141 réponses à ce sujet

[Yrkoon]

At the very least, proof of purchase should be made before one can offer a User review.

That won't help. Because there's the 3rd group of reviewers... the PC player who buys the game, installs it, witnesses how gorgeous it is, goes through character creation screen and notices that it's got the best face generator of any game *ever*....and then he starts his adventure.... only to discover that can't play the game any longer because its controls are all sorts of ass backwards messy and unthinkably cumbersome. He is LITERALLY denied the ability to play the game because of a developer design decision.

What then? How should he rate this game on metacritic? Should he be prohibited from giving a review because, of no fault of his own, he was not able to play it? Should he be allowed to review the game but not give it a 0 because he hasn't seen enough of it?

I say No. I would define a 0/10 score as an accurate representation of a game that was unplayable.

[Ranadiel Marius]

Yes it does. Fanboys can not look at things objectively.

No one looks at things objectively. An objective review of DAI would be something like:

"DAI is a series of computer commands that when executed by a processor cause a display device to display sights and sounds that can be changed based on user input. Depending on your preferences, the sights and sounds may or may not please you."

[dlux]

Who cares about a single users score.

 

The PC user score for DA:I is 5.6 on metacritic and I think that is the score it deserves. The PC user score for DA:O is 8.6 on metacritic and I think that is the score that it deserves. There are a lot of ten and zero ratings for both games.

 

 

Some people can't accept that many people hate DA:I and get all butthurt about it. In my opinion DA:I is even worse than DA2.

[mikeymoonshine]

That won't help. Because there's the 3rd group of reviewers... the PC player who buys the game, installs it, witnesses how gorgeous it is, goes through character creation screen and notices that it's got the best face generator of any game *ever*....and then he starts his adventure.... only to discover that can't play the game any longer because its controls are all sorts of ass backwards messy and unthinkably cumbersome. He is LITERALLY denied the ability to play the game because of a developer design decision.

What then? How should he rate this game on metacritic? Should he be prohibited from giving a review because, of no fault of his own, he was not able to play it? Should he be allowed to review the game but not give it a 0 because he happened to really like the graphics and the Chargen?

I say No. I would define a 0/10 score as an accurate representation of a game that the reviewer was unable to play.

 

I know literally also means figuratively now but still, lets be clear. The game is playable of PC even if the controls are awful for mouse and keyboard. There are plenty of people who have been playing on PC for a while now and the literally can play the game. This hypothetical guy should literally be able to play the game too. I am not saying the controls are not an issue or that they aren't a serious problem for some people but the game is playable on PC, so no that would not justify a 0/10 score. 

[Elhanan]

That won't help. Because there's the 3rd group of reviewers... the PC player who buys the game, installs it, witnesses how gorgeous it is, goes through character creation screen and notices that it's got the best face generator of any game *ever*....and then he starts his adventure.... only to discover that can't play the game any longer because its controls are all sorts of ass backwards messy and unthinkably cumbersome. He is LITERALLY denied the ability to play the game because of a developer design decision.

What then? How should he rate this game on metacritic? Should he be denied the ability to give a review because, of no fault of his own, the game was not playable? Should he be allowed to review the game but not give it a 0 because he happened to really like the graphics and the Chargen?

I say No. I would define a 0/10 score as an accurate representation of a game that the reviewer was unable to play.

I do not see how this is a 3rd option, as they have proof of purchase, as I suggested. But I would not use metacritic; have only glanced at the site to see how DAI has fared, and that has since ceased.

Personally, I utilize Amazon, and they link metacritic scores for comparison. I do not use that option either. And I plan to reset Keys before I start play, if possible.

[mikeymoonshine]

Some people can't accept that many people hate DA:I and get all butthurt about it. In my opinion DA:I is even worse than DA2.

