321 réponses à ce sujet

[sistersafetypin]

N7L4D wrote...

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.

 

Thank you sir 

In other words, it's only a valid opinion if it coincides with theirs

[Dutch105]

EJ107 wrote...

I think it's just a retaliation against critics ridiculously high scores. People giving Mass Effect 100/100? lets give it 0/100 in retaliation.

The entire rating system is a farce. Mass Effect doesn't deserve the 3.8/10 average users have given it, but by no stretch does it come close to deserving the 100/100 many critics gave it. Bad reviewing all around.

In an ideal world both critics and user reviewers would be more mixed. We would see more users willing to put the ending aside and admit that without the ending it would have been a great game, and more reviewers who did not like the ending (I seriously doubt that out of all the reviewers who are fans of the series so few mentioned the ending, not when so many users dislike it).

But unfortunately critics will always high-profile games like this ratings that are too high (either because they are being bribed in some way or companies just choose reviewers who they know will like the game no matter what) and users will always give it ratings that are too low to counteract that.

It's probably worth noting that I don't really believe that reviewers are all being paid to give the game a high rating, but I honestly can't see how else so many reviewers would fail to mention the endings shortcomings. Things like introducing a completely new character in the last 5 minutes of a story and making them vital to the ending is just plain bad writing, and I'm sure if it had been another game or a book then reviewers would have picked up on that.

John Walker of RPS came out to defend the ending.  (http://www.rockpaper...fect-3s-ending/)

Richard Cobbett disliked the ending but thought the fan reaction was ridiculous: http://www.rockpaper...end-of-an-epic/

[Ianamus]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Zix13 wrote...

Darth Krytie wrote...

I honestly think any rating less than a 7/10 (and that's giving it leeway) is crap. The only time games really deserve less than a 5/10 is when the game is actually broken in way that it can't actually be played. Bad camera, bad music, bad game mechanics and everything. I'd never give a game a low score because of something completely subjective like the end. The graphics were mostly wonderful, the music was wonderful, there was a reflection of choice in the game (actually, almost the entire game was a reflection of choices you made in one/two) the story was great...and so, yeah, it deserves high marks. A crap ending can't take away from that.

So, whenever I see zeros or under-five scores, I think invalid...because it's a truly unfair score based on common scoring matrices.

So you mean the scale should be 0,5,6,7,8,9,10....... o.O

In a sense, yes. It's the same reason report cards go A,B,C,D,F. E as a grade is meaningless, you pretty much still failed.

What about if somebody bought the game and it simply did not work, even though it was supposed toi work on their PC/Xbox/whatever? What if a serious bug meant that they could not continue with or complete the game?

There are always legitimate reasons for giving something a low rating

Dutch105 wrote...

Richard Cobbett disliked the ending but thought the fan reaction was ridiculous: http://www.rockpaper...end-of-an-epic/

 

I know that some reviewers mentioned it, but a lot fewer than you would expect. If I watch a movie and the ending is terrible or I read a book and the ending is terrible then I go to a reviewing website and many reviewers think that as well, and mention it in their reviews. I think Mass Effect's ending is terrible, and many, many others do, but it's barely mentioned at all in official reviews, only a select few on websites I'd never heard of. It just doesn't add up. 

Modifié par EJ107, 07 mai 2012 - 07:33 .

[upsettingshorts]

EJ107 wrote...

There are always legitimate reasons for giving something a low rating

But as I keep saying, since user reviews are piled into a #/10 aggregate, it is impossible for a potential customer to know what those reasons are, so they are taken as a blanket statement against the game's overall quality.

People aren't arguing against peoples' perogative to rate a game however they please, they're arguing against aggregate user reviews because they don't send a precise message, but a scattershot one that is easily and routinely misinterpreted. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 07 mai 2012 - 07:30 .

[Ianamus]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

EJ107 wrote...

There are always legitimate reasons for giving something a low rating

But as I keep saying, since user reviews are piled into a #/10 aggregate, it is impossible for a potential customer to know what those reasons are, so they are taken as a blanket statement against the game's overall quality.

People aren't arguing against peoples' perogative to rate a game however they please, they're arguing against aggregate user reviews because they don't send a precise message, but a scattershot one that is easily and routinely misinterpreted. 

The problem is that critic reviews are just as bad when they are /10 /100 or whatever. Looking at Metacritic I see not only ridiculous 1/10 user reviews but ridiculous 100/100 critic reviews as well. 

In my opinion a 1/10 user review on that site is just as bad as the critics 100/100 review. I don't feel that either of those are accurate reflections of the product, or any realistic product for that matter. 

