549 réponses à ce sujet

[Sdrol117]

AlienWolf728 wrote...

jreezy wrote...

OutlawTorn6806 wrote...

Its an embarrassment to be a gamer sometimes when people prefer ME2 over ME3 or ME1.

Opinions like this are why it's embarrasing to be a gamer sometimes.

Everyone has different opinions. For example, that profile pic makes you look like a tool .

grow up.

[furryrage59]

A lot of people who are emotionally invested in the series were hurt at what they got, and it is reflected in the scores.

The handful of troll scores aside, i can understand why it is rated like that.

[Apfelweinbrauer]

I proudly review-bombed this game on amazon and metacritic.

[SalsaDMA]

Apfelweinbrauer wrote...

I proudly review-bombed this game on amazon and metacritic.

A single person giving a bad score is not "bombing".

Bombing is only achieved if an organised effort is utilizing multiple accounts to give bad scores.

People individually deciding to give the game a crappy rating is not bombing, it's just people utilizing their ability to make their opinion noticed.

[CELL55]

 http://builder.cheez...14-6e4f8b77c0b2

[SalsaDMA]

CELL55 wrote...

 http://builder.cheez...14-6e4f8b77c0b2

I guess that is why software companies can loose out on payment bonuses based on how their product rates in the metacritic? Because it doesn't matter?

[CELL55]

SalsaDMA wrote...

CELL55 wrote...

 http://builder.cheez...14-6e4f8b77c0b2

I guess that is why software companies can loose out on payment bonuses based on how their product rates in the metacritic? Because it doesn't matter?

You're refering to Obsidian and F:NV, right? I mean if you, the consumer, start taking the Metacritic scores as truth, you're going to have a bad time. It's a measure of fan reaction, and doesn't factor in scores from people who dodn't feel too strongly about it either way. As far as basing bonus pay on it as was the case with F:NV I think that it is just ludicrous. No, I don't think they deserved the bonus (game was buggier than F3, and that game was pretty darn bugggy), but basing your decision to award a bonus on the whimsical scores of Metacritic is just crazy.

[Nassegris]

I give ratings of 7-10 to games I love, that have plenty of re-play value for me and that I rave about to my friends. 7-10 are games I’ll tell my friends to play, that I look back at fondly.

ME3 has auto-dialogue up the wazoo, which ruined a good aspect of it long before the ending came around. I had so little control over my Shepard that I might as well have been playing an action game, without the RPG element a lot of the time. Cut-scenes without much influence over them are very common in high-budget action games these days.

The eavesdrop quests made me cringe – really, that’s what it’s come to? Not only does my character keep talking forever without any input on me in normal conversations, but she stalks around the Citadel listening to other people talking like a creep? Not approved.

The quests as a whole felt very narrow, stream-lined, with the exception of a few exceptional ones, and the quests that had more purpose were fewer than the previous games, and I felt most of it came down to either ‘main’ quests or ‘poke a probe at this planet’ quests.

Then we have the face import-issue, which took forever to get any work done on, and left me with a completely different Shepard while playing through. Then the fact that there are now no neutral options in discussions, and because of auto-dialogue, we rarely get to question what people tell us.

The EMS fiasco with multiplayer is really grinding my gears, too, and on top of this, I felt the character models looked pretty awful this time around. Something about the lighting and the skin textures makes it look like I’m talking to weird clay-versions of people. The facial animations are iffy as well. Don't even get me started on what they did to the romantic options from ME2, it's pretty miserable. The silly dreams you have throughout the game that are mostly annoying, and the forced emotional connection to one out of a myriad of kids that Shep must have seen dying by now.

And I’ve not even arrived at the ending yet.

I might have forgiven all of this stuff and landed on an 8 if I’d loved the ending, but I have no reason to forgive any of it at this point.

The game sits at a square 6 in my heart, which is all right according to my personal measuring system, but not something I’d recommend to my friends. The friends I recommended ME3 to before I played it ended up wanting to throttle me for my misplaced efforts.

