142 réponses à ce sujet

[Jesusland]

Fans were dissapointed, but the professional critics LOVED it...

I wonder why?  Are the professional critics smarter than we are?  Or are they just paid shills for the gaming industry.  Discuss. 

[twistedforsaken]

i wonder who bioware would rather listen too, not us thats for sure

[YohkoOhno]

You guys really need to stop this.

People have different opinions! Let people have their opinions. Disagreeing with opinions does not equal them being corrupt.

That line of thinking is why political discussion is breaking down in our country--don't like what people have to say, blame the media.

[Naqey]

fans were / are more emotionally invested, so the ending pissed them off (some of them).
from an "objective" (game journalists and objective ... AM I RIGHT GUYS...) standpoint, it really is a very very very good game

Modifié par Naqey, 25 mars 2012 - 08:44 .

[o Ventus]

I've come to notice that all of the 9.5/10 and 10/10 reviews omit going into detail about the endings.

[Farbautisonn]

twistedforsaken wrote...

i wonder who bioware would rather listen too, not us thats for sure

The critics dont pay for the game. The fans do.

[JexyG]

Half of the pros never even played the first two. What do you expect?

[vader da slayer]

Jesusland wrote...

Fans were dissapointed, but the professional critics LOVED it...

I wonder why?  Are the professional critics smarter than we are?  Or are they just paid shills for the gaming industry.  Discuss. 

Im a fan and not disappointed.

Naqey wrote...

fans were / are more emotionally invested, so the ending pissed them off (some of them).
from an "objective" (game journalists and objective ... AM I RIGHT GUYS...) standpoint, it really is a very very very good game

and this is a big point. when a review site reviews the game they do so from the stand point of someone akin to a judge. that is someone who isn't emotinally invested and see's it from a 3rd person perspective if you will and not from the perspective of someone who has played ME1 20 times and ME2 25 times or something.

Modifié par vader da slayer, 25 mars 2012 - 08:48 .

[PaddlePop]

Professional "Critics", Video game "journalists" and reviewers love and crave the advertisement money. Fans are consumers who pay to play the games. Two vastly different worlds. One gets paid, the other pays.

[Prism]

Is it so hard to understand that if you loved a game but was disappointed with the ending, you weren't disappointed with THE WHOLE game?

[twistedforsaken]

the "professionals" have no opinions beacuse they get paid to praise the game.

[Abirn]

YohkoOhno wrote...

You guys really need to stop this.

People have different opinions! Let people have their opinions. Disagreeing with opinions does not equal them being corrupt.

That line of thinking is why political discussion is breaking down in our country--don't like what people have to say, blame the media.

Really so the guy who got fired from gamespot when he gave a negative review for Kane and Lynch?  That was just a difference of opinion and no corruption there?

Or when the makers of Duke Nuken forever threatened to blacklist anyone who gave them a bad review?  There was no corruption there.

Please pull your head out of the sand and realize the industry is fully corrupt.

[Jesusland]

YohkoOhno wrote...

You guys really need to stop this.

People have different opinions! Let people have their opinions. Disagreeing with opinions does not equal them being corrupt.

That line of thinking is why political discussion is breaking down in our country--don't like what people have to say, blame the media.

I see differing opinions among the fans, and I don't mind that.  But I don't see that diversity of opinion among the professional critics.  It's like they're all reading off the same script.  Why?  That's where my question is coming from.

[FlashedMyDrive]

Any game critic that gives a game 10/10 needs to have there head looked at. I have yet to play a game without any flaws.

Plus critics usually only play a couple of hours of gameplay.

Modifié par FlashedMyDrive, 25 mars 2012 - 08:49 .

[SaY4cT]

Farbautisonn wrote...

twistedforsaken wrote...

i wonder who bioware would rather listen too, not us thats for sure

The critics dont pay for the game. The fans do.

AND SOMETIMES....

[FRANCESCO84Inn]

media critic its made only for gameplay, not consider the story, in ME the story its the major part, the story made the game.

