451 réponses à ce sujet

[Freakiq]

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 could live up to the promises they gave about the endings.

Having all endings be the same is exactly the opposite of what was promised mere months ago.

[Midarenkov]

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.

Dug it up for you. http://kotaku.com/32...e--lynch-review

Also, here

Modifié par Midarenkov, 15 mars 2012 - 11:02 .

[Ianamus]

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 understand that, but 100/100 would imply a perfect game and between the various bugs (import ones in particular) and slightly clunky mission/codex log, I wouldn't say the game is perfect (very good, but never perfect) And the subjective endings only add to that (many, many people actively hate them, and I know some who are not even big fans of the series and dislike it). 

I'm not saying it should not have got good reviews, but it should have got realistic ones, and whatever you think of Mass Effect 3, or it's endings, I do not believe that giving it 100/100 is realistic. I don't think giving any game that is realistic. I also don't think it's realistic that with more than 95% of responses on a poll that has spread throughout the internet (and has more than 40'000 votes) claiming the endings are terrible that 70 reviewers gave it a perfect score, and many others a very high one, without mentioning even slight disappointment. 

The endings are a part of the game. A very large part of the game, as Mass Effect is the final part of the trilogy. While I can see that some reviewers may have liked the ending I can't believe that nearly every reviewer would like it or refuse to let it change their rating. 

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.

As I said above, as mass effect 3 got 100/100 from many reviewers that would imply that the game is perfect, as there is o higher score. So in light of reviews it is a very reasonable expectation. If a non perfect game gets 100/100 what does a perfect game get?

Modifié par EJ107, 15 mars 2012 - 11:05 .

[DashRunner92]

I'd give ME3 4/5. It was so great but those last 5 minutes were just horrible. And yes, those 5 minutes deserve the loss of a perfect score. Even just a so-so ending would of been ok, it's the fact that it's almost exactly the same as the first Deus Ex 1 is what ruins it.

[Obrusnine]

Caz Neerg wrote...

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.

Especially because an "A, B, C" ending is exactly what we got. Which are all just variations of the same thing... which was the worst part about it.

[thunderhawk862002]

Stanley Woo wrote...

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.

I trusted/believed in the promotion and advertising of the game.  Radically different,  many different outcomes, outcomes based on your choices were some of the claims I've heard officialy from Bioware and it's employees.  Right now with out a proper epilogue that doesn't seem to be the case.  Regardless if the endings were bad, they don't seem radically different unless we see the actual outcome.  It's like saying that there are three radically different endings to a Western.  The bandit shoots the sheriff and runs away, the band stabs the Sheriff and rides away on a horse, and a bandit strangles the bandit and hops away on the train.  Are they different? Yeah but how are they radically different?  

I mean if the endings are bad the endings are bad.  I can understand that.  I can't understand that the promotion of the product grossly mismatched the actual product.

[hex23]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Perhaps they had no problem with the ending, and/or felt the endings did not detract from their game experience.

All of them felt this way?

Given the near unianimous outcry over how terrible the end is that's close to impossible.

[I_Jedi]

DashRunner92 wrote...

I'd give ME3 4/5. It was so great but those last 5 minutes were just horrible. And yes, those 5 minutes deserve the loss of a perfect score. Even just a so-so ending would of been ok, it's the fact that it's almost exactly the same as the first Deus Ex 1 is what ruins it.

[ciorex]

Lets just pretend for a moment that there actually were 16 "diferent" endings, there is still one problem, the destruction of the **** *****.

I'm sure you're aware of this, as you created the damn lore, that when a **** ***** is destroyed it goes super nova and prety much vaporises the entire system its located in. So, what you've done in esence, is you've turned Shapard into the bigest mass murderer in the galaxy, aside from the Reapers ofcourse.

How does that make any sense?

P.S: I forgo to stay on topic, so if someone is downgrading the game's score just because of the ending then they have no idea what they're doing. When you review a game, you do so in a objective manner, and grade it as a whole, not based a small portion of it. 

That being said though, player reviews tend to be all over the place because its hard to stay objective, when you have so much invested in it.

Modifié par ciorex, 15 mars 2012 - 11:43 .

