250 réponses à ce sujet

[Volus Warlord]

DA2 existed to lower our expectations.

[Naesaki]

I think its a case of DA II inevitably grows on you, an tbh I did like the character interactions alot more, I know some will find it blasphemous but I get more connected to a story when the protagonist is voiced.

I love DA Origins a great deal and easily one of my favourite games, I know your suppose to implant your own style and ideas into a silent protagonist but I've never really got the appeal. I suppose in a way i prefer to be the observer and not the driver

[Martyr1777]

dreamgazer wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

Non-users spamming 0/10 votes to torpedo a game or company is possibly a better reason not to use the site. 

Yup. Case in point (aside from BioWare games):

http://www.metacriti...ty-black-ops-ii

This is so funny...

If people actually stop needing instant answers looking at scores or short posts and actually use some reading skills they would find most larger well writen reviews from metacritic, or even from store sites (newegg hardware reviews) you learn alot. If you can't take the time to read a couple paragraphs then yeah metacritic is a useless joke. But its the same with anything, if I want a new monitor I look at the reviews that really talk about the thing I ignor all the "IT"S AWESOME BEST MONITOR EVAR!" and "PURE CRAP GET COMTHING ELSE!" posts, any idiot should know that. But when you get 3-4 long well writen posts about light bleed around the edges or contrast quality etc, then you know there is something there.

Just learn to READ, and metacritic has indeed helped me any a time in this fashion since it's a one stop shop for lots of reviews, professional and user.

Modifié par Martyr1777, 24 janvier 2014 - 01:46 .

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

BRO TEAM is best reviewers.

Modifié par CrustyBot, 24 janvier 2014 - 02:36 .

[Star fury]

LinksOcarina wrote...

Ghost1017 wrote...

Star fury wrote...

DinoSteve wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

Yes, yes, we know. EA's evil....However, I don't believe Bioware would let this sort of thing happen. That being said, I trust reviewers like LadyInsanity and Gamermd83 to do the game justice, and review it well.

Secondly, I am a firm believer in reviewing a game for oneself, rather than trusting game review sites.

ME3 and IGN

Pretty much. Correlation is funny.

She left IGN awhile before ME3 released and moved to G4 so idk why ppl bring up ME3 and IGN. She didn't even review the game.

Popular preconceptions? Easy target in the end? People are stupid in general anyway. 

"Jessica Chobot, best known as a host for IGN shows but also a voice actor, plays lookalike Diana Allers."

Jessica Chobot hosts The Weekly 'Wood & Strategize for IGN

www.ign.com/articles/2012/01/31/mass-effect-3-voice-cast-revealed

Chobot WORKED for IGN when ME3 was released. How about you learn about facts before calling other people stupid? I'm afraid it's too much to ask on bsn. 

Modifié par Star fury, 24 janvier 2014 - 03:24 .

[Firky]

Woo. Time to switch from print journalism to youtube PR.

(That was a joke. Based on the fact that freelance games reviewers, even those of us with steady, paid work, don't make a lot of money. )

PS. My advice, if you want the best chance of not picking up a $100 (in Australia) game that you hate, is to wait for a while. The reality with early reviews is not that reviewers are paid to write positive stuff, but that they're often given a game for a relatively short period before the embargo is lifted so major problems with the game aren't always incredibly obvious. This isn't that the publisher is manipulating the process, as far as I know, more that everyone is on a deadline.

(I reviewed SimCity and, at first glance, it's a pretty cool game. I was lucky enough to have a long deadline on it, though, and weird bus routes and such became much more apparent with more time. As a player, it's very easy to spot "problems" with a game when you already know what everyone else is saying that the problems are this or that. As a reviewer who is under embargo, it takes time, experience and insight.)

(PS. Not that I'm saying freelancers are lazy. I know a lot and not a single one I'd call lazy. Just that if you want to be super duper careful with your large sum of money, I'd wait for a while. I get money issues. If DAI dropped tomorrow I wouldn't be able to find $100. Maybe in a month.)

Modifié par Firky, 24 janvier 2014 - 03:25 .

[Martyr1777]

Firky wrote...

Woo. Time to switch from print journalism to youtube PR.

(That was a joke. Based on the fact that freelance games reviewers, even those of us with steady, paid work, don't make a lot of money. )

PS. My advice, if you want the best chance of not picking up a $100 (in Australia) game that you hate, is to wait for a while. The reality with early reviews is not that reviewers are paid to write positive stuff, but that they're often given a game for a relatively short period before the embargo is lifted so major problems with the game aren't always incredibly obvious. This isn't that the publisher is manipulating the process, as far as I know, more that everyone is on a deadline.