Modifié par EJ107, 07 mai 2012 - 07:36 .

[upsettingshorts]

EJ107 wrote...

The problem is that critic reviews are just as bad when they are /10 /100 or whatever. Looking at Metacritic I see not only ridiculous 1/10 user reviews but ridiculous 100/100 critic reviews as well. 

In my opinion a 1/10 user review on that site is just as bad as the critics 100/100 review. I don't feel that either of those are accurate reflections of the product, or any realistic product for that matter. 

The difference is if I see a questionable professional review, I can click on it and read exactly what they had to say, at length.  There is also a review history to browse, to see if the reviewer in question has a history of inflated scores, or what they tend to value or overlook.

If I see a 3/10 user review aggregate, the only conclusion I can draw is "wow a lot of people really hated it."

Furthermore you can see how the user review-bombing message is clouded:  You say it is a possible response to overinflated editorial reviews.  It can also be a statement against the ending.  Or DLC.  Or EA.  Or Origin. Or specific features.  Etc.  The signal to noise ratio with user reviews is insane.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 07 mai 2012 - 07:50 .

[Faded-Myth]

Even when the crap hit the fan on day 1, it was pretty much a given the game would receive mass review bombings as protest. It's not a tactic I agree with. Sure, I want the end changed, and the game is far from perfect, but would I reduce the game to anything below an 8? No. If they address the end well enough with the EC, and address a few problems people have with the way ME2 squad members were treated, I'll gladly increase my score, along with my opinion of BioWare expontentially.

But the game is incredible. Definitely not 0-worthy.

[v TricKy v]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

EJ107 wrote...

There are always legitimate reasons for giving something a low rating

But as I keep saying, since user reviews are piled into a #/10 aggregate, it is impossible for a potential customer to know what those reasons are, so they are taken as a blanket statement against the game's overall quality.

People aren't arguing against peoples' perogative to rate a game however they please, they're arguing against aggregate user reviews because they don't send a precise message, but a scattershot one that is easily and routinely misinterpreted. 

but isnt it the goal to show potential customers that there is something wrong? I get what your saying but we are living in modern times. A simple google search will reveal anything that the customer has to know. And answer my question:
Is it better to get rid of/reduce user reviews and get more people disappointed because they had no clue that something was wrong and wasted their money for which they worked for or keep user reviews as they are now and give customers some kind of warning?
I think they arent an actual source of information but more of warning sign which shows if you can buy it straight away or should think twice about it. Take for example ME3. The average customer would be completely unaware of it problems without the reviews but now they are like "hey something seems to be wrong. I make a little research and think twice about it."

Modifié par v TricKy v, 07 mai 2012 - 07:57 .

[upsettingshorts]

I'm not sure what the answer is. I just know that aggregate user reviews aren't it. There are just too many problems, in my view.

However, it would seem that BioWare noticed a whole lot of things Retake did that weren't review bombing.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 07 mai 2012 - 08:04 .

[Dendio1]

Toonami TOM and Angry Joe gave it an 8/10

Which is fair.

Personally I would give it an 8.8 out of 10. The game was amazing throughout the run. The flaws were not noticible to me. The incomplete ending + the flaws is what keeps an excellent game from 9/10 territory

[Ianamus]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

EJ107 wrote...

The problem is that critic reviews are just as bad when they are /10 /100 or whatever. Looking at Metacritic I see not only ridiculous 1/10 user reviews but ridiculous 100/100 critic reviews as well. 

In my opinion a 1/10 user review on that site is just as bad as the critics 100/100 review. I don't feel that either of those are accurate reflections of the product, or any realistic product for that matter. 

The difference is if I see a questionable professional review, I can click on it and read exactly what they had to say, at length.  There is also a review history to browse, to see if the reviewer in question has a history of inflated scores, or what they tend to value or overlook.

If I see a 3/10 user review aggregate, the only conclusion I can draw is "wow a lot of people really hated it."

Furthermore you can see how the user review-bombing message is clouded:  You say it is a possible response to overinflated editorial reviews.  It can also be a statement against the ending.  Or DLC.  Or EA.  Or Origin. Or specific features.  Etc.  The signal to noise ratio with user reviews is insane.

I understand what your saying, but if the reason the person is giving the game a 1/10 is Origin at lest they will say that in their, admittedly limited, clarification. 

While it is true that critical reviews have long, detailed descriptions of why they liked something the majority of people with short attention spans or limited time cannot be bothered to read them. Even I find reading review after review to be boring, and your suggestion of checking the reviewers history is a very time consuming thing that many people would not want to do.  They just look at the rating out of 10. 

