321 réponses à ce sujet

[eddieoctane]

Didn't Amazon admit to deleting user reviews a while back? I wouldn't be surprised for people on the EA payroll to be doing it now.

[Zix13]

Persephone wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Horribly out of scale example. I do agree that some of them are nonsense, and some of the scores associated with them are nonsense. In fact, 0/10 is justified based on day 1 dlc only. Incomplete game should not be rated.

So DAO deserves a 0 too then? Oh no, it's only stuff you want rated down.....

Hm? Didn't realize it had day 1 dlc, only the awakening or whatever that came later. If it did have a part of it released seperately on day 1, then yes. I would have given it 0/10 for exactly that reason. I do not like being ripped off. 

[Persephone]

Zix13 wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Actually, some do directly, some a little more indirectly, I suggest you try reading it next time.

Regardless of what the product is, I expect it to be what it's sold to me as. If I'm told that there will be no ABC ending, I will damn well expect that there won't be an ABC ending. Would you be happy if the car you bought because it was advertised as 4 wheel drive was actually front wheel drive? 0/10. 

Show me the AD saying that about the endings. There isn't one? What, an INTERVIEW? Yeah, no legal basis.

And again, a piece of entertainment is not like a car.

And ME3 does not deserve a 0. You've never played a broken game, have you?

Lol? Interviews with the project DIRECTOR are about as official as sources get. I never argued that it should be rated 0/10 for its content. I argued that it should be because it's not what we were told the content would be.

You were talking about advertisements. Like for a car. There were none stating this. Rate TW2 a 0 because it doesn't have the the promised 16 endings either then, I guess? Er, no.

I didn't pay attention to any pre-release witcher 2 talk, but TW2 had 2 divergent storylines that resulted in different endings. ME3 has 1 ending. If they had 3 different endings, I would accept that. Instead, it has 3 different colours. 

ME3 has 4 different endings. If genocide, rewriting the DNA of every race and controlling the Reapers is ALL THE SAME to you, I have to wonder just what game you were playing.

The cutscenes were similar. As in ME2. The CHOICES were RADICALLY different.

Modifié par Persephone, 07 mai 2012 - 05:23 .

[Persephone]

eddieoctane wrote...

Didn't Amazon admit to deleting user reviews a while back? I wouldn't be surprised for people on the EA payroll to be doing it now.

Troll reviews deserve to be purged. On either "side". Should be done more often.

Modifié par Persephone, 07 mai 2012 - 05:19 .

[Persephone]

Zix13 wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Horribly out of scale example. I do agree that some of them are nonsense, and some of the scores associated with them are nonsense. In fact, 0/10 is justified based on day 1 dlc only. Incomplete game should not be rated.

So DAO deserves a 0 too then? Oh no, it's only stuff you want rated down.....

Hm? Didn't realize it had day 1 dlc, only the awakening or whatever that came later. If it did have a part of it released seperately on day 1, then yes. I would have given it 0/10 for exactly that reason. I do not like being ripped off. 

Yes. That reflects the QUALITY of the game superbly.

[NM_Che56]

over time, over reactions get balanced out by more rational reactions.

[pharsti]

Hm, i guess this is due to the fact that many people felt the end of ME3 ruined the series as a whole. Seriously, the game, by itself, even considering the ending, should be somewhere between 5-7, the problem is that if you feel like this game destroyed all those hundreds of hours you put into the series and made null any enjoyment you could have with the series for the future, then yes, ME3 does, in that case, deserve those appalling scores.

That just goes to show that many do indeed feel like that.

[AlexXIV]

That's probably why metacritic has more credit than others?

I mean 3.8 is too hard. But at least they don't act as if everything with ME3 is ok.

[paxbanana3915]

Mad-Hamlet wrote...

The game is centered around the story which is a pretty big shift from most where the story is centered around the game.

As Bioware decided to shaft the story in the end, that violation is palpable and the reaction unsurprising. Or does anyone think Star Wars ending with a 1950's musical dance number while a Nun steals battery cables from the ****'s cars and a six foot invisible bunny named Harvey makes tea would not justify a savaging both from commercial reviews and personal?

The clusterfrakkery of the last ten minutes has cost Bioware dearly. They shafted the story, now they get to take one for the team.

Hehe. Well said.

[Persephone]

AlexXIV wrote...

That's probably why metacritic has more credit than others?

I mean 3.8 is too hard. But at least they don't act as if everything with ME3 is ok.

Metacritic has credit.....uh huh....

Seriously, the melodrama is getting ridiculous.

[v TricKy v]

Laurencio wrote...


