451 réponses à ce sujet

[Altered Idol]

Obrusnine wrote...

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.

I totally agree with that and I do understand that most are making their points in a civilised way.
 
But some have chosen to just insult and harass which does no favours to our cause.

I'm in agreement with you that it should have received more focus. There has to have been some who would have known how contentious the ending was. I don't think they were particularly clear on the subject. And I do think they should have made more of an effort to address the issue or bring it to the customer's attention.

But if they genuinely liked it, thats' fair enough I reckon. What I don't like is the way some outlets have react to those of us who want different endings. Some have been ultra-aggressive in their criticism which is just not called for.

[Dansayshi]

EA provides reviewers early copies of the game.

EA chooses reviewers for this, because they know it will paint their product in a good light.

Reviewers HAVE to give their product a good review, otherwise EA will not provide review copies in the future, which damages the reviewers business.

Take "professional" reviewers words with a grain of salt, they are heavily under the thumb of developers / publishers. Its rare to actually find an honest one.

[Obrusnine]

Plaguemaster wrote...

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.

You gave ME3 a one?

You kind of just proved why metacritic user scores just can't be trusted. Irritated fanboys and girls give non-objective and non-critical reviews. Maybe you should accurately describe how you felt about the product instead of review bombing it like it was a terrible game.

[Obrusnine]

Dansayshi wrote...

EA provides reviewers early copies of the game.

EA chooses reviewers for this, because they know it will paint their product in a good light.

Reviewers HAVE to give their product a good review, otherwise EA will not provide review copies in the future, which damages the reviewers business.

Take "professional" reviewers words with a grain of salt, they are heavily under the thumb of developers / publishers. Its rare to actually find an honest one.

Wonder what happens when they give games bad reviews...?

[I_Jedi]

I found an appropriate comic.


http://search.dilber...lter=type:comic

Modifié par I_Jedi, 15 mars 2012 - 10:47 .

[Caz Neerg]

Obrusnine wrote...
You gave ME3 a one?

You kind of just proved why metacritic user scores just can't be trusted. Irritated fanboys and girls give non-objective and non-critical reviews. Maybe you should accurately describe how you felt about the product instead of review bombing it like it was a terrible game.

The problem is that many of the positive reviews are equally non-objective and non-critical, leaving people feeling like the only chance that the average will ever reflect the actual quality of the product is if they go unreasonably low to compensate for those who went unreasonably high.  Further, some are trying to compensate for critical reviews that are clearly disconnected from popular sentiment, so as to try to help save other gamers from what they honestly consider to be a poor purchasing decision.

Modifié par Caz Neerg, 15 mars 2012 - 10:48 .

[thunderhawk862002]

It's was always about seeing your choices play out in the end. It didn't deliver. For whatever reason they though an EMS score was the best way to decide the ending. For all the assets you obtain you never see their full use. Further more you lost all your ability to persuade in the end. A choice of decisions that don't depend on your Shepard's morals, views or actions. That's not the game that was advertised even if 99.9% of it was. When you played before the ending that wasn't the case. Thus the game shifts the narrative from you to the creator which went against 99.9% of the rest of the series and completely invalidates them.

[Obrusnine]

I_Jedi wrote...

I found an appropriate comic.


http://search.dilber...lter=type:comic

LOL

[Harorrd]

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.

But if you let someone review something for some site that will have a massive impact at the sales, don't you think they should give you a realistic and genuine review, and not some mumbo jumbo? Even if they claim the game is good, and more people buy it because of this, it will mostly only result in the exact oposit, just like we are experiencing now. Thousands of fans are angry because they trusted in some site, They trusted in EA, They trusted in Bioware.

[Midarenkov]

Obrusnine wrote...

Dansayshi wrote...

EA provides reviewers early copies of the game.

EA chooses reviewers for this, because they know it will paint their product in a good light.

Reviewers HAVE to give their product a good review, otherwise EA will not provide review copies in the future, which damages the reviewers business.

Take "professional" reviewers words with a grain of salt, they are heavily under the thumb of developers / publishers. Its rare to actually find an honest one.

