36 réponses à ce sujet

[Sebiale]

Article
Let's rant at them here on the boards where they can't hear us

[MerinTB]

It's funny, if you read through all of those listed, what they say, their "original" scores and their "we're sober now" scores -



it's like they want to be the people who cheered on Titantic when it first opened for being a masterpiece AND ALSO the people who after Titantic made it big mocked the film and called it crap because it was so popular.



Do they even understand what "overrated" means?



When they say crap like (and this is from MW2, a game I have no reason to defend) - "For all its unadulterated brilliance, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 is a long way from perfect."



That's like saying, "Joe just won the gold medal for the USA in figure skating, but despite his breath-taking performance there were things he failed to do!" Or "Dr. Smith performed successful brain surgery and his patient will live, earning praise from his fellow doctors but still his technique was not as polished as it should have been."



Again, to go back to the "it's awesome now that it's new" / "it's nowhere near as good as all those people are making it out to be NOW" meme, it's like they are embarrassed they praised some games and now have to appease cynical 13-year-old boys everywhere to whom only mocking everything is cool.

[Skellimancer]

>Correct us if we're wrong, but hasn't the RPG genre sort of moved on since then? Just look at the action in Mass Effect and Fallout 3

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Modifié par Skellimancer, 18 janvier 2010 - 07:52 .

[MerinTB]

Has it moved on since then?



I just watched a bunch of FF XIII trailers today, and while the story and animation for the cut scenes looked good (what else would you expect) the combat looked like the combat from Phantasie ( a game that came out in 1985, which is 25 years ago) just with better animation.



Moved on.



Just because new kinds of games are made (Cranium) doesn't mean older games (Chess) become obsolete.

I know many people who prefer the point-and-click adventure games to anything that requires hand-eye coordination, and what's wrong with that? Nothing.

[Skellimancer]

Game Rankings score: 90%

Now that we're all sober: 65%

Thats quite a drop unlike MW2 review which they drop to 85%. Guess its an attempt at publicity or something. i would give DA:O 85%then 80% now.

Modifié par Skellimancer, 18 janvier 2010 - 08:18 .

[Ponce de Leon]

I really don't see how the combat system can be similar to Baldur's gate. But if you let ignorants review games, then this is what comes out.

[Sebiale]

Yay for rantage!

Dragon Age: Origins is arguably the most hackneyed RPG in the history of the genre.

/facepalm It's a medieval fantasy, almost all RPG games use this setting.

The plot is a creatively-bankrupt mishmash of a hundred cheap fantasy novels, all churned into a flavourless paste.

At their very core, all stories are cliche, pretty much every original story element has been done. It is their construction and execution that determines the quality of plot. Pointless statement.

Every character you meet in the game speaks reams of Ye Olde Fantasy pap that seems to go on forever and ever. (Even your dog gets its own cut scenes!)

It's medieval fiction, what do you expect them to do, start spouting quantam equations?

The combat mechanics in Dragon Age: Origins are pretty much identical to Baldur's Gate from 12 years ago. You select some spells, click on some enemies, and then watch the computer have all the fun while you sit back and twiddle your thumbs.

They don't mention how you have to, you know, click the next button!

Correct us if we're wrong, but hasn't the RPG genre sort of moved on since then? Just look at the action in Mass Effect and Fallout 3 — while remaining deeply tactical, they still managed to give your pulse rate a workout. In Dragon Age: Origins, the only thing that gets a workout is your mouse finger.

They have obviously never played above normal difficulty. If that.

Despite the 'Origins' subtitle, there's almost nothing new to be found in Dragon Age. It's like every D&D game you've ever played.

No one has ever claimed that it's title would mean something incredibly innovative.



This is not even an arguement.

It's just a bunch of conclusion with no premises to back up any of it. At best, it could be considered an expository passage.

[Daerog]

Clicked on the link and saw this: "Despite the 'Origins' subtitle, there's almost nothing new to be found in Dragon Age. It's like every D&D game you've ever played."



That... just sounded so lame to me, the Origins is the origin of the DA franchise, not origins as in "original gameplay."

Mishmash of fantasy stories? What fantasy isn't? That little beginning part is all I read, and it just sounds like a rant from a guy who was dumped by his girlfriend. If lacking originality and using old gameplay mechanics makes the writer give games poor scores then he must hate his job, because most games are like that. Like shooters and RPG games... they don't change very much.

Mass Effect and Fallout 3 tactical? Sure, on hardest difficulty, like Nightmare can be, but on normal, they are all cakewalks (which I don't mind, I play on normal anyway).

Anyway, that was my short rant on another's rant. It's the staff of GamePro's opinion, good for them. Just shows they don't share the same interests as me and I won't care what they have to say in the future.

