549 réponses à ce sujet

[KotorEffect3]

Getorex wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Interestingly enough, ME3 has a higher average on Metacritic for Xbox than the other platforms (5.0 as opposed to 4.0).

Draw whatever conclusion you will from that.

Easy.  Xbox gamers are into simplistic shoot and woosh.  They aren't into RPG.  They aren't into "story".  They want run and gun as that is what consoles are good for and nothing else.  The first two ME titles were very RPG/3rd person shooter.  ME3 was VERY weak on the RPG element and catered most particularly to the shooter crowd.  PERFECT for an xbox gamer but not for anyone else who came to the game for a good action story that they could be active in authoring.  Not and xbox strong suit.

The more Bioware aims for general simpleton audiences by going heavy on action, light on story/RPG, the lower the metacritic score will be while the higher the consoler/xboxer score will be.  An xbox is good for games that fit on ONE disk and don't contain enough (interesting and good) content to require a (gasp!) disk change.

Damn PC elitist.  I was playing ME 1 on the xbox long before it was even released on your precious PC.  You think you are smarter because you throw more money at a gaming PC than someone else does at a console?

[xsdob]

@Getorex
And PC gamers are nothing but liars and cheats who can't take 3 steps in an unmodded game without dying and showing off how noobish they really are.

How about we stop resorting to the retarded platform wars already. Lets make this war a dead meme.

[MerchantGOL]

I think its funny how every one gave me **** for cutting out rpg elements, now people are trying to pass it off as having more rpg in it then me3

[Amaterasuomikami]

Never, ever pay attention to user metacritic ratings, unless they're highlighting a problem with the game that is verifiable elsewhere.

[abaris]

MerchantGOL wrote...

I think its funny how every one gave me **** for cutting out rpg elements, now people are trying to pass it off as having more rpg in it then me3

Well, it has.

At least when it comes to my personal judgment. In my opinion, RPG elements are interactions, dialogues, choices and such. The first two instalments certainly had more of that. ME3 has more character customisation, but only for combat purposes. On the other hand the character interactions have been severly toned down with dialogues running on auto and squadmates having just a few lines to say.

Amaterasuomikami wrote...

Never, ever pay attention to
user metacritic ratings, unless they're highlighting a problem with the
game that is verifiable elsewhere.

And once again: Look at user ratings for DA:O, ME1 and ME2. In these cases they're pretty much in accordance with professional reviews. The gap opens up with DAII and ME3 - both games flying the flag of appealing to the so called broader audience. Both games turning their backs on their predecessors.

Modifié par abaris, 26 mai 2012 - 08:22 .

[Oldbones2]

6.


The ending ruins an otherwise incredible ride. And for me at least, invalidates the entire trilogy.

[KDD-0063]

If a game has a low user score on metacritic but a high critic score, watch out, it may have features that will greatly upset you.

On the other hand, if a game has a low critic score but high user score (for example, Alpha Protocol), it must have pretty bad flaws here and there, but some absolute genius features somewhere.

User scores are by no means full reviews. They are the feelings from users.

[Mistrzu]

Metacritic has long ago become a hub for trolls, dawdlers and whiners why are you surprised ? They just jump on the hate wagon because "everyone" hates Bioware now.

[abaris]

Mistrzu wrote...

Metacritic has long ago become a hub for trolls, dawdlers and whiners why are you surprised ? They just jump on the hate wagon because "everyone" hates Bioware now.

Easy and cheap to explain that all away by shouting troll.

It's not only Metacritic, you know. It's at every site allowing user ratings. And the pattern stays the same. Great scores for Bioware games up until DAII. From there on it's downhill. Maybe you like their new direction, but obviously others don't.

[Getorex]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Getorex wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Interestingly enough, ME3 has a higher average on Metacritic for Xbox than the other platforms (5.0 as opposed to 4.0).

Draw whatever conclusion you will from that.

Easy.  Xbox gamers are into simplistic shoot and woosh.  They aren't into RPG.  They aren't into "story".  They want run and gun as that is what consoles are good for and nothing else.  The first two ME titles were very RPG/3rd person shooter.  ME3 was VERY weak on the RPG element and catered most particularly to the shooter crowd.  PERFECT for an xbox gamer but not for anyone else who came to the game for a good action story that they could be active in authoring.  Not and xbox strong suit.