Of course not, that's the whole reason why user reviews were introduced in the first place! Now however it's evident that user reviews don't work, they are just as bad if not worse than commerical interest reviews.

Oh my god!
Good games like Dragon Age:Origins, Skyrim, The Witcher have good scores while bad/average/rushed games like Mass Effect 3, Dragon Age 2 etc. have bad scores.
yeah there must be something wrong with them. User reviews cant be trusted.(sarcasm)

[iorveth1271]

You know an old saying? Never trust statistics you didn't forge yourself?

Yup, pretty much like that. I wouldn't give too much credibility to any statistic about anything if I were you.

[Mr.House]

Zix13 wrote...

Persephone wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Horribly out of scale example. I do agree that some of them are nonsense, and some of the scores associated with them are nonsense. In fact, 0/10 is justified based on day 1 dlc only. Incomplete game should not be rated.

So DAO deserves a 0 too then? Oh no, it's only stuff you want rated down.....

Hm? Didn't realize it had day 1 dlc, only the awakening or whatever that came later. If it did have a part of it released seperately on day 1, then yes. I would have given it 0/10 for exactly that reason. I do not like being ripped off. 

Shale and Wardens Keep was Day one dlc for DAO. Also there was day one dlc for ME2.

[leapingmonkeys]

FOZ289 wrote...

"I liekd teh game but bad ending 2/10"

Basically.

There are numerous reasons you can criticize the game, but none of them really justify a 3/10, because the game is still completely functional and as far as gameplay goes, pretty polished. People are just trying to get back at the developer and/ or publisher, which happens with practically every big game now. You should have seen the Portal 2 reviews when people saw it had cosmetic dlc.

As opinionated as "professional" reviews are, the game just isn't as much of a mess as people want to believe it is.  At least not to warrent a score as low as 3/10.

I would have to disagree.  The game has many problems.  The conclusion is simply the point at which the game stops and therefore has no chance to redeem itself.

The biggest problem is present from the start of ME3 - prior decisions/actions from ME1/ME2 are irrelevant in any meaningful way in ME3.  For a game which is supposed to feature "player driven plot" which was supposed to be a unique experience for each player, etc, that is a fatal deficiency.  Add to that the markedly smaller amount of content compared to the prior games and the obviously rushed production, and one has a game which truely deserves a score of 3/10.

Both metacritic and amazon have been sitting at about a 40% user review rating for quite some time (2/5 on amazon, 3.8/10 on metacritic).

[natalZ]

v TricKy v wrote...

Laurencio wrote...


Of course not, that's the whole reason why user reviews were introduced in the first place! Now however it's evident that user reviews don't work, they are just as bad if not worse than commerical interest reviews.

Oh my god!
Good games like Dragon Age:Origins, Skyrim, The Witcher have good scores while bad/average/rushed games like Mass Effect 3, Dragon Age 2 etc. have bad scores.
yeah there must be something wrong with them. User reviews cant be trusted.(sarcasm)

Thats what i think. Batman also has good reviews from users. ME3 doesn´t. My initial question was why some sites are just deleting bad reviews to improve the user´s score. It´s not a good thing to do. 

It appears to be some manipulation =/

[Alpha-Centuri]

Laurencio wrote...

It's more like if you bought a car that was advertised to be the next technological innovation of a company turned out to be just like every other car in the market, which is commonplace in the car industry.

Story is only part of any reasonable score. So if the story is 0/10, which still is extreme, then fine, how about everything else? Graphics, gameplay, music, animations, cinematics, atmopsphere, bugs/lack of bugs, control mechanics, voice acting, replay value, etc.

If anything this shows that users can not be trusted to give out fair, non commercial motivated reviews. It shows that the user review system is pointless, meaningless and deeply flawed.

True, people aren't very objective in their review. If I was being honest, the game would be about a 8.5 (sans ending)

7.5 Graphics - Animations are still off, uncanny valley, etc. Low res textures in some places and 2d sprites (lol!)

9 Gameplay - Greatly improved from Mass Effect 2, which was a huge improvement on ME1

8.5 Music - Clint Mansell did a great job. However it was too obvious when we were supposed to care about something. Kid comes on screen, cue main sad theme

8.5 Presentation - Bioware is still great at cinematics. Not Uncharted, but definitely elite level in gaming industry. The atmosphere of war was great. The world isn't quite alive though, so I can't rate it higher. I don't expect personal schedules for EVERY npc like The Witcher 2 and Skyrim have, but the random turian on the Citadel and that one private were a poor attempt to immerse you.

