286 réponses à ce sujet

[Conniving_Eagle]

+More fluid combat.
+Multiplayer Mode for additional replay value.
+Great Music and pretty good cinematics.
+Level design.
+Better handling of skills, weapons and customization.
+Good Character development.
+Great story arcs like Tuchanka and Rannoch.


-Simplified dialogue wheel = less replayability.
-Unorganized journal system
-Less dialogue = less replayability.
-Less Paragon/Renegade choices. Dialogue all together has been 'gimped' taking away from one of the core aspects of Mass Effect: roleplaying.
-Day 1 DLC.
-Many parts felt very lackluster and deserving of their own story arcs, just like Tuchanka and Rannoch, for example, Thessia, Sur'Kesh, Palaven, etc.
-Missed a key opportunity to expand on the lore and culture of the Mass Effect Universe.
-Not enough Reaper killing.
-The Reapers an the Ending, which deserve their own separate thread (check sig, if interested).


Conclusion

Mass Effect gets a + in gameplay, but a - in just about everything else. The game seemed to feel lackluster, and rushed, I dread to know what it would be like if they released it back in 2011, it should have been released this summer or early autumn. In the end, I would give it a 7/10, with moderate replay value (very low if you're a hardcore fan and were bothered by the ending). I gave Mass Effect 1 a 9/10 (I picked it up in 2009, but it was very good for its time) and I gave Mass Effect 2 a 10/10, Badass seal of approval and GOTY.

[Mazebook]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

maaaze wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

maaaze wrote...


I can tell you that he  just gives his honest opinions about the game and it´s content...like most of here do...

Calling someone who disagrees with you biased makes yourself pretty biased...which is quite ironic...

You don't see me calling mad hannar Biased do you? No. because I've read his posts, and he's also conceeded a point or two on a thread here and there. That means he listens when people speak and doesn't just hear words. And even when he disagrees a good portion of his posts are well thought out. From Brovikk the most of what I've seen boils down to "You're all wrong, this is the best game evah and you're all unreasonable idiots for saying anything contrary to that!"

if you think so...:huh:i guess i find it pretty childish to call someone bias just because he defends a game strongly...and i am pretty sure he never called someone an idiot who voiced his opinion resonably...

But what do I know...evidently i am a Bio drone...

No offense but I do feel you're a drone. In my mind, there's other explanations as to why people think the last 10 minutes makes sense and is good writing. Most of them are more unpleasant then simply calling you a drone. You can have your opinions and all, but when you look at how the majority of fans said was bad, and how a lot of literary writers said it was bad, then at some point you gotta stop and think to yourself.

For example the movie "Freddy Got Fingered" actually makes me laugh. But I know very well that it is a wretched wretched film. I cannot accept the opinion of Pro Enders. I simply cannot. I know I should respect other's opinions but not in this case. I've see Pro Enders say they enjoyed the ending, but completely understand why people hate it. To me that's fine. But then there are Pro Enders who loved the ending and try to convince us that we're wrong and it went over our heads. They can ****** off.

Okay...call me a drone...and i say you did not get it...it was too high concept for you...which in itself is a valid complaint you can make.

well Citicen Kane was not very well recieved at it´s time...although many consider it now as best movie of all time...at his time van Gogh was considered a hack...now look at him...

what the majority thinks has no bearing at all.

It is irrelevant what the majority of the critics think...it is irrelevantwhat the majority of the fans think...

The only thing that is relevant are your own feelings...

[ld1449]

maaaze wrote...


if you think so...:huh:i guess i find it pretty childish to call someone bias just because he defends a game strongly...and i am pretty sure he never called someone an idiot who voiced his opinion resonably...

But what do I know...evidently i am a Bio drone...

This coming from the guy who compares people who point out plotholes in the game to farm animals...

http://social.biowar.../13101948/3     (Scroll down, a little below the halfway point.)

Yeah. I'm clearly the immature one

[Ridwan]

2Shepards wrote...

You sir get the "Honest Reviewer on the Net" Award. Good for you, you're hard to come by!

Thanks dude

[Typhoniel]

OP did a very well job with his pros and contras and his rating is pretty appropriate, now after the extended cut, before it the game was for me even a 6/10.

To rate a game you have to be objective and see the good stuff as well as the bad stuff. You can't rate a bad game 10/10 just because it was better than you expected.