I'd never go and rate a game at metacritic anyway, but 6 is what I'd likely have given it. 6.5 if I was in a really good mood.

Modifié par Nassegris, 13 mai 2012 - 02:16 .

[Cyne]

napushenko wrote...

Mass Effect 3 has 3.8 rating on metacritic. 3.8 ! 
Does anyone agree with that and why ? I personally cant stand it. Its a superb game, better then any in the series imo till that last couple of minutes. 3 point fckng 8.  And some things i read in reviews were so unthrutfull it hurts. 

What rating would you give it ? Its a strong nine in my opinion, but i just gave it 10 to try & counter these 1 rating trolls 

The metacritic score is total crap. It's nowhere near a 3.8, more like a 7-9. there are some things I dislike (autodialogue, ending) which prevent it from being a solid 10, but it is still an excellent game. I feel sorry for anyone who gives the game a miss based on the low average rating, seriously.

[crazyrabbits]

napushenko wrote...

I personally cant stand it. Its a superb game, better then any in the series imo till that last couple of minutes. 3 point fckng 8.  And some things i read in reviews were so unthrutfull it hurts.

I'd say the game is incapable of getting a 10, or a 9, or an 8. Even putting aside the ending, there's so much wrong with the gameplay and story that it's difficult to understand how anyone could have botched this as bad as BW did. As per a list I once wrote out for another topic, the problems include:

- Confusing and illogical journal system that doesn't update with quest item procurement
- Shepard eavesdrops on everyone in the Citadel; solves their problems for them...uh, character development?
- War Assets mean nothing in terms of additional content or ending changes
- EMS is poorly explained, has no bearing on final mission (beyond a couple alternate cutscenes)
- 6 N7 missions (all using horde mode maps) compared to ME2's 19 N7 missions
- Fetch quests are nothing more than scanning a planet and taking the items back to the Citadel
- Multiplayer mode has direct impact on single player campaign (is needed for "best" Destroy ending)
- Reaper attacks during exploration are more annoying than anything
- New characters are largely useless and have no bearing on the plot (Kai Leng, Vega, Traynor, Cortez)
- bizarre running animations (Anderson, fleeing citizens on Earth, child in dream sequences)
- general bugs (clipping issues, holes in Normandy, disappearing enemies)
- All ME2 characters sidelined and relegated to single mission
- Multiple ME2 characters get lame resolutions (Zaeed, Jacob, Kasumi, Samara, Kelly)
- EDI gets hyper-sexualized, plus cameltoe
- Most ME2 romances get terrible resolutions, amount to a couple extra lines of dialogue (Jacob, Jack, Thane)
- Kai Leng is pathetically written, has lame comebacks, looks like Asian Nightwing
- Tali's face seen as photoshopped picture taken from a stock image gallery; fanart widely believed to be better
- Diana Allers character mostly pointless; did someone at Bioware owe Jessica Chobot a favor?
- Cerberus goes from 150 personnel to the Empire from Star Wars for no good reason
- TIM goes from well-intentioned extremist to guy who will sell humanity out for power...nice.
- Citadel is attacked and controlled offscreen by Reapers...is everyone there dead? Evacuated? Resolution!
- Citadel Defense Force is completely pointless
- Lair of the Shadow Broker effectively means nothing to the plot
- Arrival means nothing to the plot
- Mass Effect 2 final decision (Collector Base) has no bearing on ME3 plot; doesn't matter what you picked
- the only difference between saving/not saving the council is 30 War Asset points
- Final mission is just horde mode in single-player

[Xellith]

crazyrabbits wrote...

napushenko wrote...

I personally cant stand it. Its a superb game, better then any in the series imo till that last couple of minutes. 3 point fckng 8.  And some things i read in reviews were so unthrutfull it hurts.