(I reviewed SimCity and, at first glance, it's a pretty cool game. I was lucky enough to have a long deadline on it, though, and weird bus routes and such became much more apparent with more time. As a player, it's very easy to spot "problems" with a game when you already know what everyone else is saying that the problems are this or that. As a reviewer who is under embargo, it takes time, experience and insight.)

(PS. Not that I'm saying freelancers are lazy. I know a lot and not a single one I'd call lazy. Just that if you want to be super duper careful with your large sum of money, I'd wait for a while. I get money issues. If DAI dropped tomorrow I wouldn't be able to find $100. Maybe in a month.)

Now be honest, as a reviewer yourself can you say you've NEVER looked at someone elses review and thought 'That's just total borse ****.' 

Seriously, I'm no pro but I've been around a while and seen a few that did look rather paid for, so I want a staight up experienced professionals opinion.

[Rotward]

Tequila Cat wrote...

Positive reviews which actually explain why and coherrently convey the reasoning behind the review's stance are few and far between, from what I have seen, in the little time I have to skim through the sea of tripe which abounds within the "game journalism" arena. 

Yea, fair enough, my post was too absolutist. 

[Firky]

Have I ever thought another persons review looked paid for? No.

Do I sometimes think games reviewers really enjoy games - a little more than most? Absolutely. There's not a lot of incentive to be "specialist media" unless you love games. Depends where you look, really. Find a source that fits with your general opinions/likes/dislikes, I guess.

(I'm in my 7th year with one, sometimes two, print magazines, just as a freelancer, couple of reviews/opinion pieces/preview/flashbacks etc a month. It's a supplementary income for me.)

This is an interesting read though. Our editor recent changed from print to online and answered some questions.
http://www.reddit.co...aming_magazine/

Modifié par Firky, 24 janvier 2014 - 03:43 .

[Sanunes]

Martyr1777 wrote...

Now be honest, as a reviewer yourself can you say you've NEVER looked at someone elses review and thought 'That's just total borse ****.' 

Seriously, I'm no pro but I've been around a while and seen a few that did look rather paid for, so I want a staight up experienced professionals opinion.

I have seen the same with "honest fan reviews" they are complete garbage, but people agree with them because they are bashing the game and/or EA where it feels those people never even played the game.

Part of the problem with the major organizations and their reviews is that they don't have time to play the full game, a lot of the complaints I saw that people had with the reviews of Mass Effect 3 is those organizations never mentioned how horrible the ending was, but how many of them made it that far into the game before they wrote their review.

Edit:

I do think its time that reviewers try and figure out a way to describe how far they have made it into the game, with the case of Dragon Age 2, just by saying hours and what act they were in I think would have helped, for I enjoyed the first act the most and if that is the furthest they made it into the game before writing a review I think people might have understood the review given more.

Modifié par Sanunes, 24 janvier 2014 - 03:57 .

[Firky]

Sanunes wrote...

I do think its time that reviewers try and figure out a way to describe how far they have made it into the game, with the case of Dragon Age 2, just by saying hours and what act they were in I think would have helped, for I enjoyed the first act the most and if that is the furthest they made it into the game before writing a review I think people might have understood the review given more.

I think it's generally expected that you play to the end of an RPG, in the circles I write in. The Witcher 2 was hard work. Myself and the other contribs often want to review that big RPG, then grumble about time and pass it around between us. Apparently, MMOs are even harder to find reviewers for.

I wrote a piece on BG2EE recently, too, and it was obvious there was no way I was going to finish it, so I talked with the editor about making it a "state of play" piece instead of a review. And I was then at liberty to say I'd only gotten to Chapter 2 and skimmed the rest of the content. Fairer. (And I think Baldur's Gate fans would understand that. )

Nice to chat, but I'm off to Global Game Jam, insanely. Cya.

[Deebo305]

Just gonna drop my cents here

Why do people care? I'm honestly wondering if making a good decision is beyond some people. Reviews are opinions, some are good others are bad.

Reviewers might praise a game like ICO or Broken Age but I still won't give them the time of day because my opinion is they look like crap. On the other hand, reviews have Caledonia guys I like utter trash

End of day, even if someone is being paid under table. Its down to you, if all footage you're seen in gameplay vids, trailers, and reviews didn't impress or intice you then the answer is simple.. DON'T BUY IT

That's all I gotta say on the matter

[Deebo305]

*facepalm* I hate the autocorrect feature on this phone

[Seboist]

Star fury wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Ghost1017 wrote...

Star fury wrote...

DinoSteve wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

Yes, yes, we know. EA's evil....However, I don't believe Bioware would let this sort of thing happen. That being said, I trust reviewers like LadyInsanity and Gamermd83 to do the game justice, and review it well.