7.5 Technical - (Lots o Lots of bugs, but it isn't gamebreaking. Journal took a HUGE step back too.)

9.5 Storyline (sans ending) - This is me taking an objective look at the storyline. Tuchanka storyline was great. Rannoch was emotional and engaging. Character arcs were done well for the most part (besides Jacob... like always. fail bioware... fail. Mandatory dream sequences drop it down from a perfect


Total: 8.41 out of 10 (Using IGN, Gamespot, etc. an 8.5 out of 10)

Including the ending

0 Tilt - The Mass Effect series had always been greater than the sum of its parts in my opinion. The gameplay was never the best, the characters were never quite fully fleshed out, etc. But the entire world mixed with a great cinematic narrative made it rival the likes of Star Wars. If I had to grade them

Mass Effect 9.0
Mass Effect 2 9.0 (What it loses in exploration, it makes up in gameplay)
ME3 - ending 8.5

Mass Effect Trilogy - 9.5


The ending was so off-putting, that the series itself is no longer the sum of its parts. Without the ending, the trilogy as a whole would rate about a 9.5. It now rates at about a 1.0, I wouldn't recommend it to anyone because everything you do is nullified by such a shoddy ending.

Total: 7.14 out of 10 -- (Using IGN, Gamespot, etc. a 7.0 out of 10.

So yeah. That was the grade I gave on a user review. A 7.0. And that is what it deserves in my opinion. The game is not perfect by any stretch even without the endings. When I see the "Over 75 perfect reviews" line touted by Bioware/EA, credability for the gaming journalism industry is inevitably diminished.

My gut gives the game a 0 out of 10, but the game itself when using my mind rather than gut I give it a 7.


my 2 cents

[Kulthar Drax]

Fibonacci wrote...
- Graphics are hit and miss. New looks for existing weapons yet they remain their original style. Most of the character textures show marked improvements, but what is up with those hands? Not only are the textures distracting but the model is way out of proportion. Setting is well done for the most part. Some times it can be confusing which way to proceed but the feeling of the various places was spot on. Desperate and sweety in the dock housing, burned out rubble in the warzones, etc. Over all 7/10

I'm sorry, but those three points alone have got to be deducted purely for the use of those 1990's style running sprite soldiers right at the beginning of the game as you're escaping Earth. It wasn't excusable in a playtest demo, let alone the main game. Then you also have things like people twisting their heads all the way around to look at you, bad camera angles in cutscenes, various glitches such as people holding their guns upside down etc. I'd rate graphics 5-6/10 at most. They weren't bad to look at as such (except for the sprite soldiers, which are horrendous), but not really the point.

[nrcrane]

Looking at a review system that uses a 0-10 scale to judge quality has become fairly unreliable. People score too differently to keep anything objective.

Some people score a 10/10 because they feel they should support the company.
Others score a 0/10 because they don't like the company.

0/10 because some guy gave it a 10/10 and there's just no way that is true so i need to negate that score with mine.
0/10 because I'm a troll and its fun.
8/10 because I believe 8 is the new median of the bell curve.
5/10 because I believe that half of something is the true median.

[Daedalus1773]

All the people posting that someone's low review score is invalid because they admit they liked some aspects of the game make me lawl. You don't get it.

[The Protheans]

Most Journalists reviews = A joke
Most user reviews = something accurate

1/10 is more believable than 8/10, 9/10 or god forbid 10/10

[The Protheans]

Daedalus1773 wrote...

All the people posting that someone's low review score is invalid because they admit they liked some aspects of the game make me lawl. You don't get it.

3/10 or 4/10 is very valid score to say if you like some aspects otherwise it would be 0/10

[Laurencio]

v TricKy v wrote...

Laurencio wrote...


Of course not, that's the whole reason why user reviews were introduced in the first place! Now however it's evident that user reviews don't work, they are just as bad if not worse than commerical interest reviews.

Oh my god!
Good games like Dragon Age:Origins, Skyrim, The Witcher have good scores while bad/average/rushed games like Mass Effect 3, Dragon Age 2 etc. have bad scores.
yeah there must be something wrong with them. User reviews cant be trusted.(sarcasm)

There's a fairly huge difference between disappointing games and bad games. Even then, how does 32 for Mass Effect 3, and 98 for Kings of Kingdoms for iphone even remotely make sense?

Alpha-Centuri wrote...

Laurencio wrote...

It's
more like if you bought a car that was advertised to be the next
technological innovation of a company turned out to be just like every
other car in the market, which is commonplace in the car industry.