Often people don't understand that 1/10 means garbage, 5/10 decent game, 10/10 as perfect as it can be.

And Mass Effect 3 does not deserve the 10 points, there are just too many flaws. I don't want to call them all again now. Those 75 perfect scores are an insult. I don't know how these people could get the idea that this game is so perfect. 10 points are for the best of the best.

These days we get so many games were we see the potential in such amazing things but often they aren't used. I really love the flashlight parts and wanted to get some exploring of dark tunnels. The Rachni had big potential for this and some shooting in the dark, but BioWare trolled us.

[Mathias]

maaaze wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

maaaze wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

maaaze wrote...


I can tell you that he  just gives his honest opinions about the game and it´s content...like most of here do...

Calling someone who disagrees with you biased makes yourself pretty biased...which is quite ironic...

You don't see me calling mad hannar Biased do you? No. because I've read his posts, and he's also conceeded a point or two on a thread here and there. That means he listens when people speak and doesn't just hear words. And even when he disagrees a good portion of his posts are well thought out. From Brovikk the most of what I've seen boils down to "You're all wrong, this is the best game evah and you're all unreasonable idiots for saying anything contrary to that!"

if you think so...:huh:i guess i find it pretty childish to call someone bias just because he defends a game strongly...and i am pretty sure he never called someone an idiot who voiced his opinion resonably...

But what do I know...evidently i am a Bio drone...

No offense but I do feel you're a drone. In my mind, there's other explanations as to why people think the last 10 minutes makes sense and is good writing. Most of them are more unpleasant then simply calling you a drone. You can have your opinions and all, but when you look at how the majority of fans said was bad, and how a lot of literary writers said it was bad, then at some point you gotta stop and think to yourself.

For example the movie "Freddy Got Fingered" actually makes me laugh. But I know very well that it is a wretched wretched film. I cannot accept the opinion of Pro Enders. I simply cannot. I know I should respect other's opinions but not in this case. I've see Pro Enders say they enjoyed the ending, but completely understand why people hate it. To me that's fine. But then there are Pro Enders who loved the ending and try to convince us that we're wrong and it went over our heads. They can ****** off.

Okay...call me a drone...and i say you did not get it...it was too high concept for you...which in itself is a valid complaint you can make.

well Citicen Kane was not very well recieved at it´s time...although many consider it now as best movie of all time...at his time van Gogh was considered a hack...now look at him...

what the majority thinks has no bearing at all.

It is irrelevant what the majority of the critics think...it is irrelevantwhat the majority of the fans think...

The only thing that is relevant are your own feelings...

No we got it. We completely 100% understand the ending. Which is why we recognize it as terrible writing. I guess you're also gonna say writers from Dragon Age Origins, Star Trek TNG, Lost, and Joss Whedon himself, didn't get it too right? You've also done exactly what I said Pro Enders do. Act high and mighty like you're the chosen race who "got" the ending. If Pro Enders dropped the whole pretentious act, saying things like: 

"Oh...you see WE understand the ending, unlike the rest of you. Unfortuantely you never paid attention in classes which is why you prout on about things you don't understand. Hufhufhufhufhuf *sips tea*"

then I don't think a lot of people who have a problem with you. See I like to compare Pro Enders like you, to the mentally insane. It's not that I hate you, it's just that I don't want to talk to you. Because whenever I talk to the mentally insane, it ends with me pointing my fingers at them as I back away slowly saying "Ooooookay...."

And with that, I should go.

[Conniving_Eagle]

Now the question is: What do you guys give Mass Effect 2? I gave it a 10 out 10, I couldn't find one thing I didn't like about it. The second highest game I rated in 2010 was RDR, which I gave a 9.5 out of 10.

[palician]

I'd give ME3 a 5/10.
Half good & half bad.

I'd give ME1 & 2 both 9.5 /10

[Comsky159]

Agree with OP. For me it's a 7.5 on xbox and pc; and a 6.5 on ps3 (attributed to the ridiculous lag).

ME1 and 2 were both 9's.

Modifié par Comsky159, 13 juillet 2012 - 02:10 .

[Ridwan]

Eain wrote...

The same story is true for a magazine called Power Unlimited in the Netherlands, OP. This seems to have happened all over the world. At some point game journalism became bribe journalism and reviewers just became part of the hype machine.

