks, but what they really should be saying is the game isn't for them.

'How good a game is isn't opinion, it's fact.' I had the feeling before you were provoking, but now you're just plain trolling!
Only thing which is fact about 'quality' is whether a game runs smooth in general on recommended spec or better, and how many bugs etc there are. 'How good a game is' is opinion. Whether it has nice graphics, is opinion. 95% of a game rating is OPINION.

[Lancane]

Saying that the ending doesn't truly effect the overall aspect of a series or trilogy is utter nonsense. Anyone with any sort of education in literature could tell you otherwise, I'd have liked to see someone tell that to Frank Herbert or J.R.R. Tolkien and see what sort of response they would have gotten. The ending is the climax of a story arch, it's suppose to be a sound conclusion to all that's led up to that point. Do you think Dune would have been considered a classic had the ending been dull and inept? What about Lord of the Rings? Think that would have been made into one of the biggest movie trilogies of all time or had near the success had it been written with a poor, unintelligible ending? You may believe so, no one in the literary community would agree with you though...success of a story is about the whole of the story not the beginning or the middle. Mass Effect 3 was a great game with a tremendous storyline but the ending was one of the worst I've ever seen or have read. It would be equal to reading David Edding's Belgariad series and at the end he finds a nuclear bomb in this amazing fantasy world and boom, the end. Yeah, that's great and fulfilling...but heck at least the first four books were gratifying.

Modifié par Lancane, 15 mars 2012 - 10:34 .

[Obrusnine]

Derengard wrote...

Well, they also wouldn't say anything about the Chobot character, for one thing, so don't expect to get much substantial criticism from major magazines.

I don't get what's with all the hate against Diana Allers. I liked her enough to talk with her all the way through to the end.

[TUHD]

Lancane wrote...

Saying that the ending doesn't truly effect the overall aspect of a series or trilogy is utter nonsense. Anyone with any sort of education in literature could tell you otherwise, I'd have liked to see someone tell that to Frank Herbert or J.R.R. Tolkien and see what sort of response they would have gotten. The ending is the climax of a story arch, it's suppose to be a sound conclusion to all that's led up to that point. Do you think Dune would have been considered a classic had the ending been dull and inept? What about Lord of the Rings? Think that would have been made into one of the biggest movie trilogies of all time or had near the success had it been written with a poor, unintelligible ending? You may believe so, no one in the literary community would agree with you though...success of a story is about the whole of the story not the beginning or the middle. Mass Effect 3 was a great game with a tremendous storyline but the ending was one of the worst I've ever seen or have read. It would be equal to reading David Edding's Belgariad series and at the end he finds a nuclear bomb in this amazing fantasy world and boom, the end. Yeah, that's great and fulfilling...but heck at least the first four books were gratifying.

+++

[thunderhawk862002]

A fantastic ending can improve a movie especially if it is the first in a trilogy. However an ending takes a 180 from the rest of the game/movie an disregards anything that came before it then yes and ending can ruin the entire thing. If I get food poisoning from a meal i'm pretty sure I'm not going to have that meal again. When the advertised game and the games that came before it all centered on choices an seeing your actions have meaning an it's tossed in ten minutes then yeah it ruins the game. The game was built on choice and it live up to that until the ending. Once you realize you have no choice then the entire premise of the game itself is changed.

[durasteel]

They probably haven't seen the end yet at the time they write their reviews. As you play the game, you see your actions from 1 and 2 impact the galaxy, and the game is truly very, very good right up until you meet little Mr. Space Magic. This might make reviewers start trying to reach the end of a game before they review it, or add a "I haven't seen how it ends yet" caveat to their review.

[Altered Idol]

I don't think we should criticise people/reviewers for liking the ending, thats well within their right to do so. I would have preferred a bit more discussion about the ending in some articles, which sometimes seemed to bypass the issue.

We need to stick to our message that we wanted more option, more closure and more consequences. We need to back up why we feel this way in a coherent and civil manner.

We need to accept that some people like the ending and would not want to see it changed. Equally they should also be able to see that alot of fans don't like the ending and would like to see more variety, less ambiguity and more coherence. Some of the criticism from gaming outlets about the movement for more ending options has been totally out of order.

If we make our case passionately but in a civilised way, there's more of a chance that our ideas will be taken on board than if we insult everyone.

[Harorrd]

[not helping]

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 15 mars 2012 - 10:43 .

[Salvatore510]

Plaguemaster wrote...