Secondly, I am a firm believer in reviewing a game for oneself, rather than trusting game review sites.

ME3 and IGN

Pretty much. Correlation is funny.

She left IGN awhile before ME3 released and moved to G4 so idk why ppl bring up ME3 and IGN. She didn't even review the game.

Popular preconceptions? Easy target in the end? People are stupid in general anyway. 

"Jessica Chobot, best known as a host for IGN shows but also a voice actor, plays lookalike Diana Allers."

Jessica Chobot hosts The Weekly 'Wood & Strategize for IGN

www.ign.com/articles/2012/01/31/mass-effect-3-voice-cast-revealed

Chobot WORKED for IGN when ME3 was released. How about you learn about facts before calling other people stupid? I'm afraid it's too much to ask on bsn. 

Definitely NO conflict of interest with IGN reviewing a game that one of their employees is in, no sir.

[Wheel_of_Fate]

I thought it was well-known that game developers sometimes offer their reviewers all kinds of luxuries like a stay in a five star hotel, a ride in a super fast racing car or even a visit to a **** house in exchange for some good reviews. I read it in an article some time ago. Pure bribery, but then, money talks, no? All those naive folks thinking there's NO corruption at ALL in the game industry... LOL!

[Fredward]

Reviews are supposed to give you a clearer picture, not make up your mind FOR you. I never look at IGN but that's because all their scores seem to be 8+. I like Rock Paper Shotgun. I think it helps that they never give a score. Just tell you what they think.

[LinksOcarina]

Star fury wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Ghost1017 wrote...

Star fury wrote...

DinoSteve wrote...

eluvianix wrote...

Yes, yes, we know. EA's evil....However, I don't believe Bioware would let this sort of thing happen. That being said, I trust reviewers like LadyInsanity and Gamermd83 to do the game justice, and review it well.

Secondly, I am a firm believer in reviewing a game for oneself, rather than trusting game review sites.

ME3 and IGN

Pretty much. Correlation is funny.

She left IGN awhile before ME3 released and moved to G4 so idk why ppl bring up ME3 and IGN. She didn't even review the game.

Popular preconceptions? Easy target in the end? People are stupid in general anyway. 

"Jessica Chobot, best known as a host for IGN shows but also a voice actor, plays lookalike Diana Allers."

Jessica Chobot hosts The Weekly 'Wood & Strategize for IGN

www.ign.com/articles/2012/01/31/mass-effect-3-voice-cast-revealed

Chobot WORKED for IGN when ME3 was released. How about you learn about facts before calling other people stupid? I'm afraid it's too much to ask on bsn. 

I know she worked there when the game was released. I said it was a conflict of interest then for IGN at the time of the release, who should not have reviewed the game, or at the very least hire someone on the outside to do it who has no affiliation with IGN as main staff writer. Her leaving shortly thereafter is sort of inconsequential to the point really.

You are honestly focusing on the wrong issue. An issue that is pretty stupid in of itself. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 24 janvier 2014 - 07:00 .

[LinksOcarina]

ghostzodd wrote...

LinksOcarina cannot help but sound ridiculous, he has a very inflated opinion of himself since he is a self proclaimed gaming journalist:lol: He is like a hamster spinning around endlessly

stream1.gifsoup.com/view4/1183975/family-guy-buff-hamster-o.gif

When people have nothing but insults to give you, you know they have nothing important to say. Reported, by the way. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 24 janvier 2014 - 06:30 .

[Elhanan]

Martyr1777 wrote...

This is so funny...

If people actually stop needing instant answers looking at scores or short posts and actually use some reading skills they would find most larger well writen reviews from metacritic, or even from store sites (newegg hardware reviews) you learn alot. If you can't take the time to read a couple paragraphs then yeah metacritic is a useless joke. But its the same with anything, if I want a new monitor I look at the reviews that really talk about the thing I ignor all the "IT"S AWESOME BEST MONITOR EVAR!" and "PURE CRAP GET COMTHING ELSE!" posts, any idiot should know that. But when you get 3-4 long well writen posts about light bleed around the edges or contrast quality etc, then you know there is something there.

Just learn to READ, and metacritic has indeed helped me any a time in this fashion since it's a one stop shop for lots of reviews, professional and user. 

However, since Metacritic allows non-users access to review and vote, I prefer to do such informative reading at places like Amazon which seems to only permit users such access.
 

[LinksOcarina]

AresKeith wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

They really aren't

People in this thread have said his reviews are "spot on" and hes basically trustworthy, which implies hes not wrong. How is that not heavily implying hes objective? 