The more Bioware aims for general simpleton audiences by going heavy on action, light on story/RPG, the lower the metacritic score will be while the higher the consoler/xboxer score will be.  An xbox is good for games that fit on ONE disk and don't contain enough (interesting and good) content to require a (gasp!) disk change.

Damn PC elitist.  I was playing ME 1 on the xbox long before it was even released on your precious PC.  You think you are smarter because you throw more money at a gaming PC than someone else does at a console?

Relax.  There IS a cost for developers to aim for xbox and other consoles.  Consoles DO lack for graphic power and CPU power.  They all DO lack for memory (of all kinds).  Thus we often get consolers demanding a game that will fit on ONE disk (because they don't want to have to swap disks...boohoo).  Restricting to one disk restricts ALL elements of a good game.  It guts graphics, it guts broadening a story/RPG because you simply cannot fit it on a single disk, it limits the game to relatively small levels instead of near-boundless vistas.  

Bioware DID aim for the more generic xboxer/consoler who are into more shooter game than story/RPG.  You and a few others may differ but the vast majority of xbox games and gamers are into shooter/action.  That hurts a game like ME.

[Mistrzu]

abaris wrote...

Mistrzu wrote...

Metacritic has long ago become a hub for trolls, dawdlers and whiners why are you surprised ? They just jump on the hate wagon because "everyone" hates Bioware now.

Easy and cheap to explain that all away by shouting troll.

It's not only Metacritic, you know. It's at every site allowing user ratings. And the pattern stays the same. Great scores for Bioware games up until DAII. From there on it's downhill. Maybe you like their new direction, but obviously others don't.

It was inevitable that they will go into that direction, that they start "streamling" their games, making it more profitable and easier to play for casual and non-gamin consumer. It's always the same story.It isn't he first time when EA is twisting the idea of a RPG series ever profitable of Ultima 8 or 9 ? Read a little about it. 

Modifié par Mistrzu, 26 mai 2012 - 02:45 .

[Homebound]

the rating is more about costumer satisfaction than anything else really. A lot of people got burned by that ending. A LOT.

[abaris]

Hellbound555 wrote...

the rating is more about costumer satisfaction than anything else really. A lot of people got burned by that ending. A LOT.

I might stress, I never rated a game and never will do.

But blaming it all on the ending falls short in my opinion. It's obvious that a part of their fanbase don't like the way they are going. And, since Bioware and/or EA are pretty outspoken about the matter, their famed broader audience either isn't large or vocal enough to make a difference when it comes to user scores.

They're taking a new direction starting out with DAII. A direction I personally don't like and obviously is tailored for a more casual audience. The ending is only the icing on a pretty mediocre cake when it comes to comparing with previous titles.

[xsdob]

Getorex wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Getorex wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Interestingly enough, ME3 has a higher average on Metacritic for Xbox than the other platforms (5.0 as opposed to 4.0).

Draw whatever conclusion you will from that.

Easy.  Xbox gamers are into simplistic shoot and woosh.  They aren't into RPG.  They aren't into "story".  They want run and gun as that is what consoles are good for and nothing else.  The first two ME titles were very RPG/3rd person shooter.  ME3 was VERY weak on the RPG element and catered most particularly to the shooter crowd.  PERFECT for an xbox gamer but not for anyone else who came to the game for a good action story that they could be active in authoring.  Not and xbox strong suit.

The more Bioware aims for general simpleton audiences by going heavy on action, light on story/RPG, the lower the metacritic score will be while the higher the consoler/xboxer score will be.  An xbox is good for games that fit on ONE disk and don't contain enough (interesting and good) content to require a (gasp!) disk change.

Damn PC elitist.  I was playing ME 1 on the xbox long before it was even released on your precious PC.  You think you are smarter because you throw more money at a gaming PC than someone else does at a console?