Want review from those who really played the entire game?
http://www.metacriti...c/mass-effect-3
Enjoy, Metacritic. Like they say Vox Populi. now see the difference
Critic Reviews - Average - 93 from 13 reviewers, IGN, PC-Gamer etc.
User Reviews - Average 3,6 from 1992 reviews.
just a bit information:
Dragon age 2
Critic average 79 (75 reviewers)
User average 4,3 (2010 reviewers)

User reviews are useless. People aren't giving games accurate scores. It's like when Halo 3 came out, it's user reviews were mostly 0 or 1, a week before it came out. You know why? Because fanboys gave the game 0 just because it was an Xbox game.

If you actually think Mass Effect 3 is a 3.6 you're just an idiot.

[durasteel]

Obrusnine wrote...

I don't get what's with all the hate against Diana Allers. I liked her enough to talk with her all the way through to the end.

Yeah, same here. I thought some of her lines were quite humorous, and I thought Chobot did fine voicing them. But what can you say? Heters gonna hate.

[Obrusnine]

Altered Idol wrote...

I don't think we should criticise people/reviewers for liking the ending, thats well within their right to do so. I would have preferred a bit more discussion about the ending in some articles, which sometimes seemed to bypass the issue.

We need to stick to our message that we wanted more option, more closure and more consequences. We need to back up why we feel this way in a coherent and civil manner.

We need to accept that some people like the ending and would not want to see it changed. Equally they should also be able to see that alot of fans don't like the ending and would like to see more variety, less ambiguity and more coherence. Some of the criticism from gaming outlets about the movement for more ending options has been totally out of order.

If we make our case passionately but in a civilised way, there's more of a chance that our ideas will be taken on board than if we insult everyone.

Most of us are making our points in a civil manner, only the vocal minority is being stupid and abusive about it. I made this thread just wondering why none of them would mention it? They had to know someone somewhere wasn't going to like it and AT LEAST made an off-hand comment about it, but they didn't, and because of that a lot of buyers went in without knowing what they were going to get out of the product they bought. It's a critics job to bring these kind of issues to our attention, and they didn't.

[Salvatore510]

Anyways theres no use arguing with people who are deadset in thinking a bad ending makes an amazing game bad. A few more weeks and most of people saying they're going to "go on a hunger strike untill Bioware fixes the ending" or "That it's the worst game ever made" will find another game to bash from the comfort of their parents basement and Bioware can start to listen to people who aren't throwing tantrums like my 5 year old nephew.

[kbct]

Stanley Woo wrote...

EJ107 wrote...

But would you give a game with a terrible ending 100/100 and say it was a fantastic ending to the series? I'd deduct at least 10/100 from the score if the ending was as bad as mass effect 3's. 

Would I? Maybe. Would you? Obviously not. But would that reviewer you're talking about? Obviously he would and he did. Remember that the review you're reading isn't your opinion (though yuou might agree and disagree with different parts of it), it is the opinion of someone else who potentially does this as a job.

It doesn't mean the reviewer is right or wrong. You just decide whether you agree with him or not.

I can understand one reviewer giving it a perfect score, but there are at least 10 reviewers in the sticky above that gave ME3 a perfect score. And tons more near-perfect scores. I've never seen a larger disparity between user reviews and professional reviews.

[TUHD]

durasteel wrote...

Obrusnine wrote...

I don't get what's with all the hate against Diana Allers. I liked her enough to talk with her all the way through to the end.

Yeah, same here. I thought some of her lines were quite humorous, and I thought Chobot did fine voicing them. But what can you say? Heters gonna hate.

People who hate Allers? I let her tag along, she's got some nice lines (and of course she's a war asset ) Only her outfit could be... better ... at times. The skirt she wears is a bit mwah... (Is it actually a skirt? I am still unsure about it, it's a bit hard to tell )

[calabain]

TUHD wrote...

Salvatore510 wrote...

EJ107 wrote...

Salvatore510 wrote...

CompositeGNR wrote...

Salvatore510 wrote...

An ending does not make a game, and despite most people not wanting to admit it, it's the best game in the series

If a horrible game had an amazing ending, should it be an amazing game? That's the logic you guys are using, because most of you seem to think because the ending sucks, doesn't matter if the game is great, the game has to suck.

Well it completly invalidates any reason to play the two previous games, because none of those choices matter, heck it even invalidates replaying 3

Irrelevant. That doesn't make it a bad game, and the reviewers are judging the quality of the game, and if you liked Mass Effect before (IE it's your type of game) you would be lying if you think it's anything less than a great game. Sure the ending is a massive letdown, but it doesn't detract from the game.