[Obrusnine]

EJ107 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 understand that, but 100/100 wuld imply a perfect game and between the various bugs (import ones in particular) and slightly clunky mission/codex log, I wouldn't say the game is perfect (very good, but never perfect) And the subjective endings only add to that (many, many people actively hate them, and I know some who are not even big fans of the series and dislike it). 

I'm not saying it should not have got good reviews, but it should have got realistic ones, and whatever you think of Mass Effect 3, or it's endings, I do not believe that giving it 100/100 is realistic. I don't think giving any game that is realistic. I also don't think it's realistic that with more than 95% of responses on a poll that is spread throughout the internet claiming the endings are terrible that 70 reviewers gave it a perfect score.

The endings are a part of the game. A very large part of the game, as Mass Effect is the final part of the trilogy. While I can see that some reviewers may have liked the ending I can't believe that nearly every reviewer would like it or refuse to let it change their rating. 

I don't think a lot of people even understand what a perfect score is supposed to represent.

If that was true, then no game should ever get a perfect score, because no matter what the game is or who it came from, it will never be perfect. There will always be SOMETHING wrong with it. Bugs can be fixed, which a lot of people don't understand so they judge it as far to big a part of the game. What can't be fixed in a simple manner is what you should really be judging.

A perfect score does not equal a perfect game, it equals a game that innovates, inspires, and is great.

[kbct]

Obrusnine wrote...

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.

Agreed. However, BioWare can always claim that we're the minority and there is no mistake to admit to.

[Obrusnine]

ciorex wrote...

Lets just pretend for a moment that there actually were 16 "diferent" endings, there is still one problem, the destruction of the mass relays.

I'm sure you're aware of this, as you created the damn lore, that when a mass relay is destroyed it goes super nova and prety much vaporises the entire system its located in. So, what you've done in esence, is you've turned Shapard into the bigest mass murderer in the galaxy, aside from the Reapers ofcourse.

How does that make any sense?

Did you forget this was a spoiler free forum! I swear to god if my thread gets closed cause of you, -.-

[BuffPhantoms]

Didn't you hear? all 60 reviews were payed off.

Lol BSN drones.

[cotheer]

ciorex wrote...

--snip--

They can easily deny it and say that it was different type of explosion blah blah blah, and there you go.
Because, you know, space magic is awesome.

Modifié par cotheer, 15 mars 2012 - 11:10 .

[TheRealJayDee]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Adeph wrote...

To be fair guys, these are the same critics that never, ever seem to experience any of the bugs that so many games release with and which you are I will find within a few days.

To be fair, a game reviewer's job isn't to be a bug hunter. It's to play the game and give people an idea of what it's like, to aid them in making their purchasing decision. If they feel that a bug or issue needs to be called out, I'm sure they would. I have read reviews which have called out things like install issues, connection problems, crashes, even hosts of minor bugs that, while noteworthy, ultimately did not hinder the game.

This is basically what it means to be objective, and most people can be objective to varying degrees.

How about the fact that you can't import your Shepard's face at all if you imported straight from ME->ME2->ME3? Can you explain me why neither you at Bioware nor any of the reviewers stumbled upon this 'problem', which for me personally is game breaking and preventing me from playing since release?

[kbct]

EJ107 wrote...

I don't think giving any game that is realistic. I also don't think it's realistic that with more than 95% of responses on a poll that has spread throughout the internet (and has more than 40'000 votes) claiming the endings are terrible that 70 reviewers gave it a perfect score, and many others a very high one, without mentioning even slight disappointment.

It's not 40,000 anymore. There are now 50,000 votes in the poll. Remarkablely consistant results over the past week too. The percentages barely fluctuated.

[Elite Midget]

Not all Reviewers fully play the games they review. They most likely played just a few missions and thought the combat system was like CoD in Space which always gets rave views.

I look forward to the Let's Play Reviwers(That actually play the games from start to finish) and their response to the ending. I have a feeling many of their watchers would be like "Wtf?" as well.

Modifié par Elite Midget, 15 mars 2012 - 11:14 .

[NedPepper]

Kanner wrote...

You remember how DA2 got an almost universal 9/10?

Yeah.

We've even had three different people from Penny-Arcade defending/explaining/praising the endings. You will not find genuinely useful opinions on Bioware products anywhere other than the fan base itself now. Bioware is literally the 'too-big-to-fail' monolith of the video game reporting world.