 

Well I ain't "butthurt" and I don't care if other people dislike a game I like, a lot of people hate Origins too by the way, I couldn't care less. What i do care about is bad logic and the generally disingenuous way people behave on the internet over pretty much everything these days. You know that not enough time has passed for people to get a good feel of the game and I am pretty sure you also know that there are a lot of EA and Bioware haters out there. it's rather obvious if you read those 0/10 reviews that a lot of the people posting them have not even played the game. 

 

Yet you act like other people should just reasonably accept and even agree with that user score, even though you know it's a result of bias. You do this because you have some problems with the game yourself. 

[elrofrost]

Everyone seems to be posting feedback on the game and not things related to spoilers, so I am using that as my excuse to type this.

 

Do not, on any grounds, trust the user reviews on metacritic, if you want opinions then pay attention to the genuine criticisms in these forums (some are angry and annoying but a few do give proper feedback) and decide from that if you want the game. 

 

Seriously, there's a reason websites do not get any guy off the street and ask him to review a game, these people are not proper reviewers and have no idea how to score games. There are scores of zero on the pc page for Da Inquisition, whether you are currently enjoying the game or not, it is not worthy of a score under four.

 

There will be a lot of people on there using it to give the game a bad name because of their hatred for Ea, or because they want to joke. They are anonymous on there, so you can not do anything about their scores.

 

This is just me giving friendly advice, judge the game on the opinions of mature people on these forums, and of gameplay videos and reviews (yknow, the ones done my people who review games for a job)

 

Do not trust metacritic, if someone slightly dislikes a game on there then they give it a one or two most of the time, and most of the reviews are either, one: based on personal opinion or two: done by people who moan and would make terrible reviewers.

There are a few reviews (from users) that are good on that site. I mean this game IS NOT a 4 out of 10 at all. But it's not a 10 either. I'd give it a 7.5/8 because of the vague story (especially at the beginning) and the PC controls mess.

So a smart gamer looking for honest feedback (or Bioware itself) on Metacritic would ignore the 10's and anything below 6. In that range, many of the user reviews are correct. This game DOES HAVE ISSUES. Especially the PC version.

What I find striking are the professional reviews. None of them mentioned the funky PC controls, or the obvious "console port" feel. Also the various tech issues people are having.

[Yrkoon]

I know literally also means figuratively now but still, lets be clear. The game is playable of PC even if the controls are awful for mouse and keyboard. There are plenty of people who have been playing on PC for a while now and the literally can play the game. This hypothetical guy should literally be able to play the game too. I am not saying the controls are not an issue or that they aren't a serious problem for some people but the game is playable on PC, so no that would not justify a 0/10 score.

Right.

"I was unable to advance past the prologue because I bought this game for PC but I do not own an Xbox controller. I wasted $60 on a character generator" 5/10!

Yeah that makes sense. No wait. it doesn't. At all. As much as DA:I probably doesn't deserve a 0/10 score, a 0/10 score is justified if the reviewer was unable to play the friggin game through no fault of his own.

[mikeymoonshine]

Right.

"I was unable to advance past the prologue because I bought this game for PC and do not own a game pad. I wasted $60 on a character generator" 5/10!

Yeah that makes sense. No wait. it doesn't.

 

No you are right it doesn't. Neither does completely disregarding the argument you are responding to.  If you wish to argue with yourself then please just don't bother responding to me. 

[mikeymoonshine]

There are a few reviews (from users) that are good on that site. I mean this game IS NOT a 4 out of 10 at all. But it's not a 10 either. I'd give it a 7.5/8 because of the vague story (especially at the beginning) and the PC controls mess.

So a smart gamer looking for honest feedback (or Bioware itself) on Metacritic would ignore the 10's and anything below 6. In that range, many of the user reviews are correct. This game DOES HAVE ISSUES. Especially the PC version.

What I find striking are the professional reviews. None of them mentioned the funky PC controls, or the obvious "console port" feel. Also the various tech issues people are having.