I'd say the game is incapable of getting a 10, or a 9, or an 8. Even putting aside the ending, there's so much wrong with the gameplay and story that it's difficult to understand how anyone could have botched this as bad as BW did. As per a list I once wrote out for another topic, the problems include:

- Confusing and illogical journal system that doesn't update with quest item procurement
- Shepard eavesdrops on everyone in the Citadel; solves their problems for them...uh, character development?
- War Assets mean nothing in terms of additional content or ending changes
- EMS is poorly explained, has no bearing on final mission (beyond a couple alternate cutscenes)
- 6 N7 missions (all using horde mode maps) compared to ME2's 19 N7 missions
- Fetch quests are nothing more than scanning a planet and taking the items back to the Citadel
- Multiplayer mode has direct impact on single player campaign (is needed for "best" Destroy ending)
- Reaper attacks during exploration are more annoying than anything
- New characters are largely useless and have no bearing on the plot (Kai Leng, Vega, Traynor, Cortez)
- bizarre running animations (Anderson, fleeing citizens on Earth, child in dream sequences)
- general bugs (clipping issues, holes in Normandy, disappearing enemies)
- All ME2 characters sidelined and relegated to single mission
- Multiple ME2 characters get lame resolutions (Zaeed, Jacob, Kasumi, Samara, Kelly)
- EDI gets hyper-sexualized, plus cameltoe
- Most ME2 romances get terrible resolutions, amount to a couple extra lines of dialogue (Jacob, Jack, Thane)
- Kai Leng is pathetically written, has lame comebacks, looks like Asian Nightwing
- Tali's face seen as photoshopped picture taken from a stock image gallery; fanart widely believed to be better
- Diana Allers character mostly pointless; did someone at Bioware owe Jessica Chobot a favor?
- Cerberus goes from 150 personnel to the Empire from Star Wars for no good reason
- TIM goes from well-intentioned extremist to guy who will sell humanity out for power...nice.
- Citadel is attacked and controlled offscreen by Reapers...is everyone there dead? Evacuated? Resolution!
- Citadel Defense Force is completely pointless
- Lair of the Shadow Broker effectively means nothing to the plot
- Arrival means nothing to the plot
- Mass Effect 2 final decision (Collector Base) has no bearing on ME3 plot; doesn't matter what you picked
- the only difference between saving/not saving the council is 30 War Asset points
- Final mission is just horde mode in single-player

Dont forget that Harbinger (the main antagonist of the previous installment) makes a cameo appearance to shoot a beam of artistic integrity at you and then flies off.

[abaris]

I never used to look at metacritic, but now I spent a leisurly hour looking through all the games I have played within the last three years. Falllout 3, Fallout New Vegas, Dragon Age Origins, ME1 and ME2, Skyrim.

And nothing even comes close to the critic/user discrepancy when it comes to the last two Bioware games. With every other game critics and users more or less agreed, but with DAII and ME3 there's that huge gap.

[JamesT91]

never having used metacritic before i cant say if they are normally biased or not, but in this case id say they are right.

id rate mass effect 3 very low, even without the ending ripping away 5 years of gameplay and choices its not even in the same league as 1 or 2 far too many RPG features removed and way too much time spent on pointless multiplayer, shooter mechanics (the least important part of any rpg) and the worst characters ever created allers and vega

[ile_1979]

napushenko wrote...

Mass Effect 3 has 3.8 rating on metacritic. 3.8 ! 
Does anyone agree with that and why ? I personally cant stand it. Its a superb game, better then any in the series imo till that last couple of minutes. 3 point fckng 8.  And some things i read in reviews were so unthrutfull it hurts. 

What rating would you give it ? Its a strong nine in my opinion, but i just gave it 10 to try & counter these 1 rating trolls 

My rating system:
Perfect game=10
Ending is very bad and kills replay factor= -2
Face importing broken on release=-1
No weapons holstering=-1
Day one DLC present on disks=-0.5

Mass Effect 3= 10-2=8-1=7-1=6-0.5=5.5

Even if i take out the bad ending rage on my part it is still 7.5. Not even close to my ratings on ME1 or ME2. Is metta hard on the game. Yes it is, but there is a price you pay for slaping your fans.

[Anjeel]

Vaeir09 wrote...

