1107 réponses à ce sujet

[FaWa]

As for this compulsion that one must change things to make it "more accessible", I would have though Bethesda had already totally debunked that myth with their TES series. 

 

Bethesda pretty much proved it tbh

[Elhanan]

Am somewhat disheartened to discover that DA-MP is the reason PC users are confined to eight Quickslots; confirmed in a recent Twitch Stream. While this is not directly affecting the solo game, it is surely indirectly influencing design decisions. This is why Balance is relative, as I will likely never be able to play DA-MP, but to make it 'fair' for console players in DA-MP, we are restricted in solo, too. Not the best news of the day....

[Yount14]

Really gametrailers? Still no dai review.

[Funkjoker]

Really? You cannot distribute attribute points and the talent tree only has combat abilities?

 

Well, at least the console kids must be glad to make leveling more 'accessible'.

 

And the dialogue wheel... omg

[pro5]

Think this is new

http://www.gamefront...phant-return/3/

Interesting, Gamefront gives it a 89/100. "Bioware’s Triumphant Return".

 

Review author responding to the comments:

 

(about DA2 high score on GF)

– Not arguing, but I will point out that I didn’t review DA2. Ross Lincoln did, and he is on record as saying that’s the score he regrets most of any review he has ever done.

– I was very skeptical of this game going in, because I did not like DA2. At all.

[berrieh]

As for this compulsion that one must change things to make it "more accessible", I would have though Bethesda had already totally debunked that myth with their TES series. 

 

Debunked? But that's exactly what TES did with Skyrim, and it worked - they changed a lot of basic RPG systems to make them more accessible to a wider array of players, and it became one of the highest-rated and best-selling games ever made. 

[ShinsFortress]

 

Interesting, Gamefront gives it a 89/100. "Bioware’s Triumphant Return".

 

Review author responding to the comments:

 

(about DA2 high score on GF)

– Not arguing, but I will point out that I didn’t review DA2. Ross Lincoln did, and he is on record as saying that’s the score he regrets most of any review he has ever done.

– I was very skeptical of this game going in, because I did not like DA2. At all.

 

 

This is all well and good, but a professional shouldn't get it so wrong.  Also, if I mess up that bad in my job, what do I do?  What do most of us do, especially if in retail?

 

A professional reviewer can't do those things.  They can't refund time.  But his boss could have (when it mattered) authorised the updating/downgrading of DA2's score. They chose not to.  The rest thus feels more like weasley words to me.  After DA2 & DA3 there was not much chance that I would buy DA:I at release.  There still isn't.  Maybe even less.  The tone of most of those professional reviews sounds very much as it did last time.  And often too light on specific detail.

[Mathias]

 

Interesting, Gamefront gives it a 89/100. "Bioware’s Triumphant Return".

 

Review author responding to the comments:

 

(about DA2 high score on GF)

– Not arguing, but I will point out that I didn’t review DA2. Ross Lincoln did, and he is on record as saying that’s the score he regrets most of any review he has ever done.

– I was very skeptical of this game going in, because I did not like DA2. At all.

 

 

So does anyone else find it very interesting that a lot of reviewers have said something similar to this?

 

This is why I love guys like Angry Joe and will never understand people who hate him. I like his review style, but some don't, and I understand that. But you gotta respect the guy for being one of the few that are honest. When DA2 came out, there were very little reviewers that didn't BS us. I think he gave the game a 7/10, which was fair imo.

[PinkysPain]

Debunked? But that's exactly what TES did with Skyrim, and it worked - they changed a lot of basic RPG systems to make them more accessible to a wider array of players, and it became one of the highest-rated and best-selling games ever made. 

 

Ehh, the problem with Morrowind's system wasn't that it wasn't accessible ... the problem was that it was broken by design.

 

If I want exploits I'll just download a mod, I don't want the skill system to have a million ways to trivially exploit it. There was no skill necessary for that at all.

