420 réponses à ce sujet

[Ghost]

Those Protheans wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

Those Protheans wrote...

Yes it is more fair as the football throwing was a game advertised to be a football throwing game and did good.
Mass effect 3 is advertised as Action RPG where your choices matter throughout the trilogy, by god if you're gonna whine about it not been fair then don't make the damn trilogy.

Mass Effect 3 is an Action RPG where your choices matter throughout the trilogy. Not that this has anything to do with "polish."

Considering how only some of your choices matter in minor ways it is very unpolished.
More time was needed.

I believe some of the choices majorly effect what happens i.e. Tuchanka.

[Slayer299]

Ghost1017 wrote...

clos wrote...

keeveek2 wrote...

I never look up for user's score on metacritic. Scores are too low or too high because of frustrated pimple-teenagers who either give 1/10 or 10/10 , it doesn't make any sense for me.

They have only one braincell, so they function in binary mode : either 1/10 or 10/10.

Critics score shows more how this game really is.

Really? Paid advertisers are neutral institutions that are far more unbiased in their assessments than real customers? GREAT! Iet me go buy those beers, I'll totally get all the hot chicks chilling out at the beach with me because I bought a Corona.

I'm so glad those "professional" reviewers whose only income comes from advertising that comes from the same companies whose very products they are reviewing are better to listen to than the thousands of customers who PAY their own money and review it completely based upon their satisfaction of their purchase.

Yeap. Your reasoning is sooooo sound. Keep watching those commercials...er, I mean, reviews, they'll guide your life!

Metacritic=Trolls

So then that means that good metacritic scores = unbiased reviews of said game? 

[Han Shot First]

User ratings on metacritic are pointless no matter the game, because most gamers don't have the slightest clue on how to give a balanced review. Everything is either a 10 and amazing, or the worst pile of crap they ever played and a 1.

[v TricKy v]

Why fix what´s not broken?

[Kildin_of_the_Volus]

I like the EC for what it is.

Still not going to write a positive review cause EC is, at the very least, what should have been shipped with the game.

Hopefully BW can learn from this and not totally EF up a beloved franchise because one or two people wanted "speculation from everyone."

[FlamingBoy]

Han Shot First wrote...

User ratings on metacritic are pointless no matter the game, because most gamers don't have the slightest clue on how to give a balanced review. Everything is either a 10 and amazing, or the worst pile of crap they ever played and a 1.

I think them being pointless might be taking it to far, I think the website can be useful for companies to understand the feelings of certain areas of the public

that leads to the question, do critics even know how to write a balance review. Reviewers seem to be skewed towards giving a game a better review than it deserves
there were a lot of reviews from the major sites (ign would be most prominent) that did not even give an opinion of the flaws in mass effect 3 and how it affected the experiences (the ending being one of them)

I personally would say the current user score of 5-6 more accurately represents my feelings of the game than the critics score of 93

[Biotic Sage]

keeveek2 wrote...

I never look up for user's score on metacritic. Scores are too low or too high because of frustrated pimple-teenagers who either give 1/10 or 10/10 , it doesn't make any sense for me.

They have only one braincell, so they function in binary mode : either 1/10 or 10/10.

Critics score shows more how this game really is.

Only two noise levels for the "frustrated pimple-teenagers."  And to me, a "frustrated pimple-teenager" doesn't even have to be a person in their teens, or someone who has pimples.  To me, it means a person who blindly entrenches himself in an opinion that was created from a gut emotional reaction and refuses to reflect or think critically.

[Persephone]

Slayer299 wrote...

Ghost1017 wrote...

clos wrote...

keeveek2 wrote...

I never look up for user's score on metacritic. Scores are too low or too high because of frustrated pimple-teenagers who either give 1/10 or 10/10 , it doesn't make any sense for me.

They have only one braincell, so they function in binary mode : either 1/10 or 10/10.

Critics score shows more how this game really is.

Really? Paid advertisers are neutral institutions that are far more unbiased in their assessments than real customers? GREAT! Iet me go buy those beers, I'll totally get all the hot chicks chilling out at the beach with me because I bought a Corona.

I'm so glad those "professional" reviewers whose only income comes from advertising that comes from the same companies whose very products they are reviewing are better to listen to than the thousands of customers who PAY their own money and review it completely based upon their satisfaction of their purchase.

Yeap. Your reasoning is sooooo sound. Keep watching those commercials...er, I mean, reviews, they'll guide your life!

