326 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryoten]

Eterna5 wrote...

Ryoten wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Ryoten wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Ryoten wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

"IGN disagrees with me, they're money grabbing EA ****s!"

You guys are fun.

Well, when people pay you off, you dont exactly become an un-bias party.

Show me proof, then I'll agree with you.

Until then stfu. 

You want proof?  Jessica Chobit.  So eat a d1ck, queer.

So you have none. Glad we could sort this out. 

You should become a politician.  You're so good at dodging facts and evidence.

What evidence? What facts? You have provided none. 

The fact that someone who works at IGN got a prominant spot in a video
game?  DUH!  This means that there was a conscious decision made by a
party at BioWare and a party at IGN to put Chobit in the game.  You can
denie it because thats how business negotiations and contracts work. 
They could have gone for someone with more acting skill and potential
(say someone with a name).  But they didn't.  They took no-name chobit
from IGN.

So IGN gets recognition from one of their cast being in
a BioWare game.  What does BioWare get?  Revenue from reviews and
payoffs from IGN.  Trust me bub, ive been in the corporate world a lot
longer than you.  I know how these things work.

[Eterna]

Ryoten wrote...

The fact that someone who works at IGN got a prominant spot in a video game?  DUH!  This means that there was a conscious decision made by a party at BioWare and a party at IGN to put Chobit in the game.  You can denie it because thats how business negotiations and contracts work.  They could have gone for someone with more acting skill and potential (say someone with a name).  But they didn't.  They took no-name chobit from IGN.

So IGN gets recognition from one of their cast being in a BioWare game.  What does BioWare get?  Revenue from reviews and payoffs from IGN.  Trust me bub, ive been in the corporate world a lot longer than you.  I know how these things work.

I've already told you that this isn't proof. Repeating the same thing over and over again won't make your failed point relevant.

Show. Me. Concrete. Proof.

If you have none why should I believe your claims? 

Modifié par Eterna5, 05 décembre 2012 - 09:08 .

[Clivemax69]

If EA paid IGN off for ME3, then why didn't they pay IGN off for Medal of Honor?

[LPPrince]

Arcian wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

 [sarcasm]This is a twist right out of one of M. Night. Schmamadan's movies.[/sarcasm]

*How in the hell did his name not get autocorrected when I purposefully misspelled it?

Because even your phone thinks he's a joke.

I'm on my MacBook Pro though...

[Femlob]

Eterna5 wrote...

What evidence? What facts? You have provided none. 

Let me make this a little easier on you guys. It's not about evidence, or facts. It's about conflict of interest; whether it's real or perceived is irrelevant. It's there - and with that, the damage is done.

People will always believe whatever they choose to believe; and given the infantility, opacity and often shady nature of the gaming industry it should come as no surprise that the public opinion tends to lean towards suspicion.

Modifié par Femlob, 05 décembre 2012 - 09:13 .

[Deemz]

Can't take this one seriously.They had a member of their staff in the freaking game.

[Ryoten]

Eterna5 wrote...

Ryoten wrote...

The fact that someone who works at IGN got a prominant spot in a video game?  DUH!  This means that there was a conscious decision made by a party at BioWare and a party at IGN to put Chobit in the game.  You can denie it because thats how business negotiations and contracts work.  They could have gone for someone with more acting skill and potential (say someone with a name).  But they didn't.  They took no-name chobit from IGN.

So IGN gets recognition from one of their cast being in a BioWare game.  What does BioWare get?  Revenue from reviews and payoffs from IGN.  Trust me bub, ive been in the corporate world a lot longer than you.  I know how these things work.

I've already told you that this isn't proof. Repeating the same thing over and over again won't make your failed point relevant.

Show. Me. Concrete. Proof.

If you have none why should I believe your claims? 

The proof is in your face.  You are OUTRIGHT denieing how basic business works.  It's your counter logic that fails because all you keep doing to counter my evidence is state strawman arguements.  And all you do, is provide failed counter arguments by denieing anything i am saying with the same "one liners".   Get a damn educations.  Take some business classes and learn how the world works when it comes to business and corporations.

[Someone With Mass]

Clivemax69 wrote...

If EA paid IGN off for ME3, then why didn't they pay IGN off for Medal of Honor?

Because they already have a modern military shooter which is far more successful. It's called Battlefield.

If anything, MoH is just their way of trying to squeeze a couple of more pennies out of an already dead franchise.

[CroGamer002]

Deemz wrote...

Can't take this one seriously.They had a member of their staff in the freaking game.

And there is a time when domeone can take IGN seriously?

[dreman9999]

Deemz wrote...

Can't take this one seriously.They had a member of their staff in the freaking game.

So? As someone said if EA paid off IGN to give ME3 a great review, which everyone in the game industry score great as well, what happen with Medal of honer?

Modifié par dreman9999, 05 décembre 2012 - 09:15 .

[Constipator369]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Constipator369 wrote...

Well, then point out at least one logical reason the ndings were bad.

Well, for one, you really shouldn't introduce a new and important plot element when the story is starting to wrap up.