If we're truly relying on THIS fanbase in its fractured, childish, rude, entitled exisistence to be some kind of harbringer of truth and quality, Bioware is doomed.  You know who I believe has done more damage to Bioware than EA, Day One DLC, Multiplayer, DA2 being rushed....the sychophants on this forum and the trolls on metacritic.  This site is a toxic wasteland of negative nitpicking that has lost sight of the simple of love of gaming.

[Obrusnine]

TheRealJayDee wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...

Adeph wrote...

To be fair guys, these are the same critics that never, ever seem to experience any of the bugs that so many games release with and which you are I will find within a few days.

To be fair, a game reviewer's job isn't to be a bug hunter. It's to play the game and give people an idea of what it's like, to aid them in making their purchasing decision. If they feel that a bug or issue needs to be called out, I'm sure they would. I have read reviews which have called out things like install issues, connection problems, crashes, even hosts of minor bugs that, while noteworthy, ultimately did not hinder the game.

This is basically what it means to be objective, and most people can be objective to varying degrees.

How about the fact that you can't import your Shepard's face at all if you imported straight from ME->ME2->ME3? Can you explain me why neither you at Bioware nor any of the reviewers stumbled upon this 'problem', which for me personally is game breaking and preventing me from playing since release?

In all honesty, I didn't stumble upon the problem either. Or is that a platform specific problem? I don't remember.

[Elk Cloner]

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???

Gametrailers have. Although they gave ME3 high score. Figures, they're Call of Duty and PlayStation fanboys...

[GrandpaPorridge]

I think that, even though the ending was horrid, the game still deserves its 94 metacritic rating. It was a great game, until the last 5 minutes. The game is one of the highest quality titles out there in terms of gameplay and fun, it was just ruined near the end. Reviewers have to take the whole game into account, not just the end.

[XqctaX]

Stanley Woo wrote...

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.

hey stanley, ty for taking your time to talk with us here.
i for one think that everyone is entiteled to there own opinion reviewer or not, 
i myself didnt like parts of  the ending ( i wont go into it becouse that has been done so many time allready and i dont want to bore you   )

but can i ask you what your honest opinion about the endings are?
and what you/bioware  thinks about the majority (in my opinion) of the fans being upset about the ending?
 ive made my stand clear, and many other have too on both sides
and all kind of gray shades of those sides, and ive kinda seen enougf of that..


im more instressed in what you guys N gals at bioware think about the end and the debate about it?

cheers stanley, and thanks for beeing patient with us fans in a time when its hard for us fans to be it towards you somtimes.. 
. (edited becouse cut and paste shifted all my sencences around lol); s_pv=NA%3AUS%3AGAMES%3ABIOWARE%3ACOMMUNITY%3ANONE%

Modifié par XqctaX, 15 mars 2012 - 11:27 .

[Elite Midget]

nedpepper wrote...

Kanner wrote...

You remember how DA2 got an almost universal 9/10?

Yeah.

We've even had three different people from Penny-Arcade defending/explaining/praising the endings. You will not find genuinely useful opinions on Bioware products anywhere other than the fan base itself now. Bioware is literally the 'too-big-to-fail' monolith of the video game reporting world.

If we're truly relying on THIS fanbase in its fractured, childish, rude, entitled exisistence to be some kind of harbringer of truth and quality, Bioware is doomed.  You know who I believe has done more damage to Bioware than EA, Day One DLC, Multiplayer, DA2 being rushed....the sychophants on this forum and the trolls on metacritic.  This site is a toxic wasteland of negative nitpicking that has lost sight of the simple of love of gaming.

They're more reliable than reviewers since they actualy play the game to the full.

Kinda hard to love the game when Bioware lied about everything concerning ME3.

[Obrusnine]

Elk Cloner wrote...

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???

Gametrailers have. Although they gave ME3 high score. Figures, they're Call of Duty and PlayStation fanboys...

That's because ME3 deserved a high score. You can't judge an entire game on 10 minutes. Even if the ending left something to be desired. Mass Effect was a journey worth taking.

[the red boon]

Who else didn't care about these big review websites because they usually got it wrong with other games you've played?