142 réponses à ce sujet

[The Giant Napkin]

You do realise that video game 'critics'/'journalists' generally speaking have had no such education and are just people that make their money by talking about video games? It is in their interest to promote video games, so many are genuinely excited about them, some are somewhat 'corrupt' in the sense that they try to promote a game 'too much' and skip over the flaws. As for fan response, I haven't seen ME3's ending but fan response can be much exaggerated because of smaller things. The problem is that you won't hear the people that were perfectly happy with it, the constructive criticism is there but usually gets drowned in the fanboys 'Dis Gaem gets 0 on metacr1tic from mea bcuz ending sux'.

Either way, both user and so-called 'professional' reviews are not anything you should base your opinion on... in my opinion. Watch some gameplay, listen to developers talking about what they did and why, play the game if you liked it up until that point, and then decide for yourself whether you liked it or not. In the video game industry, objectivity is even harder to find than with films, books or theater.

[Jesusland]

Cobra5 wrote...

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.

I don't think all the fans hated it, by any means.  But I do think the vast majority of fans were at least dissapointed by it.  Very few fans were blown away as when ME2 came out.  Meanwhile ALL the critics were BLOWN AWAY by ME3, all giving it a 9/10, which by gaming standards is considered a perfect game.

Modifié par Jesusland, 25 mars 2012 - 09:03 .

[DJ CAVE SLAVE]

I don't see how you could rave on your reviews, when your own fans are raging.

[nevar00]

They aren't going to put down a big release title like this and anger EA. They need to keep EA happy in order to get pre-release content, exclusive interviews, etc. Hell IGN had their own reporter in the damn game.

Just go ask that guy who was fired from GameSpot for giving a mediocre score to a big title a few years ago. The big corporations have the gaming journalist industry by the balls and won't be letting go anytime soon.

[MrGPhantome]

Fans were disappointed in the ending, not the game. It's generally believed that even though those who hated the ending still enjoyed the game as whole, I certainly fall into this category.

It's still logical to take mass effect, give it a 9/10 and then follow it with a "but the ending does suck" notation in the review.

[Farbautisonn]

SaY4cT wrote...

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....

Make your point or forever leave it to the finer shades of fancy "Paraphrase Barbarossa".

[shinyelf]

There are several possibilities really, f.x they liked the ending because they didn't have a whole lot invested in the series.
They didnt think a little bit of bad ending ruins an entire series
They were afraid to rate the game poorly, not ou of monetary concerns, but to criticize a game that was before launch acknowledged as the second coming of Christ requires a lot of courage and you have to be a big name if you want to be take seriously, lesser reviewers might get shot down for doin a poor review of a popular franchise

[Motherlander]

I found in ome review that the review made a criticism that wasn't valid.

I can't give details to avoid spoliers. But he effectively say that in one point in the game he was forced the choose a renegade option even though he was Paragon to prevent being killed.

In my playthrough, I was looking out for this to happen to me, but i found that I did have a paragon option.

So if the reviewer said the truth, he probably hadn't obtained enough paragon points to be able to select the paragon response.

This suggests two things. 1) That we had only done a very quick playthrough, probably only doing priority missions. 2) He did not consider that things woulf be different if he played longer.

In conclusion, he did not give accurate information in his review and it could be argued that he did not play the game enough to truly come to a fair judgement about the score.

[daigakuinsei]

They didn't have to shell out $60 for a substandard work that didn't perform as promised.

[PirateT138]

Reviewers only gauge things on a brief playthrough, they have to.

And on the whole it's a wonderful game. It just doesn't live up to its pedigree in the last 15 minutes.

[nikki191]

i questioned susan arendt on the escapist about her glowing review of ME3 and outright asked if she had finished it as the ending wasnt mentioned in the review.

she didnt like the ending either but told me she didnt think the ending invalidated 30 hours of game play. while i see her point i still think it should of been mentioned

[Nerfhausen]

daigakuinsei wrote...

They didn't have to shell out $60 for a substandard work that didn't perform as promised.

Right to the spot!

[Nerfhausen]

PirateT138 wrote...

Reviewers only gauge things on a brief playthrough, they have to.

And on the whole it's a wonderful game. It just doesn't live up to its pedigree in the last 15 minutes.

I agree.

[2484Stryker]

Some might be paid shills *cough cough IGN cough cough* but most probably just never bothered to finish the game in its entirety or haven't bothered to play the series to see if ending was justified.

[Gigamantis]

SOME fans were disappointed. Was it enough fans to make a real difference. Dunno, the game sold pretty well.

I'm a fan and I liked the game. It'll probably be a GOTY contender.

[Rockworm503]

Jesusland wrote...

 Or are they just paid shills for the gaming industry.  Discuss. 

Yes

[Aesieru]

Jesusland wrote...

Cobra5 wrote...

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.

I don't think all the fans hated it, by any means.  But I do think the vast majority of fans were at least dissapointed by it.  Very few fans were blown away as when ME2 came out.  Meanwhile ALL the critics were BLOWN AWAY by ME3, all giving it a 9/10, which by gaming standards is considered a perfect game.

And it WASN'T JUST THE 5 MINUTE ENDING, it was the ending in its entirety which encompasses many links throughout the entirety of the game.

When you're sink you don't target the symptom you target the disease!

[Epic777]

You would think this has never happened before, did anyone play Fallout 3?

[Xellith]

Who are the better critics? The ones telling us what we should love? Or us saying that their reccomendation sucked.

[Rockworm503]

vader da slayer wrote...

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.

That is why I put Angry Joe's opionion over them all because he is emotional invested he gets angry at a bad game and he gets excited when its good.
Why would i want an empty husk review my game?  Why is his opinion worth anything?

I take my peers over reviews because of that emotional investement.  If they don't even notice the bad ending what else are they gleaming over to get a nice 10/10?

[Docmeff22]

The professional critics of game publications are sent the games early by the developers. Give the games a bad score and the game publications don't get to review future games from said developers. If the game publications don't have access to latest blockbuster games then they can't promote their publications.

See how this works?

[Gigamantis]

Rockworm503 wrote...

vader da slayer wrote...

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.

That is why I put Angry Joe's opionion over them all because he is emotional invested he gets angry at a bad game and he gets excited when its good.
Why would i want an empty husk review my game?  Why is his opinion worth anything?

I take my peers over reviews because of that emotional investement.  If they don't even notice the bad ending what else are they gleaming over to get a nice 10/10?

Emotional people give bad reviews.  Like when people die a lot in a difficult game and post a review when they're angry.  The reviews end up being nonsense with 0 scores. 

[Reikilea]

No, the critics liked the game. Not the ending. The need to look at everything, not just judge game because of the last five minutes. The try to analyse every aspect of the game. Its exactly what they did. We critics always think in a bigger frame. Its not that much of a critiquing, more analysing.

I read quite lot of reviews who gave it 9 or 9,5, but complained about the ending (calling it forced and unfinished). So no, what they did was judging the whole game. They gave you pros and cons of everything. So the game was amazing, ending was not. Of course they saw how rushed ending was, because they have the education to look for something like that. If they only took last five minutes, you would end up with very bad review.

I work as a critic so....

[Bocks]

People have different opinions and everyone's opinions are equal.

It's just that reviewer opinions are just a bit more "equal" than yours.

[ElementL09]

Money and the Video game industry itself has something to attribute with reviews for video games.