They should avoid all MMOs too, "another MMO where you create a character, run around, kill stuff, do stuff for experience, level as high as you can, do dungeons, do grouping, and maybe some crafting. How lame."
As well as shooters, "Oh, look, I just point and shoot a variety of guns that go BOOM."


Edit: Oh, good God, they flame about unoriginality but still give MW2 an 85%. Really? Wow, it's set in the modern times, like no other military shooter has done that. The only reason CoD is popular is because it is addicting as hell, like an MMO for shooter fans, and each CoD is like an expansion pack, you get some new perks, but its like the same thing over and over, and they don't care about the main campaign at all, one can beat it in an afternoon so its a game focused just on multiplayer.
Not trying to flame.... well, sorta... but... nvm I lost my train of thought on this argument.

Modifié par DaerogTheDhampir, 18 janvier 2010 - 08:54 .

[saori_shinjiro]

Well, to each their own I suppose. Sadly, you can't please everyone >:

[Spuro]

I noticed that the site GamePro Australia. The same GamePro Australia that was forced to cease production of their printed magazines within two years due to a lack of subscriptions...

[PanosSmirnakos]

Comparing Dragon Age Origins with Mass Effect and Fallout 3 was just stupid. DAO is a pure 100% RPG and not a RPG/Shooter hybrid like the other two. This shows how much the writers know about this genre. Probably they wanted to make some noise. Nothing new. I'll bet they are are going to lose many readers after this though. Especially RPG fans.

[MerinTB]

I have no problem with someone not liking a game I like. That's not what throws me here.



It's the 90 then / 65 now scoring.



While it's probably true that some games will get higher ratings if reviewed and scored right after the reviewer plays them, and then with some reflection and after the "newness" wears off a more critical eye could be turned ...

it's just as likely that the person plays the game, reviews it honestly based mostly on their own experiences, then time passes and the reactions of others to the game possibly combined with the reviewer forgetting what was good (or bad) about the game may make them review it differently than just after they played it themself.



It really strikes me as unprofessional. How often do you see movie or literary critics going back and changing their review a few months after they wrote it initially?

[Tirigon]

I admit I lold.



They fail. Badly.

[roybm]

its GamePro... what do you expect lol

[AntiChri5]

Weak arguments that i really shouldnt have bothered to read because i know I like the game and that is all that really matters.

[Noobius_Maximo]

I bet these guys give overrated crap like Halo high ratings.

[Skellimancer]

MerinTB wrote...

I have no problem with someone not liking a game I like. That's not what throws me here.

It's the 90 then / 65 now scoring.

While it's probably true that some games will get higher ratings if reviewed and scored right after the reviewer plays them, and then with some reflection and after the "newness" wears off a more critical eye could be turned ...
it's just as likely that the person plays the game, reviews it honestly based mostly on their own experiences, then time passes and the reactions of others to the game possibly combined with the reviewer forgetting what was good (or bad) about the game may make them review it differently than just after they played it themself.

It really strikes me as unprofessional. How often do you see movie or literary critics going back and changing their review a few months after they wrote it initially?

They are basicaly saying "Don't trust our reviews, we drink too much!".

They should have thought this through more.

[Saberdark]

Heh, funny you mention Halo since they took a shot at ODST in the same article...

Honestly though, this is pretty meaningless. Especially since with the MW2 comment, even though apparently they don't like it now they only knocked it down to an 85. Clearly they just don't like RPGs. Unless the gameplay involves shooting, it would seem.

Modifié par Saberdark, 18 janvier 2010 - 09:23 .

[TyroneTasty]

I stopped reading at Gamepro.

[FreezaSama]

Wait, people still read Gamepro? I don't think I've even skimmed through an issue in years. It was a decent mag back in the 90's, but now? Not so much.

[Sarevok Anchev]

1: The Gamepro of which Country are you talking about?

The German Gamepro gave a formidable 85%, while still they criticized the graphics.



2: Are they -like the German Gamepro- testing only the Console-Versions, or the PC-Version?

[Borschtbeet]

LOL at Lamepro.



Remember when they used to use little happy faces when reviewing games? Lamepro has always been the suckiest game magazine. I remember when they gave games like The Lost World and that horrendous Star Wars fighting game perfect scores.

[Deviija]

This was so ridiculous. Sober scores? Really? Where's the eyeroll emoticon when you need it.

[Seagloom]

Borschtbeet wrote...

LOL at Lamepro.

Remember when they used to use little happy faces when reviewing games? Lamepro has always been the suckiest game magazine. I remember when they gave games like The Lost World and that horrendous Star Wars fighting game perfect scores.

Gah! Yes, I remember that. Back then I used to buy Gamepro every month. I was even a subscriber for a year or two. There was a time when EGM and Gamepro were the only magazines worth buying. I particularly liked Gamepro for their Street Fighter 2 guides in the early 90s. How low the mighty have fallen...