1107 réponses à ce sujet

[SomeoneStoleMyName]

Try this, it is the same video

http://www.gamespot..../embed/6422263/

[SofaJockey]

As a Swede, I apologize for the negative review from Gamereactor. The reviewer have apparently extremely high expectations on voice acting and combat, and seem to think every RPG that is not Skyrim is bad. Ridiculous... 

 

Maybe someone stole his sweetroll...

[Degenerate Rakia Time]

the Giant Bomb review is depressing....

[The Elder King]

the Giant Bomb review is depressing....

Why?

[Degenerate Rakia Time]

Why?

in one word - incompetence

 

"i dont know what spell im casting"............

[The Elder King]

in one word - incompetence

 

"i dont know what spell im casting"............

Understood.

[Mathias]

I knew that this game was gonna be divisive with some of the reviewers. You can tell some of these guys aren't big RPG fans, which kinda makes them the wrong people to be reviewing such a game. Not to mention (and I hate to be one of these guys), but there are things that a lot of the critics are saying that are flat out nitpicky, or just wrong. I'm not ignoring the legit flaws that seem to be common with some of the reviews, but there's a lot of stupid things that some critics are complaining about that makes me wanna facepalm.

 

Let's also not forget that ME1 had some naysayer critics, and the game was generally considered to have a bad combat system. Yet people look at Mass Effect 1 as one of the best games of last gen. Even ME3, with it's far superior combat, consistently loses out to ME1 in polls. 

[Mathias]

in one word - incompetence

 

"i dont know what spell im casting"............

 

Case in point. If your critic is too stupid to look up what spell he's casting by opening the menu, going to the ability tree, and highlighting the spell, then he has no business giving his opinion on a game to thousands of people.

[Kidd]

Well, of all the reviews I've read, he's probably the only one who claims it has bad voice acting. I'd be more inclined to listen to other (Native English speaking) reviewers on this aspect at least.

Please don't belittle us and defer to some kind of native English superiority just because one reviewer didn't like the acting. I'm sure the acting is more than fine, BioWare is pretty much setting the bar in this department nowadays.
 

As a Swede, I apologize for the negative review from Gamereactor. The reviewer have apparently extremely high expectations on voice acting and combat, and seem to think every RPG that is not Skyrim is bad. Ridiculous...

To be honest, it's Swedish Gamereactor. The game probably lost 2 points because it has women in it. Immersion ruined and all that

Didn't know you're Swedish. I know I've seen a Fumiko around Swedish spaces, such as "the monkey group." Is that you? ^^

[Degenerate Rakia Time]

Case in point. If your critic is too stupid to look up what spell he's casting by opening the menu, going to the ability tree, and highlighting the spell, then he has no business giving his opinion on a game to thousands of people.

actually the only way not to know what you're casting is to close your eyes and mash the ability keys

[azarhal]

To be honest, it's Gamereactor. The game probably lost 2 points because it has women in it. Immersion ruined and all that

 

Swedish Gamereactor, the other Gamereactor in Europe all gave a 9/10 to DAI.

[kingjezza]

I knew that this game was gonna be divisive with some of the reviewers. You can tell some of these guys aren't big RPG fans, which kinda makes them the wrong people to be reviewing such a game.

 

Actually I think it makes them the perfect people to review the game, after all isn't Bioware's aim to draw in new players, get those non RPGers playing, Mike Laidlaw has always talked about making Dragon age more accessible. Not that I really agree with him but if you can make a game that appeals to both you're onto a winner, but if you want that you need people reviewing who might not necessarily play RPG's a lot. 

[Kidd]

Swedish Gamereactor, the other Gamereactor in Europe all gave a 9/10 to DAI.

Oh I know. I was referring to the Swedish Gamereactor with my comment as well (Swedish GR photoshopped Ellie off their The Last of Us cover artwork, post "favourite breasts in video games" lists, etc). I'll amend my post to clarify =)

[iNixiRir]

Power Unlimited (Dutch) - 9.0

[Kidd]

It's a joke, don't worry.The news we in the Netherlands hear about Sweden is usually about the more extreme things, like that radical feminist party that didn't even get enough votes to receive seats.

We still got 3.2% of the people's votes and thus almost made it in as the ninth party

Any way, I think this is pretty off-topic. We should be dropping this. I didn't intend for it to be more than a quick joke. I welcome PMs if you're interested in Swedish politics but it's not proper to take that here.

[bEVEsthda]

Has anyone actually played DA:O? Epic? Definitely. Dark? Eh...no, and the metal music in the trailers combined with the blood splatters doesn't make a game dark. I recall the development time being a little too long for what we got - the origins stories felt like they were put in as an afterthought and the engine/graphics were a bit on the obsolete side compared to what was out at the time. 

 

Don't get me wrong - I loved DA:O - it was a fantastic game and I've put lots of hours into it. The lore is great and the story is very good. But it's by no means a dark, gritty fantasy tale. I will admit it had some darker elements (broodmother, city elf origin, possession) but I think the "dark, gritty" thing was a product of marketing.