 

That is a bit odd tbh, especially considering a lot of critics mentioned the bugs despite them not seeming to be a big problem for most players (as far as I am seeing). Many of them played on console so that would explain it for a lot of the reviews but they didn't all play on console. PC gamer did mention the control problems but listed them as minor so idk tbh. 

[Yrkoon]

Ok, lets try this again.

The game is playable of PC even if the controls are awful for mouse and keyboard.

Not for the Individual reviewer who's choosing to give the game a 0/10 because he could not play it.

A metacritic reviewer is not supposed to form his review based on some collective experience of the masses. he's supposed to rate the game based on his OWN experience of it.

So yes, if he gives the game a 0/10 because he found it mechanically unplayable, it's justified. And, in fact, such a review is closer to Objective than someone who rates the game a 9 or 10 because he thought the romances and the narrative were "awesomesauce!"

[mikeymoonshine]

Ok, lets try this again.

Not for the Individual reviewer who's choosing to give the game a 0/10 because he could not play it.

A metacritic reviewer is not supposed to form his review based on some collective experience of the masses. he's supposed to rate the game based on his OWN experience of it.

So yes, if he gives the game a 0/10 because he found it mechanically unplayable, it's justified. And, in fact, such a review is closer to Objective than someone who rates the game a 9 or 10 because he thought the romances and the narrative were "awesomesauce!"

 

Ugh, once again if you wish to argue with yourself please do so and just leave me out of it. 

 

I'll explain once more. The game is playable on PC this person can still play the game he/she just had difficulty with the controls. That doesn't make the game unplayable or warrant a zero and yes actually it pretty much is the same as giving it a nine out of ten for the romances.  Of course though, anyone is able to judge the game however they wish and give it the score they feel it deserves based on their own opinion. That doesn't mean their opinion is worth listening to though or that it is in any way objective. 

 

I was simply pointing out that an experience like this one  "controls are all sorts of ass backwards messy and unthinkably cumbersome" Does not mean the game is "literally" unplayable. Finding a game unplayable and it literally being unplayable are not the same thing. Obviously a lot of people do not like the PC controls, some are having trouble with them, that doesn't mean the game is unplayable.

[Yrkoon]

Ugh, once again if you wish to argue with yourself please do so and just leave me out of it. 
 
The game is playable on PC this person can still play the game he/she just had difficulty with the controls.

I've got 2 people on this very forum who suffer from Parkinsons and stroke-related afflictions who will flat out tell you you're full of sh*t and that the game is unplayable for them due to the specific control schemes that are not re-mappable to the mouse.

So no, we're right back to the individual-viewpoint issue here, which you'll never overcome.

[Elhanan]

Ok, lets try this again.

Not for the Individual reviewer who's choosing to give the game a 0/10 because he could not play it.

A metacritic reviewer is not supposed to form his review based on some collective experience of the masses. he's supposed to rate the game based on his OWN experience of it.

So yes, if he gives the game a 0/10 because he found it mechanically unplayable, it's justified. And, in fact, such a review is closer to Objective than someone who rates the game a 9 or 10 because he thought the romances and the narrative were "awesomesauce!"

Trying to mediate a bit here, so pls excuse the attempt as a goodwill gesture.

If mechanics make it agonizing to play the game, a Real Player/ User is completely within their rights to post a 0/10, and explain to others why the low score. This is how I avoided one title that seemed to wipe hard drives when uninstalled; good information to have.

That said, I am reading a lot of complaints here on BSN (still not using metacritic at all) that appear to be possible fixed or remedied by resetting the K&M to personal preferences before play. As I am Techless, I do not know the extent as to what limits, restrictions, or possibilities can be done, but at least some issues can seeming be easy to resolve. Personally, if such options are available, I would not fault the game for this, but can see why some others would.

@ Yrkoon - Based on feedback, it seems that the physical copy does install from the disks; not forced into DL. This is a huge step forward for me from some past games, including Skyrim. Still wish to thank you for the tips in making that install less harsh.

