TVtropes has seriously ruined things when some people are stupid enough to think that if something qualifies as a trope, it MUST therefore be bad. Pretty much everything can be boiled down to a trope or cliche.
Is that referring to my post? 
Because there's nothing there to suggest I dislike tropes.
Ok than it's my fault.
No worries, I should've been clearer from the get-go. 
Is that referring to my post?
Because there's nothing there to suggest I dislike tropes.
You posted it as I was writing mine, I didn't even see it. Not directed at you, just the general sentiment I've seen for some time now of people going LOLOLOLOL TROPE DAT SO HORRIBUL.
What bothers me is that these critics have any sway on the game at all. We as fans have known for ages what the story is about, so it is beyond me to think that journalists (and so-called journalists) have influence as to sales, bonuses, etc.
The above example goes to show the lack of care and understanding that seems to pass for an informed press. Same kind of 'easy thing to implement' mentality is used by newcomers to the forums, and has been killing kittens here for years; why let it influence anyone?
Well the above issue is a problem since a journalist should always do their research and not make a value judgement like that in a review if they don't have the professional skill and/or sources to back it up... opinions are one thing, but being wilfully ignorant is another.
Personally, I enjoy stories about saving the person, city, world, galaxy, etc; does not bother me a bit if the tale is as old as mythology. These stories became legendary for good reasons, and likely not because of some ancient critic, but the people that listened and re-told the tales themselves.
I would disagree: good critics and criticism have always made things better, but sourcing and research have always been part of good criticism. Also presenting reasonable arguments and actually discussing the game in stead of doing a rundown of its features and what you personally liked and what you didn't is the crux of good journalism - and especially good reviews, and I'm a bit sad to say I haven't seen much in either the "good" or the "bad" reviews.
We all know how trustworthy and representative of gamers' impressions reviews are nowadays. I'll just wait and see what YouTubers have to say.
Well i played skyrim pre skyUI too and i disagree. Exspecially the inventory looks pretty bad inquisition. Having weapons and armors in so many different categories means it always takes extra long to equip anything. Additionally the lists were the items are listed are even smaller than skyrims, which makes it horrible to navigate on pc.
This.. I... *what*?
First of all, point me to anywhere in Skyrim's stock UI where you can drag and drop. Anywhere at all. That alone makes the DAI menus drastically better.
Secondly, making list items smaller makes it *easier* to navigate on PC, and in fact that's exactly what SkyUI *does*. It's on consoles where you want the items to be larger, because the distance from player to screen is generally higher.
I have a feeling I just fell for a huge troll, because what you just said is among the most nonsensical things I have read in recent days.
We all know how trustworthy and representative of gamers' impressions reviews are nowadays. I'll just wait and see what YouTubers have to say.
In destiny case both reviewers and youtubers as angry joe moved the same criticism over Bungie. So do youtubers became corrupted too or it's just a clever scheme of the VG news sites for gaining credibility *put on his tin foil hat*
So far seems , some rewievers say a lot about weak plot...so game is kinda upgarded skyrim 2... 
German Review on Gamona.
Conclusion:
“The biggest fantasy story of all times and setting the scale for future RPGs”
Contra:
Pro
The entire review is seven pages long (and as they promise without spoilers) + conclusion (the pro/contra from above plus a short written conclusion), so I won’t translate it all, but I liked the piece about decisions, so here is a small snippet from that page:
"Die Ereignisse der Hauptquest sind erneut recht unberührt von euren Entscheidungen. Es sind minimale Details, die sich auf Grund eurer Entscheidungen ändern. Mal mehr, mal weniger merklich. Ist mein letzter Gegner ein großer Mutant oder ein Magier? Erwähnt mein Gegenüber diese eine Sache oder ist das nie passiert? Verreckt dieser unwichtige Charakter oder der da? Eure Entscheidungen laufen erst in der Endschlacht so richtig zusammen und werden dann elementar für das Ende.
Was sich aber in erschreckendem Ausmaß auf die Welt, die Nebenquests und die Charaktere in diesem Farbenspiel aus rot und schwarz auswirkt, sind eure Entscheidungen. Die des Inquisitors, die von Hawke und die des berühmten Helden von Ferelden (ist eigentlich mal jemandem aufgefallen, wie blöd das in deutsch klingt?)."
“Die events of the main quest remain once more pretty much untouched from your decisions. It’s those minimum details which change according to your decisions. Sometimes more, sometimes less obviously. Is my last opponent a huge mutant or a mage? Did my counterpart mention this one thing or did it never happen? Will this unimportant character die or the other one? Your decisions will only converge in the final battle and be elemental for the end.
But what influences the world, the side quests and the characters in this play of colors from red and black in a horrific extent are your decisions. Those of the Inquisitor, those of Hawke and those of the famous Hero of Ferelden [I have to agree with the author of the article here, in that Form it sounds really stupid in German …].”
I find the reviews kinda hillariously weird in the "9/10" - "4/5" ratings. Its like they are afraid to give the game a 10/10 to be "safe" or something.
"9/10" - My character got stuck sometimes
"4/5" Fantastic and majestic games but some minor bugs
Its like with Skyrim. After only 10 hours played I decided Skyrim was a 10/10 game despite alot of bugs. But reviewers (many of them) gave the game only ALMOST top grade with skyrim aswell.