 

I can understand if some gamers do not want to evolve along with the company. That's understandable. But reviewing a game and giving it a certain score because it doesn't have elements from a game that came out in 2009, or 2001, or 1998...seems unfair. I'd rather see less number scoring systems and more general write ups and takeaways.

 

 

I have to say there has to be some differing opinions on what is "dark". Particularly since you so jump at this opportunity to deny that DA:O is dark. Why was that so important for you to do?

Name a "dark" game, "dark" novel, "dark" movie, so I better understand what it means to you.

 

 

Now, as for the comparisons with DA:O, we shouldn't expect the feel of DA:O to return. Now, it's OK to be bitter about that. I'll be so forever. But I'm more quiet about it. Because it's not OK to gripe about it forever. Particularly not when there is a new, different, great game to discover and enjoy. Anyone clinging to comparisons to DA:O is only doing her/himself a disfavor, possibly missing something great. So my advice to everyone is to let go of DA:O. ...At least for some time. Later, we can maybe start bugging Bioware about it again. Who knows, maybe one day they'll do a game that is aiming to be "The spiritual successor to DA:O". 

But for now, do yourself a favor and just embrace what DA:I is. 

[SomeoneStoleMyName]

Game reactor Sweden gives it a 7 and complains mostly about the combat system which is never fun and tactical combat is severly lacking. 

The same excuse they used for staying neutral in WW2, and the same reason they should stay out of stuff they know nothing about this time around aswell.

[Spaghetti_Ninja]

Any way, I think this is pretty off-topic. We should be dropping this

 

Looks like the mods had the same opinion.

 

Power Unlimited (Dutch) - 9.0

 

 

Well, if the PU thinks Inquisition rocks, it has to be true! I was subscribed to that magazine for a long time, until I got the Internet for my reviews.

[theacefes]

I have to say there has to be some differing opinions on what is "dark". Particularly since you so jump at this opportunity to deny that DA:O is dark. Why was that so important for you to do?

Name a "dark" game, "dark" novel, "dark" movie, so I better understand what it means to you.

 

 

Now, as for the comparisons with DA:O, we shouldn't expect the feel of DA:O to return. Now, it's OK to be bitter about that. I'll be so forever. But I'm more quiet about it. Because it's not OK to gripe about it forever. Particularly not when there is a new, different, great game to discover and enjoy. Anyone clinging to comparisons to DA:O is only doing her/himself a disfavor, possibly missing something great. So my advice to everyone is to let go of DA:O. ...At least for some time. Later, we can maybe start bugging Bioware about it again. Who knows, maybe one day they'll do a game that is aiming to be "The spiritual successor to DA:O". 

But for now, do yourself a favor and just embrace what DA:I is. 

 

Oh, sorry - my post was merely an opinion based on what I'm seeing in some of the reviews - DA:O keeps getting brought up as a baseline to compare to. I just think the number scoring system has become outdated in general and it's hard to get a good idea of what a critic thinks of a game by just looking at a number, especially when the same numbers are used to score games that are older.

 

The thing about DA:O being dark/not being dark was stemmed from a comment I quoted as you'll see.

 

I'm quite ready to move on from older Bioware games - I'm super excited about DA:I.

[Elhanan]

the Giant Bomb review is depressing....

So much misinformation from admitted non-DA enthusiasts. One should not be a fan like myself, but should try and be objective. Quit watching after a few minutes when they mentioned "a lot of French people in these games."
 

[Hillbillyhat]

No swedish voiceover, this is guy thinks that Shadows of mordor is better DA:I I looked at his history he put 8/10 on that game. 

 

Shadow of Mordor is a damn good game. The Nemesis system puts it above most games in recent memory.

[Eledran]

As a Swede, I apologize for the negative review from Gamereactor. The reviewer have apparently extremely high expectations on voice acting and combat, and seem to think every RPG that is not Skyrim is bad. Ridiculous... 

Vanilla Skyrim having good voice acting and / or combat? Seriously?

 

Also Shadow of Mordor, while introducing some interesting game mechanics, had one of the shallowest stories I've ever seen.

[Mathias]

Actually I think it makes them the perfect people to review the game, after all isn't Bioware's aim to draw in new players, get those non RPGers playing, Mike Laidlaw has always talked about making Dragon age more accessible. Not that I really agree with him but if you can make a game that appeals to both you're onto a winner, but if you want that you need people reviewing who might not necessarily play RPG's a lot. 

 

I can't agree with that. You should always try to focus on appealing to your core audience, instead of trying to please everybody. The best you can hope for is that you can make casual gamers RPG fans. I think the majority of us didn't start out as a RPG fan. We were all introduced to it at some point. DA:O was a full blown RPG that didn't try to streamline it's gameplay, and yet look at how well it did in sales.

 

I don't think some of these people, like the ones from Giant Bomb, are the right ones to give their opinion on this game. Can the opinion of a non-Rpg fan be taken into consideration? Sure. But if they're actually going to review the game and score it to thousands of people who follow their website, then they should at least find a person who's fan of RPGs and experienced in playing them.

[Ogillardetta]

Shadow of Mordor is a damn good game. The Nemesis system puts it above most games in recent memory.

Nemesis system was good but I disliked story and characters = it lacks in the areas where I put most value in.