Story
is only part of any reasonable score. So if the story is 0/10, which
still is extreme, then fine, how about everything else? Graphics,
gameplay, music, animations, cinematics, atmopsphere, bugs/lack of bugs,
control mechanics, voice acting, replay value, etc.

If anything
this shows that users can not be trusted to give out fair, non
commercial motivated reviews. It shows that the user review system is
pointless, meaningless and deeply flawed.

True, people aren't very objective in their review. If I was being honest, the game would be about a 8.5 (sans ending)

7.5 Graphics - Animations are still off, uncanny valley, etc. Low res textures in some places and 2d sprites (lol!)

9 Gameplay - Greatly improved from Mass Effect 2, which was a huge improvement on ME1

8.5
Music - Clint Mansell did a great job. However it was too obvious when
we were supposed to care about something. Kid comes on screen, cue main
sad theme

8.5 Presentation - Bioware is still great at
cinematics. Not Uncharted, but definitely elite level in gaming
industry. The atmosphere of war was great. The world isn't quite alive
though, so I can't rate it higher. I don't expect personal schedules for
EVERY npc like The Witcher 2 and Skyrim have, but the random turian on
the Citadel and that one private were a poor attempt to immerse you.

7.5 Technical - (Lots o Lots of bugs, but it isn't gamebreaking. Journal took a HUGE step back too.)

9.5
Storyline (sans ending) - This is me taking an objective look at the
storyline. Tuchanka storyline was great. Rannoch was emotional and
engaging. Character arcs were done well for the most part (besides
Jacob... like always. fail bioware... fail. Mandatory dream sequences
drop it down from a perfect


Total: 8.41 out of 10 (Using IGN, Gamespot, etc. an 8.5 out of 10)

Including the ending

0
Tilt - The Mass Effect series had always been greater than the sum of
its parts in my opinion. The gameplay was never the best, the characters
were never quite fully fleshed out, etc. But the entire world mixed
with a great cinematic narrative made it rival the likes of Star Wars.
If I had to grade them

Mass Effect 9.0
Mass Effect 2 9.0 (What it loses in exploration, it makes up in gameplay)
ME3 - ending 8.5

Mass Effect Trilogy - 9.5


The
ending was so off-putting, that the series itself is no longer the sum
of its parts. Without the ending, the trilogy as a whole would rate
about a 9.5. It now rates at about a 1.0, I wouldn't recommend it to
anyone because everything you do is nullified by such a shoddy ending.

Total: 7.14 out of 10 -- (Using IGN, Gamespot, etc. a 7.0 out of 10.

So
yeah. That was the grade I gave on a user review. A 7.0. And that is
what it deserves in my opinion. The game is not perfect by any stretch
even without the endings. When I see the "Over 75 perfect reviews" line
touted by Bioware/EA, credability for the gaming journalism industry is
inevitably diminished.

My gut gives the game a 0 out of 10, but the game itself when using my mind rather than gut I give it a 7.


my 2 cents

Perfectly reasonable and sensible.

Modifié par Laurencio, 07 mai 2012 - 05:51 .

[AlexXIV]

Persephone wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

That's probably why metacritic has more credit than others?

I mean 3.8 is too hard. But at least they don't act as if everything with ME3 is ok.

Metacritic has credit.....uh huh....

Seriously, the melodrama is getting ridiculous.

Well I give them credit as a gamer. And that's what counts, no?

You could go back and see some of my posts before ME3 release when the bad reviews already hit on metacritic and I was among the metacritic bashers for downrating a game before release. But now ... I can see where all these 0/10 were comming from. To me and many others the damage of the ending goes beyond just one game. It ruins the franchise. Now you can call us overdramitic, childish or whatever. But if you were as decent as you call us out to not be, then you'd realize that our opinion is also valid.

The notion that you can't ruin a franchise with a bad ending to it is simply wrong. For once ME is not such a big and established franchise. Not like Star Wars or Star Trek or whatever. Millions is still a small number compared to hundret millions or billions. However, if ME3 is the worst thing that ever happened to you (in a video game, mind you) then I guess a 0/10 is a proper rating. I know for me, personally, the ending of ME3 is a 0/10. So ... I can relate.

[xsdob]

For the journalist reviews, when you make your own site with it's own server you can post your own scathing reviews at the top of the page and have no one touch it, until than please refrain form telling the jorunalistthey should remove their property form it's spot on their property.

As for the other reviews, I do not trust any review less than 2 sentences long, that reeks of impulse rating and flashpan reviewing.

Modifié par xsdob, 07 mai 2012 - 05:53 .