I mean - how significant are a few minor bugs? Here is the answer: Insignificant, inconsequential, meaningless and should not affect the game. If a game has major game stopping bugs and such, then sure. Bugs should matter.
But "My character ATLEAST 10 TIMES DURING MY 80 HOURS GOT STUCK ON A ROCK OR HAD THEIR CAPE FLY UPWARDS" !!!!! is the most idiotic criticism I've read. If the game has a great world, combat , story, companions, lore and so on... who in their right mind get genuinely upset over a few minor bugs?
This is like entering a resturant to rate a 7 course meal and rate it 9/10 because "The spice on the appetizer was abit lacking". I mean, really?
Just makes me frustrated to see people give a whole grade off due to some minor bugs. Noone is genuinely bothered by getting stuck on a rock for a few seconds. Like get real 
the magazines talk of a disappointment in the resolution of missions imported of the keep,they talk of the impact in misión advisor of text same of the war assets of me3.
I would love it if some reviewer were to say something along the lines of, "DA:I is so absurdly large it must be a hoax." 
I would love it if some reviewer were to say something along the lines of, "DA:I is so absurdly large it must be a hoax."
I am not a fan of early reviews, that colors their reputation sometimes.
When I reviewed games it was usually well after the game releases but that's the way it goes when you don't get early copies, but a little less bias in the end. The caveat is no one cares by that point, or has the desire to care because the sphere already said its peace.
Look at THAT score. Glad that confirms my pre-order decision was a right one.
A friendly reminder to anyone comparing DA:I score to DA:O or DA2. Many review sites have completely revamped how they give scores over the past couple of years, so DA:O 's 9 might be lower with their current scoring system.
if you dont like rpgs you shouldnt write reviews about rpgs, period
Wrong, actually.
Some of the most respected critics often reviewed things not to their liking. Gaming doesn't have that yet, and it needs it. Homogenizing the same expectations on each game is managing the same expectations, if you put an expert on a sports game he can maybe go into the detail of it, but it means nothing in the first place if you don't already care.
You need reviewers who can write reviews, and criticize games when they deserve it. Robert Christgau is a music critic who hates a lot of genres of music, but it doesn't stop him from reviewing it. Roger Ebert was the same way, as are others in various media fields where criticism is around.
If you focus too much on one genre, you are missing the point of what reviewing actually is, you become the token shill of that said genre and nothing more.
I fear we are "manipulated" by the reviews again.
I do not trust any of them right now. I red and watched a discussion with a journalist who was reviewing the game, he's not done yet mind you, but so far he says it feels a bit dissapointing. LOTS of filler content, LOTS of "dead people's notes" as he formulated a theory that it must be a Thedas culture that 90% of dying people are leaving notes... with some quests related hikes in some cases.
He enumerated quit a few things that felt "meh" with the title, but all in all it felt decent. Most worrying though was the plot and discussions which at times felt like a railroad... damn.
I hope not, but you know what they say about hope...
So all the good reviews are manipulative
but the journalist that confirms your bias is trustworthy?
got it
This pretentious one by Stace Harman seemed to just moan about the game not being (equally) pretentious enough.
http://www.telegraph...ion-review.html
It's the most negative one I've seen thus far but only describes the first third of the game. He/she complains about a generic fantasy RPG conforming to basic RPG story-telling conventions (like your protagonist being special) and I have to wonder what he/she expected.
Well the above issue is a problem since a journalist should always do their research and not make a value judgement like that in a review if they don't have the professional skill and/or sources to back it up... opinions are one thing, but being wilfully ignorant is another.
I would disagree: good critics and criticism have always made things better, but sourcing and research have always been part of good criticism. Also presenting reasonable arguments and actually discussing the game in stead of doing a rundown of its features and what you personally liked and what you didn't is the crux of good journalism - and especially good reviews, and I'm a bit sad to say I haven't seen much in either the "good" or the "bad" reviews.
Guys and Girls,
there is going to be an internet meltdown over Assassin's Creed Unity and DA:I will look even better in comparison.
Embargo ends in 14 minutes.
Can't wait.
For myself, a good critic informs, and offers constructive opinions about the material; humor helps. But I continue to see arrogance, prejudicial attitudes, irreverence, and the notion that as critics; their opinion is so much more valuable than any other. In olden times, such attitudes could be met with a rotten tomato; now it is a title of one of them (nothing against RT; do not watch it, use it, or care what they have to offer; simply using it as an example).
And I hope that the language and dialogue of the game is far better than those critiquing it.
The thing is though, critics are often justified in their perceived arrogance because their opinion is weighted more.
I mean, this entire thread is going over reviews and mostly review scores with a fine toothed comb, clearly the general public cares about what critics say, otherwise this thread wouldn't be 23 pages already. Throw in the culture of the internet, the fact that most critics are not professional writers or see themselves as journalists, often aren't getting paid for their work, and you have that desperate perception of trying to make their words mean something.
I think reviewers were the ones that found it for us, actually. For us, the game was "out the door" before the new firmware was delivered. Most are pretty understanding after the cause was found.
Is that bug described by MMORPG with the shiny armor textures being applied to the skin PC only and is a fix being worked on?
Retour en haut