Taking this profession seriously is like taking psychics seriously. Both are laughable trades that exist only because there's an audience gullible enough to attach any worth to what they say at all.

My biggest gripe with reviews these days is that they're so empty on content. They never tell you anything that you also couldn't have gathered from the game's marketing machine. Hence, they are part of the game's marketing machine.

never had a problem with my squad...love the
multiplayer...journal is annoying but not gamebraking...game has the
same lenght as the others...around 28 hours...

Bull. Average length for this game is 15 to 16 hours. If you take longer at this game then that's because you're bad at it, but then that would seem to fit with why this game seems to "exceed your expectations."

If a smaller company had made Mass Effect 3, they would never have gotten away with any of the following:

1) Removal of dialogue wheels and addition of autodialogue to replace 70% of spoken content.
2) Linearity of the game in comparison to the previous two installments.
3) The ramshackle nature of the story and the reliance on a sudden deus ex to drive the plot.
4) The spacebar doing everything at all.
5) The complete removal of minigames rather than trying to make them better.
6) The complete removal of galaxy exploration.
7) The complete removal of vehicle based combat.
8) The massive reduction in player choice.
9) How the renegade/paragon system no longer means anything because we rarely ever put it to practice in dialogue.
10) Kai Leng the space ninja.
11) The lackluster nature of the game's final act and the blatant badness of the Priority Earth mission.

All of these are bad design decisions. All of these.

I'd love to hear from others how their favourite websites suddenly started to hand out 10/10 games which you couldn't understand.

Great post, sorry I didn't reply to it earlier.

[Clayless]

Did you buy ME3 after reading reviews or had you already decided that you were going to buy it before reviews?

[JBPBRC]

M25105 wrote...

Lack of boss battles.

Haven't you heard? Those are too video gamey to be in a video game these days.

[Ridwan]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

Did you buy ME3 after reading reviews or had you already decided that you were going to buy it before reviews?

I haven't bought a game based on a review since 1999.

[shurikenmanta]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...
then I don't think a lot of people who have a problem with you. See I like to compare Pro Enders like you, to the mentally insane. It's not that I hate you, it's just that I don't want to talk to you. Because whenever I talk to the mentally insane, it ends with me pointing my fingers at them as I back away slowly saying "Ooooookay...."

And with that, I should go.

Hilarious thing is, you could switch 'pro' with 'anti' there and it'd be equally accurate. Rabids are all equally nuts

As for me... hmm, I'd give it maybe an 8. It had its flaws, but I still had a lot of fun with it and it was still an enjoyable experience.

[Clayless]

M25105 wrote...

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

Did you buy ME3 after reading reviews or had you already decided that you were going to buy it before reviews?

I haven't bought a game based on a review since 1999.

So you haven't bought a game based on a review for 13 years yet it bothers you that games get high reviews that you don't agree with?

Why?

[Ridwan]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

M25105 wrote...

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

Did you buy ME3 after reading reviews or had you already decided that you were going to buy it before reviews?

I haven't bought a game based on a review since 1999.

So you haven't bought a game based on a review for 13 years yet it bothers you that games get high reviews that you don't agree with?

Why?

It bothers me cause people are being misled. It bothers me that some people still believe that magazines and websites give fair reviews. It bothers me when I read on forums, how [insert game] is perfect and should get 10/10. 

I never smoked crack in my life before, but it bothers me that crack is being sold and used. Do you see where I'm going at?

[Apocaleepse360]

In my opinion, people don't criticize things enough these days. There was a day when there would only be a few people who would preorder something, and they would be heavily critical since it was their money on the line (which is understandable, at least for me it is anyway). Everyone else would wait for them to say whether or not that game was worth buying. That was how developers did well back in the 'good old days'.

These days people will jump out of their seats and preorder something merely because it has a bonus weapon pack that comes with it, or whatever. Not to mention that the big-time journalists (such as IGN) get paid by the publishers to write "perfect" reviews all the time, and people only ever listen to them because they don't know where else to look for their gaming info as everywhere else is overshadowed by such big journalists.

Then you have the people who are far too eager to spend money on something simply because "they are a huge fan".

Modifié par Apocaleepse360, 13 juillet 2012 - 02:37 .

[Xeranx]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

M25105 wrote...