Without the ending, I'd give the game a 6/10 with points taken for a large amount of auto dialogue, paid day one DLC, odd quest system, a terrible journal, Kai Leng being the least impressive villain ever, and having to restart some missions multiple times due to bugs.

With the ending, I'd give it a -17/10 for managing to retroactively ruin my enjoyment for the previous two games.

Oh yeah.... thanks for reminding me about the ninjas in the game......

[Anjeel]

I almost forgot about the whole "Thanks for beating our game, now buy some DLC when we add it" dialog box...

[Swordfishtrombone]

I'd give the game a solid 7 - if the ending wasn't so attrociously bad, it'd be an 8, I think.

The reason I wouldn't give it a higher rating than that is that there are some problems beyond the ending that really drastically reduce the replay value of the game when compared to ME1 and ME2

First, the small squad and the fact that you get some of that small squad pretty deep into the game, means that you don't have that many squadmate combinations to try out on different missions.

Second, the low number of proper side quests, and the high number of fed-ex "quests".

Third, the linearity of the story, and the railroading; despite some parts of the game being quite beautifully done and engaging (thinking of Tuchanka, especially), what felt like major decisions from earlier games didn't turn out to have almost any effect on the story of ME3. Especially the railroading with the rachni felt hamfisted, and broke that all-important illusion of playing a fairly open world with a variety of meaningful choises to make.

This is why I really got bored near the end of my second playtrhough - that officially makes it the Bioware game that's kept my interest the shortest time of all Bioware games I've played. The one thing that I've really valued in Bioware titles is the replayability, and it's just not there with ME3.

Thus the 7.

[KBomb]

I gave the game a 6/10 and I thought that was being generous. Including the points brought up by crazyrabbits, Nassegris and jimbo3—most of which I agree with—the replayability is what seals the low score for me.

I remember watching the end credits rolling on the two previous games and already planning my next playthrough. I had a total of ten complete characters that were all from ME1. I played Mass Effect 3 once. I tried to do more, but just couldn't bring myself to do so and that speaks volumes to me.

[ile_1979]

[quote]Adam1117 wrote...


[/quote]


ME 3 is superior, you just have bad judgment.  Get over it.[/quote]

Superior to what? Pong? I've played second rate RPGs like Divinity 2 which are better than this game. You fail. 0/10

[/quote]
[/quote]
Like I said you have poor judgment.  Now go back under your bridge.

If the game is so bad; why are you still on the forums?  When FF14 proved a disappointment to me, guess what I and many other people did? WE FREAKING LEFT THE GAME AND DIDN'T BOTHER POSTING ON THE FORUMS BECAUSE WE GENUINELY THOUGHT IT WAS GARBAGE.

Since you and your fellow whiners are still on the boards, it proves that you did enjoy the game. Now either quit for good for or just shutup and play the game.

[/quote]

Good grief, i just imagined a legal system in which people are being convicted based on this "logic"
1984, here we come....

[napushenko]

ile_1979 wrote...

napushenko wrote...

Mass Effect 3 has 3.8 rating on metacritic. 3.8 ! 
Does anyone agree with that and why ? I personally cant stand it. Its a superb game, better then any in the series imo till that last couple of minutes. 3 point fckng 8.  And some things i read in reviews were so unthrutfull it hurts. 

What rating would you give it ? Its a strong nine in my opinion, but i just gave it 10 to try & counter these 1 rating trolls 

My rating system:
Perfect game=10
Ending is very bad and kills replay factor= -2
Face importing broken on release=-1
No weapons holstering=-1
Day one DLC present on disks=-0.5

Mass Effect 3= 10-2=8-1=7-1=6-0.5=5.5

Even if i take out the bad ending rage on my part it is still 7.5. Not even close to my ratings on ME1 or ME2. Is metta hard on the game. Yes it is, but there is a price you pay for slaping your fans.

pretty lofty standards you got there. no holstering -1 ? 
so, like, youd give baldurs gate a 0 based on that theres no face importing, protagonist is not voiced, no scabbards ! 
what else ? you didnt like some picture on the missing persons board ? -3 

[napushenko]

Swordfishtrombone wrote...

