80 réponses à ce sujet

[ncRidesh]

Maybe it's not a week before, but the week before, I imagine the reviews going up on november 13 - november 14.

Either way, that's great BioWare, shows a lot of confident

[Osena109]

Just looks up Totalbscuit and shadows of mordor  thing were he was not allowed to give the game bad review and was not allowed to show bugs just to name a few

[Meltemph]

Just looks up Totalbscuit and shadows of mordor  thing were he was not allowed to give the game bad review and was not allowed to show bugs just to name a few

Actually he was, because he refused to do the deal. Boogie on the other hand did take the deal. But they all were pretty upfront about it, which was good. If I was WB I would have fired that PR company, because they made a good game look bad, because of that dumb move.

[Caelorummors]

You're right lol, although I doubt DA2 or ME3's situation will happen so bluntly this time around.. or will they?

Why wouldn't they? Nothing happened because of it. Reviews have always been targeted advertisements under the guise of objectivity.

[Estel78]

I've come to realize that I just can't trust the general consensus of game forums of any sort. Too much hyperbole and oft times far less objectivity.

 

So much this.

[Vilegrim]

To be perfectly honest, as long as it doesn't repeat DA2's faults, it will probably be lauded by critics as the return of BioWare. What is better you ask? Varied level design, actual exploration, more customization options for all party members, a believable and immersive story, among others. From what little I've seen in the promotional material (bear in mind it is promotional) they seem to have addressed all these.

From the streams I am unsure that they have addressed the flashboomlol of the immersion destroying joke that was Da2 awesome button

[ushae]

It makes sense, they've been doing live streams so consistently and the game screams confidence. It looks and feels like a massive, well polished game. Having the review embargo 1 week earlier also tells me they have a lot of faith in the product.

 

This news just makes me even more hyped for the game.

[VikingDream]

Yeah Critics review sadly can't be trusted at any rate best critics are from players and in some lets play videos

[Crazeegamer]

I will have to stay away from the reviews until after I have played a nice amount of hours of the game. I'd rather not have  someones opinion even slightly in my head when I boot up and start the game.. For once I'm making myself go in with less hype, less having watched all the video's that were put out.

[MissOuJ]

Just looks up Totalbscuit and shadows of mordor  thing were he was not allowed to give the game bad review and was not allowed to show bugs just to name a few

 

That was the YouTuber payola issue. This did not include actual game journalists.

 

And on the topic of reviews - I have a couple reviewers/sites and some YouTubers/bloggers whose opinion I take into account when I buy games. Honestly, I trust forums the least, since the Internet Hate Machine turns the slightest issue into a full-blown protest movement. Also, reviewers are usually much more analytical in their criticism, whereas most (granted, not all) user reviews can be boiled into "the best game ever! GOTY or GTFO!" vs "they changed it, now it sucks". Reviewers usually articulate their criticism better, like "I didn't enjoy X because of Y and Z," which is a point where you can go "Okay, X was the thing that sold me on this game, and I too hate Y and Z. Maybe I'm better off not buying this" - so even if the game gets a deserved 90/100, I can make an informed decision not to buy (on launch or in general). Not because this isn't a good game, but because this is probably a good game I might not enjoy.

 

Not to say that forum posts and user reviews can't go that aswell, just that they usually don't.

[Ailith Tycane]

DA:I has largely been flying under the radar compared to games like Ass Unity.

 

MRW that abbreviation...

 

[keightdee]

I personally don't trust reviewers or anyone who does any type of reporting, no matter what others say will judge for myself.

 

[Timate]

I judge with what I read and what I see however I have purchased many games just to pass the time by but when I honestly feel a game in my gut will do well it does. I am not typically wrong when it comes to games or movies. Personally I do like people who do reviews like angry joe he may not always be right but I do find him funny.

[Eledran]

Reviews are not without importance if they're well written and argumented. That way the potential player can check whether he would like or dislike a game no matter if the final review score is positive or negative.

 

I only have a few reviewers that I like to watch currently because they offer a lot of footage and arguments that I also find important in games, mostly Angryjoe, The Escapist and some other internet people.

[Burricho]

All these people saying that they don't trust reviewers but do trust forumers.... HAHAHAHA.

[Noviere]

Initially, the early embargo date inspires confidence... but then you realize, as others have pointed out, that many people will be playing it early with EA Access on the XBONE, so any huge problems can't really be hidden. 

 

Not that it matters to me really... I pre-ordered once they showed the mouse and keyboard controls on the livestream. 

 

Reviews only affect my purchasing decisions when it comes to games that I'm not familiar with. If it's a game I've spent time following during development, my mind is usually made up by the time it comes out.

[Vilegrim]

All these people saying that they don't trust reviewers but do trust forumers.... HAHAHAHA.

 

 

Reviewers have a massive financial incentive to give AAA games glowing reviews whether or not the game is any good, that shows in the scores they give out.  So no I don't trust them.