As sad as it may be I think that twenty reviews that all said "1/10 ending is crap" would have been far more useful for me in hindsight than any of those long professional reviews. And again, sad as it may be, I think that for anyone who played ME1/2 that is what they should know before they buy the game- that there is a high chance they will hate the ending, but barely any professional reviewers mentioned it.

Modifié par EJ107, 07 mai 2012 - 08:09 .

[sorentoft]

Ratings are overrated. They do not show if a game is good or bad, let alone why.

[upsettingshorts]

@The Mad Hanar:

One of the most interesting things to me about the endings and DLC and Origin controversies is how thoroughly they've overshadowed all the things ME1-2 did to annoy fans that ME3 corrected. But that's kind of offtopic.

Anyone else remember ME1's repeated environments? Fixed.
How about ME2's disjointed plot structure and poor weapon stat GUI? Fixed.

There's a lot of that. But it's easy to point out that no game has ever gotten it completely right for everyone. I'm sure that's not possible, though.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 07 mai 2012 - 08:30 .

[Durontan]

All of that is correct that game itself is good and in NORMAL situation it should get around 8/10 radius. Problem is, that it is NOT a normal situation.

As if you look at the game as a solo game with nothing else, game actually goes down to around 6/10. Outdated graphics, Problems with graphics (head spins, terrible camera angles in conversations on many occasions), only one mod for multiplayer with retarded servers, BUYING gear for real cash for multiplayer?... ye okey, to LINEAR for RPG with 0 choice importance (for an RPG decisions are useless, they are in forms will I bang this character or that one. Or will I get this war asset instead of this one). THAT is actually biggest problem. 0 choice importance. An RPG should have some sort of it was needed to do that, in this game it's not. I wouldn't mind it that through entire game they didn't make it look like everything I gather matters a lot.

And now back to 8/10. Yes, game cannot be looked as a solo game, it is a trilogy. Trilogy of Shepard and characters we learned to love and hate. We got the goosepumps through the entire trilogy with so many OMFG moments. I still feel the OMG feeling when I talked to Vigil and found out the plan of Saren and Sovereign. My eyes almost poped out. To give the game it's deserved 8 I have to look at the entire picture, of all the details, all the props added into the game, all the changes from choices in last 2 games. As that, yes I can easily give game 8, even 9 out of 10 for bringing the feeling and keeping all the characters in their own element, their personal it's THAT character feeling.

Now, why does game insta get low scores? As I cannot look at it as anything other then as a disappointment. Game to get high scores requires players desire to replay the game + long play time consumption. Sorry, this game DOESN'T have replay value as no matter what it comes the same, no different choices as it is linear. I can't even get to know what those few choices that are different actually meant as final message is Buy extra DLC and nothing about all the galaxy and characters I loved. So in forms of looking it like that, YES game actually deserves even lower scores then as looking it as a solo game which is a 6, so overall score is actually around 3-4 out of 10.

So no, I am not surprised at low scores and IGN can go kiss their EA masters asses for some more free stuff from them.

[Panthro90]

I liken ME 3 to the huge tasty Sunday. You savor every bite, enjoying the rich ice cream and toppings. You get down to the bottom of the glass, the bitter sweet finish, where you know it is going to be done but oh so enjoyable and you find a… Brussels sprout?

Now some people like Brussels sprouts and they may even call it art to put one in a Sunday. I think they are disgusting and don’t belong in Sundays.

So how do you answer the question, “How was the Sunday?”
The Sunday was great, but the end sucked. Just like ME3.

[AtreiyaN7]

*rolleyes*

[Daedalus1773]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Daedalus1773 wrote...

Laurencio wrote...

Of course not. However disappointing 5 minutes out of 30 hours does not = 0/10 either.

For you, I'm sure that is a 100% valid statement.

However, you don't get to set the judging criteria for others. What defines a games "score" for you isn't the same as everyone else. Sorry.

Behold an example of the problem.

Professional reviewers have relatively uniform standards for evaluation.  If there is a question, you can look at their other reviews, or even an explanation of their policy.

User reviews are an aggregate.  Since there are so many of them, a comprehensive analysis of user review criteria is impossible.  Therefore, the raw score - an average of the user ratings - is all people tend to consider.  So while in Deadalus' opinion, sinking the score an entire game because of the ending is perfectly reasonable, no-one reading a his raw number review score will know that this is simply his interpretation of that endings' value and effect on the experience.  They will instead see a user average score of 4.0 and draw a possibly wildly different conclusion, that the game is an unplayable mess, which it is not.  

