321 réponses à ce sujet

[Vasparian]

The ending ruined the game, but that was not the only flaw. The way you did quests was a borefest.

[lillitheris]

So, is there like a service where judicious people such as the ones in this thread can review stuff on my behalf, because I’d probably do it wrong by taking into account how I felt about it?

[Father Alvito]

Torrible wrote...

I'm still waiting for people to tell me why Metacritic is more credible than IMDB. Does it take longer to sign up for Metacritic? Or does the ability to type a 2 word review like "RGB explosions" give the users more credibility?

Because IMDB excludes user scores according to criteria which we cannot observe and that are totally unrelated to gaming.  I fail to see why this is hard.

Neither score is a valid representation of quality, but unfiltered result > result with known bias of unknown form.

Modifié par Father Alvito, 08 mai 2012 - 01:33 .

[Larryboy_Dragon]

One of the worst things about the ending outcry is that it glosses over Me3’s other issues:
Fewer missions, more lame fetch missions, less dialogue options, no real new RPG options, limited enemy selection compared to ME1 (where did the wall climbing geth and giant-tank geth go), only one hub to explore, much less companion dialogue and so forth.

[indyracing]

Laurencio wrote...

With the majority of user reviews being a joke, I'm surprised they haven't purged the system completely.

(examples were here)

And that's just a small fraction of the user reviews on metacritic. Yeah I can't imagine why they would consider reviews like this to be meaningless.

Well since those reviews come from paying customers, I would think they wouldn't consider them meaningless.

I'm not sure I could give the game a 0/10, because it was good until the end, but the end was, IMO, just SO bad that nothing higher than a 5 is really accurate. 

I actually have a hard time coming up with an accurate rating, because the ending is such an incredible disappointment (that's when you get a brand new character, you get your Shepard-ness removed, and you realize not one of your choices ever mattered - that equals bad story writing, the neutering of the protagonist at the last minute, and betraying one of the core features of the entire series in a 10 minute spell after 100+ hours).

I know I don't recommend Mass Effect 3 to anyone, unless it's for the multiplayer (which is fun!).

The things in that last I find very valid criticisms (not that they justify a 0/10 score):

Red green and blue explosions I rest my case
My choices didn't matter, well, I mean the ending was ****, and they want me to buy DLC
Face import didn't work, it's an outrage
"I feel betrayed", Jessica Chobot
RGB explosions
Poor writing, good game, but poor writing. (for me poor writing at Thessia and the ending - but the ending was atrocious)
Critic scores are a joke
Great fantastic game until the end.
Day one DLC! Lack of meaningful choices! BUY MORE DLC BANNER!
The best RPG turned to the worst in 5 minutes!

I know you listed those as examples of why to ignore user reviews - but users are who buy the games, not critics.  As a loyal (well until I played through the end of ME 3 - on the tails of DA2 which was an average game, as well as TOR - a 6 year old MMO) Bioware customer - I agree with all of those criticisms, and would most likely rate the game in the region of 5/10 on Metacritic or somewhere else.  Maybe as low as 4/10.

The end was so bad, that on a scale of 1-10, I have to rate it as a 1, because I can't imagine a worse written ending to THIS series than what we were given, unless it was intentionally bad (sabatoged in some way).

[Averdi]

I don't remember giving it a web review, but I'd say something like 2-3/10 is about right, due to the ending. The ending of a story-driven game receives disproportionate weight in the game's overall value for me, and the ME3 ending was just soul-devouring. I'd also rank it low because it devalued the previous two games in the series to me.

So in short, those low scores don't seem outrageous, from my point of view.

[shurikenmanta]

I don't take the insanely-low review scores very seriously to tell you the truth. Even Superman 64 only got about 2 or 3 on most scales, and that's infinitely worse than ME3 is on its worst day. It kind of strikes me as hamming it up majorly and I find that hard to give any real credence to.

[eddieoctane]

Averdi wrote...

I don't remember giving it a web review, but I'd say something like 2-3/10 is about right, due to the ending. The ending of a story-driven game receives disproportionate weight in the game's overall value for me, and the ME3 ending was just soul-devouring. I'd also rank it low because it devalued the previous two games in the series to me.

So in short, those low scores don't seem outrageous, from my point of view.

The ending of any narrative, be it game, book, or movie, should be weighted much heavier than any other element of the story. So when the ending of a narrative driven game falls flat, it's fair to knock it down to 5-6/10 When you start adding in the dropped plot lines, deliberately ignored decisions (like the Rachni), and various glitches and bugs, taking another 2 or 3 points off isn't so inconceivable. And now, you've got a 3/10 game. If you justify a low rating, it's ridiculous to delete it. But it's unsurprising when IGN is taking down "bad" reviews of a game they have a vested interest in hyping.