[bEVEsthda]

Debunked? But that's exactly what TES did with Skyrim, and it worked - they changed a lot of basic RPG systems to make them more accessible to a wider array of players, and it became one of the highest-rated and best-selling games ever made. 

 

I frankly fail to see anything particularly 'mainstream' about any TES game. In the sense that game publishers, marketing people and game design consultants/teachers saw things. At least before TES. Now some TES features have become part of their formula-religion. (Which doesn't necessarily mean that they've got a clue).

 

I also fail to see how Skyrim was supposed to be "dumbed down". It wasn't. It was changed. Like every single TES game. And as I remember it, this particular Skyrim critique pretty much died out as soon as the game was released. 

 

I never meant my use of the word 'accessible' to mean better balanced, less broken or more playable. I meant it to mean things like the arch-typical and simple kill-level-rewards-boss -paradigm that most videogames cling to, and which, notably, DA2-redesign aligned itself with. Things like contemporary fashions in design from comics and latest movies. Things like the cartoonish combat animations in DA2 and DA:I.

 

Accessible can be a good thing or bad thing. It's a bad thing if it means "simply press this button" or "same as everything else" or "same as what you're already used to, in those other games we presume you play, because they come thirteen a dozen, even if none of them sells so well, just bigger explosions and more colors".

[Sartoz]

I've pre-ordered the game a while back based on my experience with DA:O and DA2 and the Mass Effect series....plus some early PAX info.  Then, again, The last official trailer "The Breach" is

totally CGI. It is beautiful, awsome and I like it but the last screen information says and I quote:

 

"imagaes are not representative of actual gameplay"

 

Pure PR in my view

[XxPrincess(x)ThreatxX]

And the dialogue wheel... omg

Whats wrong with the dialogue wheel? silent PC's work in games that are mostly played in 1st person like Skyrim or the newer Fallout's but is just weird & silly looking in cinematic games like DA where everyone speaks in cutscenes & the Warden stands there silent with a emotionless look on their face

[Star fury]

I find it hilarious how since the DA:I release the game bloggers started to retroactively lower DA2 scores or state that they regret giving it high scores. Looks like it's safe to change their tune now.  

[Elhanan]

Interesting, Gamefront gives it a 89/100. "Bioware’s Triumphant Return".
 
Review author responding to the comments:
 

(about DA2 high score on GF)
– Not arguing, but I will point out that I didn’t review DA2. Ross Lincoln did, and he is on record as saying that’s the score he regrets most of any review he has ever done.
– I was very skeptical of this game going in, because I did not like DA2. At all.

I did not read GF's reviews, or most of them for DA2; pre-ordered, and was pleased with the results. This kind of so-called regret seems to be as bogus as ones buffing/ tanking reviews for whatever prejudicial or biased reason they may have as motivation.

Personally, I seek to learn info about the games, and read enough of these current reviews to realize the vast amt of misinformation that is out there currently. I hope that DAI gets better reviews and scores for the Developers, but have little use of them for myself.

[LinksOcarina]

I find it hilarious how since the DA:I release the game bloggers started to retroactively lower DA2 scores or state that they regret giving it high scores. Looks like it's safe to change their tune now.  

 

I call bs on that.

 

In the end, Dragon Age II, despite what people thought then, was solid enough, which is why I figure it got those high scores. You can't rewrite history when it's staring us in the face you know. 

 

And honestly, replaying it, I still like it better than Origins in most cases. But to each their own.

[Elhanan]

So does anyone else find it very interesting that a lot of reviewers have said something similar to this?
 
This is why I love guys like Angry Joe and will never understand people who hate him. I like his review style, but some don't, and I understand that. But you gotta respect the guy for being one of the few that are honest. When DA2 came out, there were very little reviewers that didn't BS us. I think he gave the game a 7/10, which was fair imo.

Personally, have yet to finish an AJ vid, as his choice to be un-professional in his reviews dissuades me from watching them completely. I prefer the opinions of those like Gopher; ain't perfect, but strives towards that direction

[LinksOcarina]

So does anyone else find it very interesting that a lot of reviewers have said something similar to this?