Metacritic=Trolls

So then that means that good metacritic scores = unbiased reviews of said game? 

No. Review pushing is just as bad as review bombing.

Neither the supposedly "paid" critics nor the supposedly "fair" and "unbiased" fan reviews at Metacritic matter to me.

I have some people whose opinions I somewhat trust. Some are friends, others are professional reviewers. But more than anything else...I trust myself.

[Slayer299]

Persephone wrote...

No. Review pushing is just as bad as review bombing.

Neither the supposedly "paid" critics nor the supposedly "fair" and "unbiased" fan reviews at Metacritic matter to me.

I have some people whose opinions I somewhat trust. Some are friends, others are professional reviewers. But more than anything else...I trust myself.

Exactly my point

[savionen]

Tell all the critics to fix all their 9s and 10s if you want to be fair.

[Henioo]

The EC doesn't improve the overall score of the game.

[betd2]

No, Bioware does not get credit for having to be brow beaten by their fans into the EC which still didn't fix the biggest plot holes.

[The Spamming Troll]

Han Shot First wrote...

User ratings on metacritic are pointless no matter the game, because most gamers don't have the slightest clue on how to give a balanced review. Everything is either a 10 and amazing, or the worst pile of crap they ever played and a 1.

metacritic should add another rating system called "pass or fail" 

because really thats the only thing somepeople want to know. is it worth playing or not? is me3 worth playing or not? how many 1s compared to 10s?

[spockjedi]

No, keep shooting down the user score. The EC is just a confirmation of Bioware's stubbornness.

[H2Ape]

Metacritic blows anyway.

[Ghost]

Persephone wrote...

Slayer299 wrote...

Ghost1017 wrote...

clos wrote...

keeveek2 wrote...

I never look up for user's score on metacritic. Scores are too low or too high because of frustrated pimple-teenagers who either give 1/10 or 10/10 , it doesn't make any sense for me.

They have only one braincell, so they function in binary mode : either 1/10 or 10/10.

Critics score shows more how this game really is.

Really? Paid advertisers are neutral institutions that are far more unbiased in their assessments than real customers? GREAT! Iet me go buy those beers, I'll totally get all the hot chicks chilling out at the beach with me because I bought a Corona.

I'm so glad those "professional" reviewers whose only income comes from advertising that comes from the same companies whose very products they are reviewing are better to listen to than the thousands of customers who PAY their own money and review it completely based upon their satisfaction of their purchase.

Yeap. Your reasoning is sooooo sound. Keep watching those commercials...er, I mean, reviews, they'll guide your life!

Metacritic=Trolls

So then that means that good metacritic scores = unbiased reviews of said game? 

No. Review pushing is just as bad as review bombing.

Neither the supposedly "paid" critics nor the supposedly "fair" and "unbiased" fan reviews at Metacritic matter to me.

I have some people whose opinions I somewhat trust. Some are friends, others are professional reviewers. But more than anything else...I trust myself.

[ClockworkSpectre]

While the EC was a slight improvement, no matter how much you polish a turd, it is still a turd. The ending was the biggest issue I had with the game, but honestly, it was only one of many problems this game has.

The horrible user scores are well deserved. If nothing else it displays the HUGE disconnect between actual consumers and those in the media that rate games(and of course that they are bought out).

[KDD-0063]

Ironically review scores kinda force people to go binary mode.
User score is binary by itself and much of critic scores are paid ads.

So it comes down to something like this:
If critic score > 8.0 or user score > 7.5, this game is worth checking out;
If the two scores are consistent, the game is probably worth buying;
If critic is positive but user is negative, find out what the problem is through internet and if the problem still exists, and check if there are recent negative reviews because some problems may become apparent a lot later than the game releases (example: SWTOR, Diablo 3's real money auction house). If such problems no longer exist, it is probably worth buying.

[Necrotron]

H2Ape wrote...

Metacritic blows anyway.

I disagree.  It's one of the places where I can go get unbiased reviews from fellow gamers on games.

Reading the reasons why they gave low scores often tells me whether what they are complaining about would bother me or not, and often there are quite a few balanced reviews in between all the junk.  I just throw out/ignore the junk reviews.

Once I read gamespot's review, I always read the metacritic/Amazon/etc. user reviews because they're 90% of the time a better metric for me on whether I think I'll enjoy the game or not.

Modifié par Bathaius, 08 juillet 2012 - 06:58 .

[dirty console peasant]

no they did not fix anything they just polished the turd. It is still a TURD.