[Zana]

Yeah, sorry, but there is a world of difference between what reviewers write and what the game could end up being.  ME3 had no review scores below 8/10, most were 9-10/10s.  Did it mean the game deserved it? Nope.  Sorry, awful ending really ruined that game. Some glaring inconsistencies or railroads in the plot didn't help either Reviewers didn't care.  BSNers did.  When the crap hit the fan and the forums exploded, you knew that something went horribly wrong.

 

The problem with a lot of reviewers is that they are not invested in the game world.  They do not have a perspective as to what's going on and why it's going on.  How many DAI reviewers will read every DA novel and replay DAO and DA2 multiple times to immerse themselves in the world?  A lot of people on the forums do.  It's up to you to separate major concerns from the forum members from trivial ones.  You can (usually) rely on fair review on game play mechanics, special effects, audio and other aesthetic things which do not require world immersion, but anything past that is not entirely what I would rely on reviewers for.

[The Elder King]

All these people saying that they don't trust reviewers but do trust forumers.... HAHAHAHA.

Depends on The forumer.
If I know a person for year and I know We like The same things in games or rpgs, why shouldn't I trust him if he plays The game before me?

[Gonzo]

If there is a Giant Bomb quick look by the time the embargo ends, i'll be happy as ****. I don't hate reviews, it's just a matter of finding a journalist who's personal tastes kinda aligns with your own. Also, its fun to read different opinions, especially on something i like as much as DA.

[N7recruit]

The Ideal situation would be to just have MatthewMatosis do the "One & Only" Review/discussion of the game & leave it at that because he is BY FAR the best games critic around. Both "Professional" & "Average Joe" alike 

 

He goes into MUCH more detail than your typical 5 min IGN or gamespot Review.

 

Also He doesn't waste half of his video's ranting, raving & acting like an asshat like that Absolute ****** Clown Angry Joe does.

 

The relevant stuff from Joe's .... "Reviews" can fit into 5 minutes. Matthews videos on the other hand are 30 minutes on average of QUALITY discussion & analysis. Not some "IM AN ANGRY GAMER, THIS GAME ****** SUCKS!!!!!! 2 out of 10!!!!" **** that has taken over youtube.

 

 

Also Review scores for games are probably the most STUPID ****** THING IN THE INDUSTRY.  You cannot Objectively define with a numerical value of how "Good" a game is. REVIEW SCORES ARE SUBJECTIVE. But hey, how else are fanboys going to feel validated if their favourite game that isn't even out yet doesn't have a 90 average on meta critic? 

 

Plus the worst part is that it's only used for Marketing to cherry pick high scores from. "Over 50 perfect scores!" but the game's meta critic score is 70. DESTINY didn't put that one on the box did it?! Good old Activision.

 

My advice is READ the reviews(Both good & Bad) you trust but ignore the score at the end.

Listen to INFORMED DISCUSSION, both positive & negative about the game.

FanBoys/Girls are just as bad as haters so ignore them. 

Read the AVERAGE Scored user reviews ranging from 7 to 5 on meta critic. 10/10's & 2/10's are worthless to you.

 

Subscribe to MatthewMatosis,  Errant Signal, MrBtongue, SuperBunnyHop & SmudBoy(I know some people HATE him but he is the best at Writing/Storytelling critic for Bioware games) on youtube.  

[Kantr]

So I have to avoid all social media, Stop the google alerts and leave the forums on the 11th?

[RICHIECOQUI]

I saw a reporter from a Houston newspaper doing  an unboxing of the game he covers video games for a newspaper there.  you think I should post his video here I'm not sure if  i should plus  I really don't know how to?!

[blussi]

I saw a reporter from a Houston newspaper doing  an unboxing of the game he covers video games for a newspaper there.  you think I should post his video here I'm not sure if  i should plus  I really don't know how to?!

 

I think that video already has been posted here on BSN . 

 

And if you want to post youtube video here you only have to copy the URL of video and simply paste it. 

[WillieStyle]

Yeah, sorry, but there is a world of difference between what reviewers write and what the game could end up being.  ME3 had no review scores below 8/10, most were 9-10/10s.  Did it mean the game deserved it? Nope.  Sorry, awful ending really ruined that game. Some glaring inconsistencies or railroads in the plot didn't help either Reviewers didn't care.  BSNers did.  When the crap hit the fan and the forums exploded, you knew that something went horribly wrong.

 

The problem with a lot of reviewers is that they are not invested in the game world.  They do not have a perspective as to what's going on and why it's going on.  How many DAI reviewers will read every DA novel and replay DAO and DA2 multiple times to immerse themselves in the world?  A lot of people on the forums do.  It's up to you to separate major concerns from the forum members from trivial ones.  You can (usually) rely on fair review on game play mechanics, special effects, audio and other aesthetic things which do not require world immersion, but anything past that is not entirely what I would rely on reviewers for.

 

This post is a perfect example of why pro reviewers are more reliable than forumites.  ME3, despite its ending, was an awesome game.  If my copy had crashed immediately after Priority Tuchanka, it would still have been worth the money.  Yet the forums devolved into a cesspool of hyperbolic ranting over the ending. Never mind that the vast majority of those who complained the loudest had not only bought the game, but finished it multiple times.