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

Did you buy ME3 after reading reviews or had you already decided that you were going to buy it before reviews?

I haven't bought a game based on a review since 1999.

So you haven't bought a game based on a review for 13 years yet it bothers you that games get high reviews that you don't agree with?

Why?

It's a show of concern for those people think are being led to something that isn't real.  A Busey-ism: Fear is false evidence appearing real.  No, fear is either the imagined threat of harm (paranoia) or the knowledge of a possible harm befalling someone (actual fear).  If a gun is pointed at Gary Busey and he thinks it's imagined, I'll pray for him.

In other words, if someone believes in something even if all evidence proves otherwise, people feel as though they're being led astray.  10/10 reviews tend to put a stain on the mark of the magazine and the company making the game that received the perfect score.  It's misleading the consumer and serves to bilk the consumer out of his/her hard-earned money.  Any time something like that happens, those involved should face severe penalties.

[Clayless]

M25105 wrote...

It bothers me cause people are being misled. It bothers me that some people still believe that magazines and websites give fair reviews. It bothers me when I read on forums, how [insert game] is perfect and should get 10/10. 

I never smoked crack in my life before, but it bothers me that crack is being sold and used. Do you see where I'm going at?

Most people, like you, don't buy their games based on reviews. You slightly dodged the question so I'm just going to assume you decided you were going to buy ME3 before reviews, which is what most people do for game. In fact I'm pretty sure I could find quite a lot of people that have decided to buy Borderlands 2/RE6/Halo 4/Black Ops 2 already, and reviews for those games aren't even out yet.

If they let themselves be misled that's their fault. Not only are people actively creating an entitlement image for gamers, they're creating a victim mentality image for them too, and it's threads like this which help create this victim mentality image for gamers. What you're doing here is trying to take the blame off the individual for buying games they don't like and put it on the reviewers, despite the fact you, and many other people, don't buy games based on reviews and didn't buy ME3 based on reviews.

Modifié par Our_Last_Scene, 13 juillet 2012 - 02:42 .

[Seifer006]

M25105 wrote...

First of all, and I really shouldn't specify this, this is my own opinion. If you don't like it, then you don't, end of story.

I'm writing this, cause when you write an opinion piece on BSN it gets flooeded with the usual people who rushes in and posts "Well thanks for speaking for all of us /sarcasm" or some other smart ass comment. Ok? Ok.

Now that I got that out of the way, this will be my first long post on here that's somewhat serious.

If you're like me, then you remember back when it was very hard for a game to get 9/10 or 10/10 scores. But things changed as the gaming industry got bigger and bigger. I'm going to use a local example to show you how it changed.

If you live in Denmark and you play PC games, chances are that you've heard of a magazine called PC Player. I used to buy this magazine a lot. I've bought it when Warcraft 2 came out, maybe even earlier, I can't remember. It used to be a cool magazine and what stood out to me the most, was a review of Fallout. The reviewer liked the game, but didn't think too much of it, so he gave it a 6/10 score. This prompted another reviewer, who was far more in to RPG than the original reviewer, to write a little protest in a small box on the same page. There he explained very briefly why he thought the game was better than that and gave it 8/10. Wow, this seems to be a good magazine, I thought to myself.

Then somewhere along the road, I don't know when exactly, they sold out. Not in an open way, but in a "subtle" way, that many missed out on. They were invited to EA's Westwood's development studios in the U.S. They actually flew them to America, and treated them like royalty. They made a big article about it, writing how awesome it was to see all those big stars that acted in the game and how everything looked so amazing. The game in question? Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun.

Then lo and behold! Some months later, the game came out, but they had the review ready for it. And it was a perfect 10/10. This made many of the readers, myself included, rush out and buy it. Funny enough Starcraft, which was reviewed a few months earlier got 8/10. Many couldn't understand this, but we guessed it was because that PC Player had very high standards. Until C&C: Tiberian Sun, only Half Life and Dungeon Keeper, and Dungeon Keeper 2 got 10/10. The warning signs were there with Dungeon Keeper 2. The only games I agree on is Half-Life and Dungeon Keeper.

Well, it turned out that Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun was a very forgetable game. I didn't complete it. I wasn't impressed as I played and began to think "This game sucks". I couldn't understand how this game got 10/10. Neither could many others, and whenever the topic is brought up on their website, they're quick to lock the threads due to the fact it's old news. The game didn't deserve anything other than maybe a 6/10.