I agree with most of what you're saying, but yeah, this doesn't classify as objective.  That just means a lot of people exist on the same subjective wavelength as AJ. I'm sure they're aware of this, too. 

And I'm sure everyone who mentioned Joe doesn't agree with all of his reviews but still consider him trustworthy

Fair point to both, I guess from my perspective that is just not the case, considering it is nothing but praise for the reviews. The only negatives seems to be the character of Angry Joe itself. 

Tequila Cat wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

People in this thread have said his reviews are "spot on" and hes basically trustworthy, which implies hes not wrong. How is that not heavily implying hes objective? 

Who said he was objective? You're doing some mental gymnastics to get to that conclusion.

He says what he thinks of the game; even if he likes it he points out the problems and often makes fun of them. It's fairly transparent and doesn't beat about the bush, if he doesn't like something he says so and why. I don't agree exactly more often than not, but he's usually in the right area. Hence trustworthy ie: he's not going to lie to people's face, at least not yet.

Look at the Rome 2 review, 45 minutes of pulling that pile of rubbish apart. What were the other reviewers doing? Giving it a pass and a good score, despite the fact it was utterly broken. 

Bravo, one more notch on the proverbial belt for "journalistic integrity"

Once again, 20 minutes of dicking around with Skyrim, saying nothing is really wrong with the game and giving it a perfect score is a good counter-balance to 45 minutes on Rome 2.  The implications given in this thread (despite you believing there are none) are what I said above, praise for the reviews given. So he can do a book report and pick apart stuff. Since the review is not the focus (its entertainment) good on him for doing it well. That still doesn't make him a reviewer. If he dropped the act and did it straight up, then I would go with it a bit more because the pretense to entertain people is gone, and maybe we can go deeper than just surface impressions like many reviewers, which is what I always advocate for. 

 And everything else said regarding the need for more opinions, more vigor in journalist's writing reviews, analyzing aspects of the game as they see fit over a generic rubric of things and the dangers of just listening to one reviewer out there which skews your bias, still apply. 

Case en point, you give a reason why you like him, yet you give no flaw. Saying "I don't agree exactly more often than not" is an empty statement, give an example, of what you hate, I showed you one of mine with Skyrim.

You are all probably right, no one is saying hes objectively good, and that is my assumption in the end. Yet the visage presented by the way people express it still implies otherwise if you ask me. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 24 janvier 2014 - 06:49 .

[DarthSliver]

No point in reading this thread because the simple answer is you don't buy games based off reviews. People who review the stuff give Bias opinions, so quit looking for a way not to buy the game. Get Dragon Age Inquisition because you want to get it and because you think you will enjoy it. Using reviews for games you are truly interested is like saying you never had interest in game in the first place. I only using reviews for games I truly don't care about and/or didn't invest time in looking into them. But I never use reviews to steer myself away from a game I am heartfelt about getting, if I want a game I will just get it despite the reviews.

OP, use your own assessment on the game because of what you seen the game to offer not what reviewers say about the game. Not everyone likes how Dragon Age is so if a person like that reviews the game, well of course he will say negative things. Also if a person is being paid to give games good reviews of course it will show if you followed that reviewer over several other games. But get the game because you want to get it, quit making a excuse not to get Dragon Age Inquisition.

[Star fury]

LinksOcarina wrote...

ghostzodd wrote...

LinksOcarina cannot help but sound ridiculous, he has a very inflated opinion of himself since he is a self proclaimed gaming journalist:lol: He is like a hamster spinning around endlessly

stream1.gifsoup.com/view4/1183975/family-guy-buff-hamster-o.gif

When people have nothing but insults to give you, you know they have nothing important to say. Reported, by the way. 

You call other posters stupid but easily pretend to be a victim when somebody says something not flattering. Hypocrite.

[LinksOcarina]

Star fury wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

ghostzodd wrote...

LinksOcarina cannot help but sound ridiculous, he has a very inflated opinion of himself since he is a self proclaimed gaming journalist:lol: He is like a hamster spinning around endlessly

stream1.gifsoup.com/view4/1183975/family-guy-buff-hamster-o.gif

When people have nothing but insults to give you, you know they have nothing important to say. Reported, by the way. 

You call other posters stupid but easily pretend to be a victim when somebody says something not flattering. Hypocrite.

I said people were stupid, not a specific poster. 

That includes me, for being overly passionate in my own reply and making a mistake in agreeing with what was said about Chobot. There is a major difference between the two. If you feel otherwise, then report me on it and see if I really care about your misguided charge of me being a hypocrite.

As the old addage goes, mages in glass houses shouldn't throw fireballs.

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 24 janvier 2014 - 07:38 .