Second, I don't think they stopped and thought: "Why?" during the development, since there's really no rhyme or reason behind the Catalyst (or his creators, for that matter), who lets you destroy him and flush all of his work down the crapper, which isn't just a little counterproductive.

The Crucible's introduction was also very sloppy and came across as the most blatant plot device in the entire trilogy. Which also kills the suspense rather fast, since everyone knows it'll work one way or the other, despite of what the game is telling the player.

Did I mention that they changed the theme within the last fifteen minutes to something about how the created will always rebel against its creator? That's called a lack of consistency, which really isn't good for a story-driven game.

Well, for one, nothing new was introduced. The crucible and the catalyst have been mentioned from the very beggining of ME3. And if you say that catalyst suddenly turning out to be the Citadel is bad, then most crime fiction is bad, becausee we know there's a, for example, killer, but it is only revealed who he is near the end of the book.

Did not understand the second. Might need a little help with that.

Crucible's introduction wasn't any worse than suddenly finding a beacon on Eden Prime, Shepard suddenly activating it, it suddenly being damaged, delayng a plot, so we can have a few more missions. 

Well, and what was the theme before that? We didn't even know the reason for the harvest and, knowing the reapers are synthetics, we might have anticipated that. Especially that the 2 major example from this cycle - the krogans and the geth - hve been introduces in ME.

Modifié par Constipator369, 05 décembre 2012 - 09:18 .

[Brovikk Rasputin]

I really hope they win another GOTY award. They deserve it.

[Someone With Mass]

Mesina2 wrote...

And there is a time when domeone can take IGN seriously?

Nope.avi.

[dreman9999]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Clivemax69 wrote...

If EA paid IGN off for ME3, then why didn't they pay IGN off for Medal of Honor?

Because they already have a modern military shooter which is far more successful. It's called Battlefield.

If anything, MoH is just their way of trying to squeeze a couple of more pennies out of an already dead franchise.

No one would put that much money in Making an hd game so they can squeeze more money out of fans. They lost amassive amount of money on the Moh REMAKES, TWICE.

[Femlob]

dreman9999 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Clivemax69 wrote...

If EA paid IGN off for ME3, then why didn't they pay IGN off for Medal of Honor?

Because they already have a modern military shooter which is far more successful. It's called Battlefield.

If anything, MoH is just their way of trying to squeeze a couple of more pennies out of an already dead franchise.

No one would put that much money in Making an hd game so they can squeeze more money out of fans. They lost amassive amount of money on the Moh REMAKES, TWICE.

Good. Perhaps they will learn something from it.

There's a first time for everything.

[Ryoten]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

I really hope they win another GOTY award. They deserve it.

Translation: "slurp slurp slurp  mmmmm more pen1s please bioware mmmm slurp slurp"

[Deemz]

dreman9999 wrote...

Deemz wrote...

Can't take this one seriously.They had a member of their staff in the freaking game.

So? As some said if EA paid off IGN togive ME3 a great review, which everyone in the game industry score great as well, what happen with Medal of honer?

Really? If there is even the remote chance of a conflict on interest then you recuse yourself. Even if it is deserved or not, from the moment they agreed to have a staff member in thegame, they should have decided that the most the could give ME3 was an honorable mention.

[Clivemax69]

Did EA pay off 34 review outlets? Based on Metacritic that is how many have scored ME3 on X360 a 95 or higher. Or how about the 63 outlets that scored it a 90 or higher?

[Brovikk Rasputin]

So if none of you care or doesn't take IGN seriously, why are you getting mad?

Not trying to start an argument, I was just wondering.

Modifié par Brovikk Rasputin, 05 décembre 2012 - 09:19 .

[Fireblader70]

Just to add to the Diana Allers discussion - her voice acting is absolutely horrendous, and she contributes nothing to the game except measly war assets and a chance for Shepard to 'unwind'.

So I don't think suspicion should be completely dismissed.

[Ryoten]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

So if none of you care or doesn't take IGN seriously, why are you getting mad?

Not trying to start an argument, I was just wondering.

Nobody take sarah palin seriously.  Yet when she opens her mouth, guess what happens.

[FlamingBoy]

Clivemax69 wrote...

If EA paid IGN off for ME3, then why didn't they pay IGN off for Medal of Honor?

that would require an extra donation, also some reviewers have integrity others do not

[LPPrince]

Arcian wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Arcian wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

 [sarcasm]This is a twist right out of one of M. Night. Schmamadan's movies.[/sarcasm]

*How in the hell did his name not get autocorrected when I purposefully misspelled it?

Because even your phone thinks he's a joke.

I'm on my MacBook Pro though...

For what it's worth, you have my condolences.

lol'd

[Femlob]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

So if none of you care or doesn't take IGN seriously, why are you getting mad?

Not trying to start an argument, I was just wondering.

Because it touches on a severe problem that has plagued gaming magazines and websites both ever since their inception: the lack of truly independent journalism. Both survive by the grace of advertisement space purchased by the very companies they are supposed to review.

Modifié par Femlob, 05 décembre 2012 - 09:24 .