It woke me up however, and made me understand that gone are the days of honest reviewers. You can still find a few honest reviewers, but it's not like there is a whole lot of them. These days, you gotta check youtube to see an honest review, like that Totalbiscuit or Halibut guy.

So the whole 75 perfect reviews for Mass Effect 3 is a joke. If you want to give the game an honest score, like in the old days, it would get a 7/10. A good game, that's fun, but certainly not perfect.
Here's a quick summary of Mass Effect 3.

The good stuff.

• Excellent combat system, the cover and cover movement works very well.
• Lots of different weapons with the ability to customise them.
• Melee can be very handy in certain situations.
• Skill tree is easy to work around.
• Enemies seem to work together and they mix up well.
• Insanity is hard, but still doable for an experienced gamer.
• Multiplayer is pretty ok.
• Return of well loved characters.
• No scanning of planets.
• Sound and music are top notch.
• Health and healing system flows well with the combat.
• Pretty cool choices during the game, like the cure of the genophage, siding with the Geth or not.

Bad stuff.

• The game is WAY TOO SHORT! It's the shortest of all three games, even if you do every single side-mission.
• Multiplayer affects the singleplayer ending if you want the best ending (destroy with Shepard alive). Which is a terrible idea to force those that care only about playing singleplayer to play multiplayer.
• Extremely linear, there is only one way and that's forward, every other path you see is an illusion.
• Wasted potential of certain levels. The ones where you walk around with the flash lights on your gun turned on in the complete dark. Now that would've been awesome to fight in.
• Squad mates still being stupid in combat. It's OK for Vega to be stupid and rush in, since he's tough and can handle it, but why on earth does Liara and EDI do the same thing? You have to constantly control them and park them in the back where they are safe.
• Sprites and funny head movements, shows that the game didn't get enough time to get polished. It's very annoying to see Shepard look like the girl from the exorcist.
• Lack of boss battles.
• The game expects you to know things that's in the novels.
• Journal system incredible inefficient.
• Pandering to IGN.
• Introduction of the universally hated spacebrat. If you like this character you should read a good book for a change, something other than Dragonlance or cheap sci-fi novels.
• The ending leaves you disappointed, which affects the replay value of the game.
• Day one DLC that's already on the disk, and it's not something or someone that's useless or of zero importance, but a freaking Prothean.

Conclusion.

Based on what we've experienced Mass Effect 3 is a 7/10 game. Meaning it's a good game, it's fun, but it has too many flaws to get 8/10 and higher. It's main saving grace is the amazing sound and the combat system.

Before the drones rush in and say "How can you give it 7/10. You admitted you had FUN playing it, didn't you?!" Well I also had fun playing Puzzle Quest, Puzzle Agent and Zuma's Revenge. Are those 10/10 games? No? Then your point is stupid. You're letting yourself get blinded and you ignore the issues infront of you.

you should read my review (signature)

[N0-Future]

M25105 wrote...

First of all, and I really shouldn't specify this, this is my own opinion. If you don't like it, then you don't, end of story.

I'm writing this, cause when you write an opinion piece on BSN it gets flooeded with the usual people who rushes in and posts "Well thanks for speaking for all of us /sarcasm" or some other smart ass comment. Ok? Ok.

Now that I got that out of the way, this will be my first long post on here that's somewhat serious.

If you're like me, then you remember back when it was very hard for a game to get 9/10 or 10/10 scores. But things changed as the gaming industry got bigger and bigger. I'm going to use a local example to show you how it changed.

If you live in Denmark and you play PC games, chances are that you've heard of a magazine called PC Player. I used to buy this magazine a lot. I've bought it when Warcraft 2 came out, maybe even earlier, I can't remember. It used to be a cool magazine and what stood out to me the most, was a review of Fallout. The reviewer liked the game, but didn't think too much of it, so he gave it a 6/10 score. This prompted another reviewer, who was far more in to RPG than the original reviewer, to write a little protest in a small box on the same page. There he explained very briefly why he thought the game was better than that and gave it 8/10. Wow, this seems to be a good magazine, I thought to myself.