 

This is why I love guys like Angry Joe and will never understand people who hate him. I like his review style, but some don't, and I understand that. But you gotta respect the guy for being one of the few that are honest. When DA2 came out, there were very little reviewers that didn't BS us. I think he gave the game a 7/10, which was fair imo.

 

I am not a fan of Joe because his schtick is terrible, and he is far from perfect as a reviewer. I recall the Skyrim review he pretty much gave it gold stars across the board, which honestly is something that worries me when Skyrim had bug issues and a lot of inconsistencies when you build a character.

 

I also am a bit more biased because I worked for him when Blistered Thumbs was around. I can't really talk about it, but it's one of those things where you see two sides of a person too intimately.

 

I respect him for his work, it's clearly resonating with people, but is he a reviewer? No, I don't think so. He is an entertainer first and foremost, and that needs to be distinct, it doesn't matter how many good or bad points he makes, really, that is the focus in the end. 

[ghostzodd]

So does anyone else find it very interesting that a lot of reviewers have said something similar to this?

 

This is why I love guys like Angry Joe and will never understand people who hate him. I like his review style, but some don't, and I understand that. But you gotta respect the guy for being one of the few that are honest. When DA2 came out, there were very little reviewers that didn't BS us. I think he gave the game a 7/10, which was fair imo.

 

Angry Joe is the man, His vids are entertaining and he  brings up good points about the game's he reviews, Its usually just haters like self important game journalists who think there opinion matters who have **** to say

 

I wouldn't really trust Gaming journalist's reviews since there credibility has gone down the drain as of late

[Star fury]

I call bs on that.

 

In the end, Dragon Age II, despite what people thought then, was solid enough, which is why I figure it got those high scores. You can't rewrite history when it's staring us in the face you know. 

 

And honestly, replaying it, I still like it better than Origins in most cases. But to each their own.

It's either the game bloggers have to give the latest EA game high scores or DA2 got really undeserved praise in the past and it looks ridiculous compared to DA:I quality or both.

[LinksOcarina]

It's either the game bloggers have to give the latest EA game high scores or DA2 got really undeserved praise in the past and it looks ridiculous compared to DA:I quality or both.

 

it could be based on that, if it is an issue of quality. I doubt it being an EA game is really the issue, since Moore and Wilson have been continuing the reforms from the Riccitello reign.

 

I don't think it is that though because the narrative most journalists are following is pretty clear. If it is a quality issue, it's a hindsight issue. But then the writing quality from the previous review needs to be, as I always say, much  more rigorous than to sound as unaltered praise you know? 

[ARTHURIUSS]

A perfect score from Game revolution!

http://www.gamerevol...e-3-inquisition

[berrieh]

Ehh, the problem with Morrowind's system wasn't that it wasn't accessible ... the problem was that it was broken by design.

 

If I want exploits I'll just download a mod, I don't want the skill system to have a million ways to trivially exploit it. There was no skill necessary for that at all.

 

I was speaking of the standard attributes/class-based transition from Oblivion to the more open, accessible system of Skyrim. As well as some other accessibility changes they made from Oblivion to Skyrim, not even just Morrowind. I could never get through more than a few minutes of Morrowind, personally, so I have no idea. It is generally considered less accessible, though, but also touted as "the best one" by those who like inaccessible, oldschool CRPGs. 

 

I frankly fail to see anything particularly 'mainstream' about any TES game. In the sense that game publishers, marketing people and game design consultants/teachers saw things. At least before TES. Now some TES features have become part of their formula-religion. (Which doesn't necessarily mean that they've got a clue).

 

I also fail to see how Skyrim was supposed to be "dumbed down". It wasn't. It was changed. Like every single TES game. And as I remember it, this particular Skyrim critique pretty much died out as soon as the game was released. 