Wonder what happens when they give games bad reviews...?

They get sacked. Happened a few times before. From what I remember that led to a former gamespot reviewer starting giantbomb or something.

[Obrusnine]

You also have to think about how many dissatisfied fans there are that don't have the internet. Because of that, even if Bioware decides to fix the endings, there will be many who never get it. Or many that are just no longer paying attention.

I'm sad for them.

[Lee T]

It's not surprising that they didn't talk about the ending, after all how many of them talked about the beginning and the face import failure?

[Obrusnine]

Midarenkov wrote...

Obrusnine wrote...

Dansayshi wrote...

EA provides reviewers early copies of the game.

EA chooses reviewers for this, because they know it will paint their product in a good light.

Reviewers HAVE to give their product a good review, otherwise EA will not provide review copies in the future, which damages the reviewers business.

Take "professional" reviewers words with a grain of salt, they are heavily under the thumb of developers / publishers. Its rare to actually find an honest one.

Wonder what happens when they give games bad reviews...?

They get sacked. Happened a few times before. From what I remember that led to a former gamespot reviewer starting giantbomb or something.

rofl? A Gamespot reviewer got sacked for giving a bad review?

I find that hilarious because Gamespot tends to be about as overtly critical as fans are on some things.

Just look at their reviews of InFamous 2 or Ace Combat Assault Horizon.

[catofnine]

Obrusnine wrote...

Why is it that not a single one I have seen with a review has even mentioned the terrible ending. I mean seriously, wtf???

Adam Sessler in on X-Play literally said "this is how you end a trilogy!"

That one made me laugh, really hard.

I'd be surprised if we get an answer to this, but could it be possible that the reviewers got copies of ME3 that were different than what was shipped on 3/6/12?  Tinfoil hat time I know, but I'm having a hard time believing that every one of these guys ignored the elephant in the room or was ok with it. 

Reviews from my friends looked a lot like this: "Great game.  Ending !@#$$%^^&&. OMG, WHY?!? /head explode." Forums didn't sound much different either.

[Plaguemaster]

Obrusnine wrote...
You gave ME3 a one?

You kind of just proved why metacritic user scores just can't be trusted. Irritated fanboys and girls give non-objective and non-critical reviews. Maybe you should accurately describe how you felt about the product instead of review bombing it like it was a terrible game.

I have my reasons and I can explain why I gave such a low score. You imply I have no right to express my opinion? And if someone's not venerating ME3 then they are non-objective raging fanbois\\fangirls?

[Stanley Woo]

Harorrd wrote...

But if you let someone review something for some site that will have a massive impact at the sales, don't you think they should give you a realistic and genuine review, and not some mumbo jumbo? Even if they claim the game is good, and more people buy it because of this, it will mostly only result in the exact oposit, just like we are experiencing now.

I would hope that all reviewers are giving us a "realistic and genuine review," otherwise even more poeple will decide that reviews don't mean anything anymore.

Thousands of fans are angry because they trusted in some site, They trusted in EA, They trusted in Bioware.

They trusted that no one at any of these companies would ever make a mistake or create something that the players don't like, ever? While flattering, that appears to be an unreasonable expectation. Holding us to a higher standard, I can understand and am firmly in support of, since I believe we do make high-quality games. Holding us to a perfect standard, on the other hand, I wouldn't recommend, since no one can possibly live up to something like that.

[Obrusnine]

Lee T wrote...

It's not surprising that they didn't talk about the ending, after all how many of them talked about the beginning and the face import failure?

About the same amount that talked about the ending apparently, lol

I didn't run into any bugs that are extremely prominent in my playthrough of the game.

The only persistant bug I ran across was how I was CONSTANTLY getting stuck in the environment whenever I went to the Normandy's cockpit to talk to Joker and EDI...

[RocketManSR2]

Critics are paid opinion givers. That's the only thing that makes them different from you and me. Our opinion doesn't mean s***, theirs slightly more.

[DeadLetterBox]

Todd Kenreck gave a negative review of GoW 3 because he didn't like the ending and I was annoyed with him for it.