Then somewhere along the road, I don't know when exactly, they sold out. Not in an open way, but in a "subtle" way, that many missed out on. They were invited to EA's Westwood's development studios in the U.S. They actually flew them to America, and treated them like royalty. They made a big article about it, writing how awesome it was to see all those big stars that acted in the game and how everything looked so amazing. The game in question? Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun.

Then lo and behold! Some months later, the game came out, but they had the review ready for it. And it was a perfect 10/10. This made many of the readers, myself included, rush out and buy it. Funny enough Starcraft, which was reviewed a few months earlier got 8/10. Many couldn't understand this, but we guessed it was because that PC Player had very high standards. Until C&C: Tiberian Sun, only Half Life and Dungeon Keeper, and Dungeon Keeper 2 got 10/10. The warning signs were there with Dungeon Keeper 2. The only games I agree on is Half-Life and Dungeon Keeper.

Well, it turned out that Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun was a very forgetable game. I didn't complete it. I wasn't impressed as I played and began to think "This game sucks". I couldn't understand how this game got 10/10. Neither could many others, and whenever the topic is brought up on their website, they're quick to lock the threads due to the fact it's old news. The game didn't deserve anything other than maybe a 6/10.

It woke me up however, and made me understand that gone are the days of honest reviewers. You can still find a few honest reviewers, but it's not like there is a whole lot of them. These days, you gotta check youtube to see an honest review, like that Totalbiscuit or Halibut guy.

So the whole 75 perfect reviews for Mass Effect 3 is a joke. If you want to give the game an honest score, like in the old days, it would get a 7/10. A good game, that's fun, but certainly not perfect.
Here's a quick summary of Mass Effect 3.

The good stuff.

• Excellent combat system, the cover and cover movement works very well.
• Lots of different weapons with the ability to customise them.
• Melee can be very handy in certain situations.
• Skill tree is easy to work around.
• Enemies seem to work together and they mix up well.
• Insanity is hard, but still doable for an experienced gamer.
• Multiplayer is pretty ok.
• Return of well loved characters.
• No scanning of planets.
• Sound and music are top notch.
• Health and healing system flows well with the combat.
• Pretty cool choices during the game, like the cure of the genophage, siding with the Geth or not.

Bad stuff.

• The game is WAY TOO SHORT! It's the shortest of all three games, even if you do every single side-mission.
• Multiplayer affects the singleplayer ending if you want the best ending (destroy with Shepard alive). Which is a terrible idea to force those that care only about playing singleplayer to play multiplayer.
• Extremely linear, there is only one way and that's forward, every other path you see is an illusion.
• Wasted potential of certain levels. The ones where you walk around with the flash lights on your gun turned on in the complete dark. Now that would've been awesome to fight in.
• Squad mates still being stupid in combat. It's OK for Vega to be stupid and rush in, since he's tough and can handle it, but why on earth does Liara and EDI do the same thing? You have to constantly control them and park them in the back where they are safe.
• Sprites and funny head movements, shows that the game didn't get enough time to get polished. It's very annoying to see Shepard look like the girl from the exorcist.
• Lack of boss battles.
• The game expects you to know things that's in the novels.
• Journal system incredible inefficient.
• Pandering to IGN.
• Introduction of the universally hated spacebrat. If you like this character you should read a good book for a change, something other than Dragonlance or cheap sci-fi novels.
• The ending leaves you disappointed, which affects the replay value of the game.
• Day one DLC that's already on the disk, and it's not something or someone that's useless or of zero importance, but a freaking Prothean.

Conclusion.

Based on what we've experienced Mass Effect 3 is a 7/10 game. Meaning it's a good game, it's fun, but it has too many flaws to get 8/10 and higher. It's main saving grace is the amazing sound and the combat system.

Before the drones rush in and say "How can you give it 7/10. You admitted you had FUN playing it, didn't you?!" Well I also had fun playing Puzzle Quest, Puzzle Agent and Zuma's Revenge. Are those 10/10 games? No? Then your point is stupid. You're letting yourself get blinded and you ignore the issues infront of you.

I like this human, he understands...

Modifié par N0-Future, 13 juillet 2012 - 02:50 .

[Ridwan]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

M25105 wrote...

It bothers me cause people are being misled. It bothers me that some people still believe that magazines and websites give fair reviews. It bothers me when I read on forums, how [insert game] is perfect and should get 10/10. 