I'd give the game a solid 7 - if the ending wasn't so attrociously bad, it'd be an 8, I think.



Second, the low number of proper side quests, and the high number of fed-ex "quests".

Third, the linearity of the story, and the railroading; despite some parts of the game being quite beautifully done and engaging (thinking of Tuchanka, especially), what felt like major decisions from earlier games didn't turn out to have almost any effect on the story of ME3. Especially the railroading with the rachni felt hamfisted, and broke that all-important illusion of playing a fairly open world with a variety of meaningful choises to make.


Thus the 7.

say what ? no effect from earlier games ? you insane ? me 1 didnt have 10 % of storyline implications on me2 , as me 1 & 2 have on me 3.  geth - quarians. mordin lives dies based on actions you did in me 1 and me 2. almost everything depended on your actions from past games. even minor characters show up if they arent dead and they have awareness of what you did in their quests. hell, you couldnt even play it without importing saved game because of repercussions. that speaks to me that your actions have consequences here. 

some points are ok but downright lies are disgusting. 

Modifié par napushenko, 13 mai 2012 - 05:08 .

[napushenko]

Dont forget that Harbinger (the main antagonist of the previous installment) makes a cameo appearance to shoot a beam of artistic integrity at you and then flies off.



[/quote]


this is so funny !  
loved it.

and wont answer any of your points above because i dont wanna repeat myself. 
game - great. 
ending - sucks.
war assets > resource mining/collecting. same s h i t 

strong nine. for me. 
anyone who has it below 7 at least is a troll because he cant objectively look at the game. worst games ever have ratings of 4-5.  you telling me this have rating as deer hunting or barbie dances with you or something like that. 

[leminzplz]

I'd probably score it an 8, because it was a good game, but some little things (like the running) made the game annoying so...yeah

[napushenko]

[quote]SalsaDMA wrote...

[quote]Apfelweinbrauer wrote...
es.

People individually deciding to give the game a crappy rating is not bombing, it's just people utilizing their ability to make their opinion noticed.

[/quote]

thats being a spoiled brattish troll. especially if their opinion is wrong. and it is, because i said so. me & profesional reviewers. 

[ile_1979]

napushenko wrote...

ile_1979 wrote...

napushenko wrote...

Mass Effect 3 has 3.8 rating on metacritic. 3.8 ! 
Does anyone agree with that and why ? I personally cant stand it. Its a superb game, better then any in the series imo till that last couple of minutes. 3 point fckng 8.  And some things i read in reviews were so unthrutfull it hurts. 

What rating would you give it ? Its a strong nine in my opinion, but i just gave it 10 to try & counter these 1 rating trolls 

My rating system:
Perfect game=10
Ending is very bad and kills replay factor= -2
Face importing broken on release=-1
No weapons holstering=-1
Day one DLC present on disks=-0.5

Mass Effect 3= 10-2=8-1=7-1=6-0.5=5.5

Even if i take out the bad ending rage on my part it is still 7.5. Not even close to my ratings on ME1 or ME2. Is metta hard on the game. Yes it is, but there is a price you pay for slaping your fans.

pretty lofty standards you got there. no holstering -1 ? 
so, like, youd give baldurs gate a 0 based on that theres no face importing, protagonist is not voiced, no scabbards ! 
what else ? you didnt like some picture on the missing persons board ? -3 

Actually Baldur's Gate had a working face importing system. BG2 had it too. Throne of Bhaal had it. If 1 had it and 2 didn't you are quite right i'd rate 2 in a bad way. If 1 had scabards and 2 didn't i'd give it minus points for that. BG2 had broken isometric system and i gave it negative points for it at the time (i am one of those that like BG1 better by the way). The protagonist was not voiced in BG1 so i did not expect it to be voiced in BG2. Exploration was ditched in BG2, so gave it negative points for that. All in all, BG1 is 9.2 in my book, BG2 is 8.7. I think you can see the pattern here....