[Deathstroke123]

Because people have apparently lost the ability to be subjective. It's infantile, really. I wouldn't be surprised if most of those reviews were from people on this site, the same place that continually argues that fan reviews somehow hold more water then professional reviews, by whatever flawed logic.

Here's an example of a subjective review:

Overall, I enjoyed ME3 for the majority of it's run time. Yes, there were some hiccups here and there in the form of inconvenience with the journal, but none were significant enough to ruin my overall view of the game. The ending is definitely the biggest fault of the game, but again, 10 minutes doe not detract from or spoil the 30 hours of fun I had beforehand. 8.5/10

Notice how I didn't blow up small portions of the game like the journal as if they were major strikes against the game, because they weren't. If you have half a brain, the journal not updating is a complete non-issue. Just scan every new galaxy that appears to 100%. Boom. There, you didn't miss anything. Problem?

[Hadeedak]

My feelings regarding the last 10 minutes of ME3. Now.... I actually think in total, it was a pretty good game and I enjoyed it. I will probably play it again and a few more times after that! I certainly wouldn't give it a 2 or 3, not while there's so many truly awful titles I could glare at at the drop of a hat.

My guess is that people are simmering down for the moment.

Modifié par Hadeedak, 08 mai 2012 - 02:18 .

[Deathstroke123]

Larryboy_Dragon wrote...

One of the worst things about the ending outcry is that it glosses over Me3’s other issues:
Fewer missions, more lame fetch missions, less dialogue options, no real new RPG options, limited enemy selection compared to ME1 (where did the wall climbing geth and giant-tank geth go), only one hub to explore, much less companion dialogue and so forth.

There were more unique missions in ME3 then in ME1 or 2. By unique, I mean the mission actually had voice acting, a point, and weren't set in the same box room a thousand times.

The fetch quests were meant as a time sink, which each game had. Gotta love selective memory. I recall wasting way more time in the first and second game either driving around a flat, dull landscape, scanning planets for hours for minerals, or playing pointless unlocking games.

Limited enemies compared to ME1... you mean the game where you fight Geth troopers and maybe once or twice a collosus for 95% of the game? Yeah, whole lotta variety in that game. Give me a ****ing break.

There was only one hub in ME1, and it was largely empty and dull. But oops, we're not supposed to say anything bad about ME1, sorry.

Less companion dialogue... THAT is rich. Honestly it is. I'm starting to question whether or not you actually bought the real game and not a Russian bootleg.

[Averdi]

Deathstroke123 wrote...

Because people have apparently lost the ability to be subjective. It's infantile, really. I wouldn't be surprised if most of those reviews were from people on this site, the same place that continually argues that fan reviews somehow hold more water then professional reviews, by whatever flawed logic.

I read and watched the IGN review, and a few other professional ones, both before and after playing the game.  While there's lots of hyperbole on these boards, those review are not exactly deep, and are considerably shallower than many of the critiques of the game that I saw here just after release.  The fact that those professional review don't mentioned possible dissatisfaction with the ending, frankly, toes the line of dishonesty, in my opinion.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that fan reviews are categorically better than professional review, but I don't think they're categorically worse either.  The ME3 experience has done a lot of damage to my faith in professional reviews.  One needs to be careful to consider the details and specifics of the review, rather than more or less putting faith in the source.

[Necrotron]

Well, one thing I learned from all of this, metacritic is an invaluable source of information regarding games I am considering purchasing, since there are things Gamespot and IGN won't tell me.

Edit:  Note, I also learned that I never want to support IGN in any way with page views.

Modifié par Bathaius, 08 mai 2012 - 02:25 .

[EnvyTB075]

Can i just ask who gives a flying **** about reviews anyway? I mean why wouldn't you ask a mate about whether a game is just plain good or not?

[shurikenmanta]

Bathaius wrote...

Well, one thing I learned from all of this, metacritic is an invaluable source of information regarding games I am considering purchasing, since there are things Gamespot and IGN won't tell me.

Edit:  Note, I also learned that I never want to support IGN in any way with page views.

Metacritic is an invaluable source of lulz if you click on 'view negative reviews'.

The Fallout 3 ones are hilarious.

[Deathstroke123]

Averdi wrote...

Deathstroke123 wrote...

Because people have apparently lost the ability to be subjective. It's infantile, really. I wouldn't be surprised if most of those reviews were from people on this site, the same place that continually argues that fan reviews somehow hold more water then professional reviews, by whatever flawed logic.

I read and watched the IGN review, and a few other professional ones, both before and after playing the game.  While there's lots of hyperbole on these boards, those review are not exactly deep, and are considerably shallower than many of the critiques of the game that I saw here just after release.  The fact that those professional review don't mentioned possible dissatisfaction with the ending, frankly, toes the line of dishonesty, in my opinion.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that fan reviews are categorically better than professional review, but I don't think they're categorically worse either.  The ME3 experience has done a lot of damage to my faith in professional reviews.  One needs to be careful to consider the details and specifics of the review, rather than more or less putting faith in the source.