I never smoked crack in my life before, but it bothers me that crack is being sold and used. Do you see where I'm going at?

Most people, like you, don't buy their games based on reviews. You slightly dodged the question so I'm just going to assume you decided you were going to buy ME3 before reviews, which is what most people do for game. In fact I'm pretty sure I could find quite a lot of people that have decided to buy Borderlands 2/RE6/Halo 4/Black Ops 2 already, and reviews for those games aren't even out yet.

If they let themselves be misled that's their fault. Not only are people actively creating an entitlement image for gamers, they're creating a victim mentality image for them to, and it's threads like this which help create this victim mentality image for gamers. What you're doing here is trying to take the blame off the individual for buying games they don't like and put it on the reviewers, despite the fact you, and many other people, don't buy games based on reviews and didn't buy ME3 based on reviews.

I bought Mass Effect, after a co workers recommendation. I liked it, which resulted in me buying Mass Effect 2, which I liked even more. So naturally I bought Mass Effect 3 based on the previous games of the series.

How am I being the victim when I wrote that Mass Effect 3 is a good game? 7/10 is not a bad score. It's an above average score.
I don't regret buying the game, but that's solely based on how I got it (I bought the standard edition, with with a 15% discount due to a coupon). If I had forked over the money for the collectors edition, I would've been outraged.
My point in this thread, is that reviewers are dishonest. Mediocrity is being celebrated as perfection and it's a trend that continues.

[4stringwizard]

Thanks for posting this. You've echoed what I think the majority of people feel about gaming journalism (and I use the term "journalism" lightly). Sad to say, it's become a joke. Where once it was rare to see a game get several perfect scores, these days you can see it with almost all major titles coming out. The warning signs of corruption have been there for some time, ME3 just dragged it into the light for all to see.

Suffice to say, thanks to ME3 I've learned to NEVER buy a game before reading the fan reviews first. And I most certainly won't be pre-ordering a game ever again.

Modifié par 4stringwizard, 13 juillet 2012 - 02:56 .

[Clayless]

M25105 wrote...

I bought Mass Effect, after a co workers recommendation. I liked it, which resulted in me buying Mass Effect 2, which I liked even more. So naturally I bought Mass Effect 3 based on the previous games of the series.

How am I being the victim when I wrote that Mass Effect 3 is a good game? 7/10 is not a bad score. It's an above average score.
I don't regret buying the game, but that's solely based on how I got it (I bought the standard edition, with with a 15% discount due to a coupon). If I had forked over the money for the collectors edition, I would've been outraged.
My point in this thread, is that reviewers are dishonest. Mediocrity is being celebrated as perfection and it's a trend that continues.

But it's also a trend that doesn't affect you, and those it does only have themselves to blame.

Threads like these create victim mentalities, which I don't see as being any better than the subject matter of the OP.

Modifié par Our_Last_Scene, 13 juillet 2012 - 02:57 .

[Ridwan]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

M25105 wrote...

I bought Mass Effect, after a co workers recommendation. I liked it, which resulted in me buying Mass Effect 2, which I liked even more. So naturally I bought Mass Effect 3 based on the previous games of the series.

How am I being the victim when I wrote that Mass Effect 3 is a good game? 7/10 is not a bad score. It's an above average score.
I don't regret buying the game, but that's solely based on how I got it (I bought the standard edition, with with a 15% discount due to a coupon). If I had forked over the money for the collectors edition, I would've been outraged.
My point in this thread, is that reviewers are dishonest. Mediocrity is being celebrated as perfection and it's a trend that continues.

But it's also a trend that doesn't affect you, and those it does only have themselves to blame.

Threads like these create victim mentalities, which I don't see as being any better than the subject matter of the OP.

But voicing my opinion (or warning) on matters like this, at least clears my conscience. I know I won't reach that many gamers, hell considering how many gamers there are in the world, I won't even reach 0.01% But at least I let my thoughts get known on a public forum.

People that trust reviewers for their own reasons, deserves to at least buy their games based on honest reviews. "It's their own fault for not doing the research" is too cheap of an argument. They could have a hundred different reasons why they didn't do the research and bought it purely based on some bigsite/magazine review cause they think these people must know what they're talking about since they're getting paid.

Modifié par M25105, 13 juillet 2012 - 03:07 .