Relax.  There IS a cost for developers to aim for xbox and other consoles.  Consoles DO lack for graphic power and CPU power.  They all DO lack for memory (of all kinds).  Thus we often get consolers demanding a game that will fit on ONE disk (because they don't want to have to swap disks...boohoo).  Restricting to one disk restricts ALL elements of a good game.  It guts graphics, it guts broadening a story/RPG because you simply cannot fit it on a single disk, it limits the game to relatively small levels instead of near-boundless vistas.  

Bioware DID aim for the more generic xboxer/consoler who are into more shooter game than story/RPG.  You and a few others may differ but the vast majority of xbox games and gamers are into shooter/action.  That hurts a game like ME.

No your still an elitiest because you just belittled not only an entire gaming platform but all those who play on them.

You were a snob in your post, the only way to convince people otherwise would be to apologize for your overgeneralization of console gamers.

[xsdob]

@Obi-Wan Old Ben Kenobi wrote...

Thanks.

Modifié par xsdob, 26 mai 2012 - 04:16 .

[Lokiador]

to OP : this rating is justified per se : as an aggregation of hundreds of reviews made by the same number of individuals.

So many peaople decided to flame down this game through their reviews : you may not agree with them, but they are right to express their opinions anyway, that is the very purpose of this site.

The same idea applies to the comments : they reflect reviewers' opinion. IF they consider that the game is ruined because of the ending, suit them.

[DarkDragon777]

It deserves about a 5, and that's all.

[xsdob]

Obi-Wan Old Ben Kenobi wrote...

DarkDragon777 wrote...

It deserves about a 5, and that's all.

Aggreed, Average in every way, when one choice (to go with Dark Energy and Import) could've made it the greatest RPG experience to this day but No Bioware, you had to **** it up because of New-come-r's to the series.

Sorry, and I know you just complimented me a while ago, but I disagree.

1. New players have just as much right to this series than any other players out there, they are not the reason changes were made to the series. The bioware team wanted to experiment a little with the game, they did these same thing in lair of the shadow broker with the auto-dialouge conversations in battle. They tweek their games mechanics with each instalment to gauge the reaction of the fanbase. They'll probably return to the old bioware system of micromanaging dialouge but keep the combat the same.

And before anyone does a "well they shouldn't have experimented with this game" line let me ask you somethung, If not in the games they are currently focusing one, than when? Should they create a new IP everytime they have a gemplay idea they want to try? That'd be like me buying a new care everytime I wanted to make a modification to my cars, I'd run out of time and money pretty quickly doing it that way.

2. Darek energy...I don't like it because mass effect technology causes dark energy by converting electrical energy to create a mass effect feild and as a by prodcut creates dark energy. Seems to preachy to me, like all of a sudden mass effect has become an episode of captain planet with a "don't pollute the enviroment with dark energy emmisions." message.

The reapers are looking for a solution to dark energy, but their technology is one of the most direct and largest produceing factors of dark energy. It's completly backwards and makes no sense, why not just destroy mass effect generating technology, the relays are probably the largest dark energy producers in the universe and I wouldn't be surprised if they were the cause of the dark energy problem in the mass effect universe.

So to sum it up,

"Yo dawg, We're trying to stop dark energy from destroying the universe so we invented technology that creates dark energy and gave it to everyone so we could stop dark energy from being made and save the universe."

[Getorex]

xsdob wrote...

Getorex wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Getorex wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Interestingly enough, ME3 has a higher average on Metacritic for Xbox than the other platforms (5.0 as opposed to 4.0).

Draw whatever conclusion you will from that.

Easy.  Xbox gamers are into simplistic shoot and woosh.  They aren't into RPG.  They aren't into "story".  They want run and gun as that is what consoles are good for and nothing else.  The first two ME titles were very RPG/3rd person shooter.  ME3 was VERY weak on the RPG element and catered most particularly to the shooter crowd.  PERFECT for an xbox gamer but not for anyone else who came to the game for a good action story that they could be active in authoring.  Not and xbox strong suit.

The more Bioware aims for general simpleton audiences by going heavy on action, light on story/RPG, the lower the metacritic score will be while the higher the consoler/xboxer score will be.  An xbox is good for games that fit on ONE disk and don't contain enough (interesting and good) content to require a (gasp!) disk change.

Damn PC elitist.  I was playing ME 1 on the xbox long before it was even released on your precious PC.  You think you are smarter because you throw more money at a gaming PC than someone else does at a console?