[YohkoOhno]

Jesusland wrote...
I see differing opinions among the fans, and I don't mind that.  But I don't see that diversity of opinion among the professional critics.  It's like they're all reading off the same script.  Why?  That's where my question is coming from.

Well, for starters, perhaps they are less emotionally invested than the fans.  When you play lots of different games, you're less likely to be worrying about who had a relationship with who.

And even people critical of the game market have said fans are being paranoid.  Both those admired Forbes bloggers said that there's really no corruption that reviewers who liked the game are "shills".

[Motherlander]

I must say that I like many enjoyed ME3 even though i do not like the ending. Thus, I would still give it a high score.

However, I think that there are reasons why reviewers may have not taken account of the ending when giving their score. But I am not going to go down the rout of "paid reviews". I am assuming (rightly or wrongly) that the reviews were genuine and done in good faith.

1) They didn't actually finish the game. I am sure this happens sometimes.

2) They are not real ME fans and so the ending didn't mean much to them.

3) The finished the game, thought the ending was not great, but did not let it affect their review on the assumption that there may well be a better ending if they had picked other choices or got more war assets. In some cases, th reviewes may have tried to finish quickly, only doing mainly priority missions and so assumed that the ending was based on not having enough war assets.

4) For whatever reason, they did not think that the ending was that important in giving reviews, in that they did not think the average gamer would find it important. For most games, the ending is not that important as the gameplay is more important than the story and characters.

5) They were writing the review from the point of view of ME virgin, for whom the ending is proably not that important. I noted that many reviews were from people who did not download ME2 characters and were thus really reviewing on behalf of people who may not have played ME before.

6) They were very tired after a long session and didn't concentrate much on the ending because they weren't focused and may have assumed there were no plot holes because they just missed them or their mind wanders. In this case, they may just assume that you missed a plot point because your mind wandered, etc.

7) They genuinly liked the ending. This is of course a possibility.

So as you can see, i can come up with many good explanations for why the reviews are good based on general gameplay, but were not adjusted for the ending.

[Alexraptor1]

10/10 games do not exist, 0/10 and 10/10 are numbers that no true professional with any integrity will ever use.

[Nerevar-as]

http://www.lar.net/2...ame-journalism/

After I read this, I´d say there´s among other things a conflict of interest with the big gaming sites.

Anyway I stopped trusting reviewers after they failed to mention several obvious flaws in DA2.

[Jesusland]

Alexraptor1 wrote...

10/10 games do not exist, 0/10 and 10/10 are numbers that no true professional with any integrity will ever use.

I have played a 0/10 game before.  I didn't even finish it because it was so worthless.

[Cobra5]

The fans didn't hate it, the vocal fans hated it.

And even then they mostly just hated the ending, mob mentality and all that.

[Namevah]

Abirn wrote...
Really so the guy who got fired from gamespot when he gave a negative review for Kane and Lynch?  That was just a difference of opinion and no corruption there?

Jeff Gerstmann was fired from GameSpot because the marketing department had no balls, not the department playing the games and writing the reviews.

People who claim bias or corruption against any professional critic because of difference of opinion bugs the hell out of me. I'd prefer that those people keep their comments to themselves unless they manage to find actual proof of their claims.

[Salis777]

They're also rating ME3 as a stand alone product, not as the trilogy (which is sort of, an important selling point). Plus rating things out of 10 is silly. The gaming journalists have been doing that since 1985, the rest of the consumer review world moved on, and got more sophisticated. These guys are still in the dark ages.

[freestylez]

Everyone knows the gaming journalism isn't real journalism, at least not yet. There are just no true professional standards and way too many conflicts of interests (most game reviw sites are draped with ads from the very game they're reviewing)..

Gaming review sites are also obsessed with 0-day reviews. This may work in the movie industry because one can watch a movie 3 times within 6 hours. For a game like ME3? You won't even be off Palaven in 6 hours. Games aren't given the attention they should before reviews are made.

I found this opinion piece to be on point for several issues:

http://massively.joy...journalism-yet/