I got so deflated after the ending I didn't touch my Xbox for 3 days but it doesn't change the fact it's still an awesome game and deserving of all the high praise it's getting.

And people seem to forget, that some people actually do like the ending. But in the end, peoples opinions of the ending are irrelevant when discussing the quality of the game. It's just bitterness if you think it changes an amazing game into an awful game.

But would you give a game with a terrible ending 100/100 and say it was a fantastic ending to the series? I'd deduct at least 10/100 from the score if the ending was as bad as mass effect 3's. 

If the game was amazing yes I would give it 100/1000 even if I didn't like the ending. And yeah Mass Effect 3 is a great ending to the series, gameplay wise.  Look how many 3rd game in a series really drop the ball and don't improve or even move backwards (Uncharted 3 for example), while Mass Effect 3 significantly improved on everything.

Peoples opinions on the ending are just that opinions. How good a game is isn't opinion, it's fact. People that don't like great games will often say the game sucks, but what they really should be saying is the game isn't for them.

'How good a game is isn't opinion, it's fact.' I had the feeling before you were provoking, but now you're just plain trolling!
Only thing which is fact about 'quality' is whether a game runs smooth in general on recommended spec or better, and how many bugs etc there are. 'How good a game is' is opinion. Whether it has nice graphics, is opinion. 95% of a game rating is OPINION.

I'm just going to jump in here and say that's utter nonsense.  There are plenty of objective features you can examine when considering both story and gameplay.  Same holds true for literature, movies, etc. 

Granted, we all have a limited perspective, so we cannot be truely objective, but that does not mean we can't strive toward determining somethings overall objective quality.  This is where opinions come into play.    

This is getting far too philosophical though, so I'm just going to end this line of thought cause I don't feel like writing an essay on what those objective qualities are.  

[Caz Neerg]

Altered Idol wrote...

I don't think we should criticise people/reviewers for liking the ending, thats well within their right to do so. I would have preferred a bit more discussion about the ending in some articles, which sometimes seemed to bypass the issue. 

I think the main issue people have with the reviews is the consistent disconnect.  It feels more than a little bizarre when fan reaction is this consistently negative, and critic reaction is almost universally positive.

[Sentr0]

Salvatore510 wrote...

Plaguemaster wrote...

Want review from those who really played the entire game?
http://www.metacriti...c/mass-effect-3
Enjoy, Metacritic. Like they say Vox Populi. now see the difference
Critic Reviews - Average - 93 from 13 reviewers, IGN, PC-Gamer etc.
User Reviews - Average 3,6 from 1992 reviews.
just a bit information:
Dragon age 2
Critic average 79 (75 reviewers)
User average 4,3 (2010 reviewers)

User reviews are useless. People aren't giving games accurate scores. It's like when Halo 3 came out, it's user reviews were mostly 0 or 1, a week before it came out. You know why? Because fanboys gave the game 0 just because it was an Xbox game.

If you actually think Mass Effect 3 is a 3.6 you're just an idiot.

you're right, 3,6 is just too high should be 2.0 max

[Obrusnine]

kbct wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

EJ107 wrote...

But would you give a game with a terrible ending 100/100 and say it was a fantastic ending to the series? I'd deduct at least 10/100 from the score if the ending was as bad as mass effect 3's. 

Would I? Maybe. Would you? Obviously not. But would that reviewer you're talking about? Obviously he would and he did. Remember that the review you're reading isn't your opinion (though yuou might agree and disagree with different parts of it), it is the opinion of someone else who potentially does this as a job.

It doesn't mean the reviewer is right or wrong. You just decide whether you agree with him or not.

I can understand one reviewer giving it a perfect score, but there are at least 10 reviewers in the sticky above that gave ME3 a perfect score. And tons more near-perfect scores. I've never seen a larger disparity between user reviews and professional reviews.

Bioware even advertises ME3 with "70 perfect reviews!"

How out of 70 critics could not a single one, NOT A SINGLE ONE, recognize that the ending was unworthy of the series?

It just seemed ridiculous.

[Plaguemaster]

Salvatore510 wrote...
User reviews are useless. People aren't giving games accurate scores. It's like when Halo 3 came out, it's user reviews were mostly 0 or 1, a week before it came out. You know why? Because fanboys gave the game 0 just because it was an Xbox game.

If you actually think Mass Effect 3 is a 3.6 you're just an idiot.

I, actually gave ME3 a 1. the difference is that I'm not childish enough to coincider those who think otherwise as idiots.
Also, if you look at Halo 3 then you'll figure majority of positive ratings from users.