Relax.  There IS a cost for developers to aim for xbox and other consoles.  Consoles DO lack for graphic power and CPU power.  They all DO lack for memory (of all kinds).  Thus we often get consolers demanding a game that will fit on ONE disk (because they don't want to have to swap disks...boohoo).  Restricting to one disk restricts ALL elements of a good game.  It guts graphics, it guts broadening a story/RPG because you simply cannot fit it on a single disk, it limits the game to relatively small levels instead of near-boundless vistas.  

Bioware DID aim for the more generic xboxer/consoler who are into more shooter game than story/RPG.  You and a few others may differ but the vast majority of xbox games and gamers are into shooter/action.  That hurts a game like ME.

No your still an elitiest because you just belittled not only an entire gaming platform but all those who play on them.

You were a snob in your post, the only way to convince people otherwise would be to apologize for your overgeneralization of console gamers.

No.  Objective fact.  If you develop a game for a hardware system that has tight limits on memory usage, memory storage, CPU power, and GPU power, you will NOT get  a game with great depth, with supreme graphics approaching realism, you will not have as many choices in game, dialog will be less (audio files DO take up space too).  

What I would like to see developers do is simply build the biggest, best game and story they can with an eye on ALMOST the best hardware available to PCs.  Not the best possible hardware, just the upper levels.  Then they can look at the limitations of other target platforms and pare and tailor the game down to be the best possible for THOSE platforms.  Release it broadly.  Each platform gets a game that their system can handle, everyone's happy, and the game technology is pushed and improved. 

Sometimes it seems that all a consoler would be happy with is ascii-based sprites and a text-based dungeon pasted under it.  No thanks.

[Getorex]

[quote]Obi-Wan Old Ben Kenobi wrote...


[/quote]

No your still an elitiest because you just belittled not only an entire gaming platform but all those who play on them.

You were a snob in your post, the only way to convince people otherwise would be to apologize for your overgeneralization of console gamers.

[/quote]

This, Nice Sig BTW

[/quote]

I actually did not specifically mean to.  I DO belittle the newcomers that Bioware was clearly aiming at with their ME3 decisions and design.  Who cares about the previous two games, right?  Just make a standalone game that some casual newcomer can get into, no problem.  Reduce the RPG elements and crank up the action components and stick an MP on there too...perfect for the typical consoler.  Why is it an insult to state a fact that most games, and most games for consoles, are action-based run-and-gun or mortal combat style simple games?  They ARE this way.  Few and far between are the deeper games that requires more than just a fast twitch response.  I have consolers in my own family.  They just want to plop down on the sofa and race cars around a track or shoot stuff up for a short while and then do something else.  They don't WANT to get into some story and invest any real mental time into a game - they are casual console gamers.  Because they are going for the cheap ($$) console with lots of simple, fast-paced race and combat games.  That is simply objective fact.  The consoles are designed as commodities to be used to play commodity games.  Commodity games are pumped out a dime a dozen and involve lots of short-shorts on women, lots of gun fights, lots of car chases, some of it tied into an MP, and that's about it.  It is cheap for the developer to do it (no effort required on their part, just assembly line production.  Code and dump.  No imagination required).  

If you are making a BIG RPG/action game for a console, then one thing or the other HAS to give.  You either have lots of RPG dialog and story OR you have lots of action, to do both means subtracting from both because the developer is limited by space (disk size), memory available, and processing power available.  That is simply a fact. 

I spend some big bucks every once in a while (not constantly) on my PC to keep the graphics capabilities near to cutting edge.  Not on THE edge but somewhere close by.  CPU power is less important these days as there is little bang for the buck in that arena.  Overclocking is a waste for little gain.  It would sure be nice if developers would actually make games that at least makes such capability breath faster rather than go lowest common denominator.  Go for the highest denominator and then pare and tailer the game DOWN to the best fit for the various other platforms in your tgt list.  Everyone gets what they want and the best that their systems are capable of handling.  Win-win.

[Uccio]

Right on Getorex, those dam dirty console gaming peasants ruining our PC gaming experience with their shoot em up demand.

Modifié par Ukki, 26 mai 2012 - 06:29 .