This is why user reviews are a problem.

It happens on Amazon too, for things that aren't games, but simply consumer goods.  I've lost track of the number of times where I've seen a product with a low Star rating that had more to say about Amazon's delivery record than the usefuless of the product in question.  That many people - myself included - might overlook the product because of shoddy, mis-targeted user reviews, stands to reason.  

It would benefit retailers and sites like Metacritic to drop user reviews for this reason.  There's no consistency and that lack of consistency is open to abuse.

A good & fair analysis. 

FWIW, I've never submitted a user score on any of the sites being mentioned; nor do I reference them before making a game purchase.  My post wasn't a statement in support of user review sites or their usefulness/validity. It was just meant as a riposte to all the people claiming that someone elses' review is invalid because they don't have the same opinion or criteria as themselves.

[Daedalus1773]

v TricKy v wrote...

And who should we trust then? The "honest" professional who earns his money with reviews and if he talks bad about something gets fired because he ruined the sales of Amazon and co.? 

I can tell you who I trust with regards to game recommendations ... myself & my own tastes, and my friends whose judgement & opinions I value.

That's pretty much it.

edit: I lied. I also give weight to whatever Penny Arcade recommends as "quality."

Modifié par Daedalus1773, 07 mai 2012 - 10:20 .

[Zardoc]

arial wrote...

professional reviewers dont give a bad review to a game because of 5 minutes of content thats not as good as it could be.

"Its about the Journey, not the destination"

[Shajar]

natalZ wrote...

So,  with some free time and nothing to do, i decided to read again some reviews about ME3.  But then comes the surprise, where are the bad reviews? I mean, the game is somehow good if you put aside the journal, plot holes and the ending and some other blablablastuff, but a lot of users gave the game bad reviews and that made the overall score reach the bottom.

(pc)
IGN user´s review: 9.8
Gamezone user´s review: 3.8/5
Gamespot: 8.6


The only site that apparently "didn´t change" the score was metacritic with 3.8/10.

They changed how they compute user´s reviews or EA´s space magic is spreading? Also could be some other strong force...

Its normal day for EA to pay for game sites/game magazines to get high number. Happens with their every major game and will continue to happen. Thats why i never trust "professional" reviews, same like Activison do with CoD's

[Clayless]

If you go back to before the game came out look at all the 0/10 reviews.

I just recently decided to buy a new phone, I was going to buy an iPhone 4s but decided to read some reviews first.

5/5
1/5
5/5
5/5
5/5
5/5
1/5
1/5
1/5

Got told to buy an Android or that the iPhone is the best thing ever, I quickly learned that user reviews are terrible to base something off.

[Darth Krytie]

Zix13 wrote...

Darth Krytie wrote...

I honestly think any rating less than a 7/10 (and that's giving it leeway) is crap. The only time games really deserve less than a 5/10 is when the game is actually broken in way that it can't actually be played. Bad camera, bad music, bad game mechanics and everything. I'd never give a game a low score because of something completely subjective like the end. The graphics were mostly wonderful, the music was wonderful, there was a reflection of choice in the game (actually, almost the entire game was a reflection of choices you made in one/two) the story was great...and so, yeah, it deserves high marks. A crap ending can't take away from that.

So, whenever I see zeros or under-five scores, I think invalid...because it's a truly unfair score based on common scoring matrices.

So you mean the scale should be 0,5,6,7,8,9,10....... o.O

Not really what I meant. I was referring to this game specifically. I was saying that anyone who gave ME3 a score under five makes me assume their position is invalid because based on how games are professionally rated (the common areas they all judge) Mass Effect 3 passes. And if the only reason you're voting that low is because of taste alone, then your opinion isn't worth much at all.

Though, there's something to be said for the fact that if the game's really that bad in as such the game is pretty much broken and horrid all over, does it matter if it's rated a two or a three? What would make anyone pick up a game rated three, but not a two? I won't even bother with a professionally rated game under five (though, I tend to get stuff at least rated seven). I basically see a five as the bare minimum of making a game playable, and only just.

[Sohlito]

The game is a 7.

[Singu]

I gave the game a 3/10 Metacritic score an hour after finishing it(and so far the only time I finished it). And yes, I did write several paragraphs to back up my reasoning for the low score. Not a four word sentence with expletitives in it.

As it is the score still stands, even though I have played MANY hours of ME3 multiplayer over the last few months. The reason for why I still feel that way is because I still can't touch the singleplayer part of it - and that's not something I would ever have thought after having replayed ME1 and ME2 more times than I would care to admit.