But, yeah, it seems unlikely that this many fans are upset and none of the reviewers were. On the other hand, if you play lots of video games, an unexpected ending may have more value than it does for your average game customer.

[Dansayshi]

Obrusnine wrote...

Midarenkov wrote...

Obrusnine wrote...

Dansayshi wrote...

EA provides reviewers early copies of the game.

EA chooses reviewers for this, because they know it will paint their product in a good light.

Reviewers HAVE to give their product a good review, otherwise EA will not provide review copies in the future, which damages the reviewers business.

Take "professional" reviewers words with a grain of salt, they are heavily under the thumb of developers / publishers. Its rare to actually find an honest one.

Wonder what happens when they give games bad reviews...?

They get sacked. Happened a few times before. From what I remember that led to a former gamespot reviewer starting giantbomb or something.

rofl? A Gamespot reviewer got sacked for giving a bad review?

I find that hilarious because Gamespot tends to be about as overtly critical as fans are on some things.

Just look at their reviews of InFamous 2 or Ace Combat Assault Horizon.

It was a while back, and it was for Kayne and Lynch 2, he gave it a 6/10, eidos complained, and gamespot sacked him. The backlash from that though, as soon as the community gold hold of it.... it really hurt gamespot and eidos at the time, that eidos ended up being bought by squaresoft, because it was going under.

[Obrusnine]

Stanley Woo wrote...
Holding us to a perfect standard, on the other hand, I wouldn't recommend, since no one can possibly live up to something like that.

Not that's something I can agree with you guys on.

I just like it when a company admits when they make mistakes, I am much more likely to trust a company and buy their products when they are open and admit their mistakes when they make them. Bioware has done this in the past years, but for Mass Effect 3 they aren't admitting their failure, which is my biggest failure of trust here.

[I_Jedi]

[TUHD]

Caz Neerg wrote...

Obrusnine wrote...
You gave ME3 a one?

You kind of just proved why metacritic user scores just can't be trusted. Irritated fanboys and girls give non-objective and non-critical reviews. Maybe you should accurately describe how you felt about the product instead of review bombing it like it was a terrible game.

The problem is that many of the positive reviews are equally non-objective and non-critical, leaving people feeling like the only chance that the average will ever reflect the actual quality of the product is if they go unreasonably low to compensate for those who went unreasonably high.  Further, some are trying to compensate for critical reviews that are clearly disconnected from popular sentiment, so as to try to help save other gamers from what they honestly consider to be a poor purchasing decision.

That's kinda the problem - most MetaCritic reviews get bombed first by either absurd positive or absurd negative reviews (so either whole strings of 10/10 or strings of 1/10-0/10) and then people who don't agree counter it, leading to a chain where no realistic marks are given. It's become more a battleground then a helpfull tool, and the fact that professional reviewers tend to create unrealistic expectations by not fully playing a game before reviewing it doesn't help either.
Metacritic is actually a bad tool. And sadly enough with it, so do review scores - since often there is no middle ground anymore.

[Obrusnine]

I_Jedi wrote...

HA, that one was even better then the last

Modifié par Obrusnine, 15 mars 2012 - 10:58 .

[Caz Neerg]

Stanley Woo wrote...
They trusted that no one at any of these companies would ever make a mistake or create something that the players don't like, ever? While flattering, that appears to be an unreasonable expectation. Holding us to a higher standard, I can understand and am firmly in support of, since I believe we do make high-quality games. Holding us to a perfect standard, on the other hand, I wouldn't recommend, since no one can possibly live up to something like that.

They trusted that what they viewed as explicit promises would be kept.  In the minds of most fans who have expressed opinions, there are several that were clearly broken, such as the promise that we wouldn't just receive an "A, B, C" ending, that we would receive closure, and that it wouldn't be a Lost ending that creates more questions that answers.  Those are all things that were stated in interviews prior to the release of the game.  It is perfectly understandable that people would base their purchasing decisions in part on what they perceived as explicit promises, and be disappointed when the reality didn't match the reasonable expectations created by those promises.