The difference comes in the fact that the professional reviewers do not let their emotions get in the way of a review, however. Once you start adding or dropping points in a review for something personal, you've lost all credibility as a reviewer. You're meant to present a straightforward, subjective review that anyone can relate to. Once you start saying "THEY DIDN'T LET ME MARRY MY SPACE-WAIFU AND HAVE A HOUSE WITH PUPPIES AND KIDS AND...", then your opinion is spoiled. And yes, I've seen many arguments here based around that.

[Averdi]

Deathstroke123 wrote...

The difference comes in the fact that the professional reviewers do not let their emotions get in the way of a review, however. Once you start adding or dropping points in a review for something personal, you've lost all credibility as a reviewer. You're meant to present a straightforward, subjective review that anyone can relate to. Once you start saying "THEY DIDN'T LET ME MARRY MY SPACE-WAIFU AND HAVE A HOUSE WITH PUPPIES AND KIDS AND...", then your opinion is spoiled. And yes, I've seen many arguments here based around that.

First, let me say that I'm not convinced that professional reviews don't let their emotions, or other pressures, influence their reviews.  Profession reviews' lack of comment about the ending is so blatent and beyond the pale, that I'm having trouble rationalizing how they decided to remain silent about it other than deliberatly for some reason.  It's like Car and Driver going on a length about the interior and power windows while ignoring that the car has no engine and doesn't run.  How can you miss that?

Second, as I said many of the professional reviews are not particularly deep.  What use is something that doesn't provide the detail truely necessary to judge my potential enjoyment, even if it is objective?  Much of the value of  these professional reviews, seems to me, to be in the faith people put into them, rather than the actual professionalism of their critique.  Once that faith is gone, there isn't much there, and I'll go looking for detailed reviews where I can find them, and judge them individually.

[Zolt51]

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.

+1 to this.

[2484Stryker]

Can't say I disagree with removing obviously biased reviews. ME3 may have a broken ending and numerous other disappointments, but even taken together, they don't sink the game down to 2/10. Having said that, I'm also quite insulted by all the 10/10 scores out there, too. ME3 may not deserve the review bombings, but neither does it deserve the perfect scores; the game has enough flaws even outside of the ending. Both should be removed if you truly want to be objective.

I've said it numerous times, without the broken ending (or assuming they fix it), it's a solid 7/10 or perhaps even 8/10. As it is, 5-6/10 is the best I can give it.

Modifié par 2484Stryker, 08 mai 2012 - 03:09 .

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

I personally dont like a numbered scoring system, i like how jeremy jahns review things, basically it ranges from crap to awesometacular, its a more efficient system saying if something is good or not.

[Wabajakka]

Metacritic was pretty much the only site targeted with bad user reviews from what I know.

[StevenG_CT]

FOZ289 wrote...
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.

True. Despite the problems I still think ME3 is deserving of an 8-8.5 score as there were some very well done portions. I don't however believe it is deserving of a 9+ score since significant portions (most of the side quests and the final priority mission) were clearly rushed and inferior to the rest of the game.

[Father Alvito]

EnvyTB075 wrote...

Can i just ask who gives a flying **** about reviews anyway? I mean why wouldn't you ask a mate about whether a game is just plain good or not?

Three good reasons to care:

1) I do not have an infinite amount of mates, so there's a finite amount of material they can cover
2) My mates' preferences are not precisely mine, so their opinions are not always reflective of what I will/will not enjoy
3) Unless my mates are game reviewers (which they're not), I can't get an informed opinion immediately upon release

The reality is that in this day and age you pretty much have to read a professional review and fill in the score at the end yourself, based upon the content of the review.  Even then you'll still have problems with the big titles, since the reviewers won't comment negatively on big issues such as, say, the ending of ME3.  Sure, they'll complain about inventory management in ME1 and planet scanning in ME2, but they'll gloss over anything like a game being the unplayable bug-infested mess that was Skyrim upon release.

The net result is that there aren't a lot of titles that I'll buy on the release date any more.  I took the leap of faith on DX:HR and was reasonably rewarded.  Excepting the ending, this title is about at the same level of quality.  Unfortunately, that level of quality just isn't worth $60 to me.  I paid $40 to Amazon for DX:HR (which later got adjusted downward another $10 for reasons that seemed clear to them in their explanation but remain unclear to me) and have no complaints.

[FatalX7.0]

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 thought the game was pretty bad without the ending.

[FataliTensei]

[quote]ArchDuck wrote...

I personally would peg it on the 5-7/10 range. Anything higher is as absurd as anything lower really. Both are not defensible unless you are ignoring the good or ignoring the bad.[/quote]

[/quote]

This, it was a mediocre game sans multiplayer, with MP it gets a 7/10 in my book. You know it's weird that the part of the game I looked foward to the least is the part I most enjoy...hell it's the only part I play anymore.