 

I never meant my use of the word 'accessible' to mean better balanced, less broken or more playable. I meant it to mean things like the arch-typical and simple kill-level-rewards-boss -paradigm that most videogames cling to, and which, notably, DA2-redesign aligned itself with. Things like contemporary fashions in design from comics and latest movies. Things like the cartoonish combat animations in DA2 and DA:I.

 

Accessible can be a good thing or bad thing. It's a bad thing if it means "simply press this button" or "same as everything else" or "same as what you're already used to, in those other games we presume you play, because they come thirteen a dozen, even if none of them sells so well, just bigger explosions and more colors".

 

I never said dumbed down. To me, Skyrim is much more "pick up and play" friendly than any previous TES game. It's also much more friendly for if you want to change playstyle midway through. That is accessible. It helps create wider appeal because it makes it feel more fun and less frustrating, from the start. 

 

We were talking about accessibility, which I see as a good thing. I don't feel like either of your definitions are fair - since you are painting accessibility as a needlessly bad thing, despite it being a positive word with a positive definition. I'm also confused how art style factors into the accessibility of play. (I do prefer DA2 art style to DAO and DA:I to both of them fwiw.) To me accessibility is all about gameplay and cannot be really used to describe fashion or animation (what is there to "access" in that?). To me, accessibility in games aligns with the word's definition - it essentially is about being more playable and more easily pick-up-and-played by a wider audience. The fashion in the game doesn't help or hinder accessibility at all. 

 

I don't think DA2 or DA:I was dumbed down for players any more than I think Skyrim was dumbed down. The character development systems are still rich, but they have become increasingly more balanced. (Now DA2's repetitive levels and wave-based combat was dumb, but I would consider those factors neither accessible, nor dumbed down - rather just rushed and flawed.) 

[Mathias]

I am not a fan of Joe because his schtick is terrible, and he is far from perfect as a reviewer. I recall the Skyrim review he pretty much gave it gold stars across the board, which honestly is something that worries me when Skyrim had bug issues and a lot of inconsistencies when you build a character.

 

I also am a bit more biased because I worked for him when Blistered Thumbs was around. I can't really talk about it, but it's one of those things where you see two sides of a person too intimately.

 

I respect him for his work, it's clearly resonating with people, but is he a reviewer? No, I don't think so. He is an entertainer first and foremost, and that needs to be distinct, it doesn't matter how many good or bad points he makes, really, that is the focus in the end. 

 

Just because he doesn't resonate with you, doesn't mean he's not a reviewer. He IS a reviewer, in fact he goes into more detail and in depth analysis of a game than most critics do. This is something that's highly valued by a lot of gamers, which is why he gets so many views.

 

I honestly don't care about the "two sides" thing either. The Angry Joe I know seems like a very cool guy, and has been cool to his fans and fellow gamers. I've been in a few Angry Army guilds and watch a lot of his streams, and I've never seen whatever darker side he may have. But we all have dark sides to us, because we're human. I know when I'm at work I'm a lot crankier and less patient with people. I get annoyed very easily when people get in the way of my job, which can make me moody. But outside of work I'm a different person and extremely nice to people.

And I can say that about almost every other person I know.

[ghostzodd]

Just because he doesn't resonate with you, doesn't mean he's not a reviewer. He IS a reviewer, in fact he goes into more detail and in depth analysis of a game than most critics do. This is something that's highly valued by a lot of gamers, which is why he gets so many views.

 

I honestly don't care about the "two sides" thing either. The Angry Joe I know seems like a very cool guy, and has been cool to his fans and fellow gamers. I've been in a few Angry Army guilds and watch a lot of his streams, and I've never seen whatever darker side he may have. But we all have dark sides to us, because we're human. I know when I'm at work I'm a lot crankier and less patient with people. I get annoyed very easily when people get in the way of my job, which can make me moody. But outside of work I'm a different person and extremely nice to people.

And I can say that about almost every other person I know.

 

 

Gaming Journalists tend to hate people who threaten there livelihood

[Mathias]

A perfect score from Game revolution!

http://www.gamerevol...e-3-inquisition

Low and behold, they praise the story.