[Yrkoon]

That said, I am reading a lot of complaints here on BSN (still not using metacritic at all) that appear to be possible fixed or remedied by resetting the K&M to personal preferences before play. As I am Techless, I do not know the extent as to what limits, restrictions, or possibilities can be done, but at least some issues can seeming be easy to resolve. Personally, if such options are available, I would not fault the game for this, but can see why some others would.

There isn't. You can remap the keybindings as you wish. But there's no option to do anything with your mouse other than the standard useless nonsense (Ie. invert Y axis, mouse sensitivity etc) And *that's* the real problem here. There's just Keyboard mashing. Simply walking around requires 4 fingers of one hand and 2 fingers of the other....simultaneously. There's no point and click! When one has to stop and think about the multiple steps involved in approaching an NPC and initiating a conversation with them....in a bioware game... The system has failed. Period.

[Melca36]

Everyone seems to be posting feedback on the game and not things related to spoilers, so I am using that as my excuse to type this.

 

Do not, on any grounds, trust the user reviews on metacritic, if you want opinions then pay attention to the genuine criticisms in these forums (some are angry and annoying but a few do give proper feedback) and decide from that if you want the game. 

 

Seriously, there's a reason websites do not get any guy off the street and ask him to review a game, these people are not proper reviewers and have no idea how to score games. There are scores of zero on the pc page for Da Inquisition, whether you are currently enjoying the game or not, it is not worthy of a score under four.

 

There will be a lot of people on there using it to give the game a bad name because of their hatred for Ea, or because they want to joke. They are anonymous on there, so you can not do anything about their scores.

 

This is just me giving friendly advice, judge the game on the opinions of mature people on these forums, and of gameplay videos and reviews (yknow, the ones done my people who review games for a job)

 

Do not trust metacritic, if someone slightly dislikes a game on there then they give it a one or two most of the time, and most of the reviews are either, one: based on personal opinion or two: done by people who moan and would make terrible reviewers.

 

 

Metacritic is a troll website. IGNORE IT. Its full of haters who get off on being bullying and hating.

[Sylentmana]

Angry gamer rage on both sides it seems.  This is getting ridonculous.

 

"Raaarwg! I got my hopes up and the Bioware didn't give me exactly what I want! Raaarwg!"

"Raaarwg! I love Bioware and they can do no wrong ever! Your opinions and criticisms don't match mine so you are wrong! Raaarwg!"

 

In this kind of debate, everyone loses.

[Elhanan]

There isn't. You can remap the keybindings as you wish. But there's no option to do anything with your mouse other than the standard useless nonsense (Ie. invert Y axis, mouse sensitivity etc) And *that's* the real problem here. There's just Keyboard mashing. Simply walking around requires 4 fingers of one hand and 2 fingers of the other....simultaneously. There's no point and click! When one has to stop and think about the multiple steps involved in approaching an NPC and initiating a conversation with them....in a bioware game... The system has failed. Period.

Am guessing you mean WASD plus Mouse hold like Skyrim and SWTOR. Would a gaming mouse help? I ask, as another stroke victim, that I do prefer Point & Click, but have become proficient at the other type. It does wear on the fingers, so I rest rather often. And I have read the Tac-Cam helps with this; my combat style of choice anyway.

[Vox Draco]

Ever since Forbes covered the whole ME3 scandal in an unbiased and insightful way I check them out now and then on big game issues and topics. They are not a "true" game-site, so I consider their viewpoints usually a bit more unbiased and critical ....

 

http://www.forbes.co...bioware-needed/

 

http://www.forbes.co...bioware-needed/

 

Usercritics? Well, on one hand it would be silly to avoid that kind of opinion totally. But some are ... well, let's say some fans that think they are totally right are often not, and some are only on a crusade against bioware or EA or "modern" gaming anyway and have their reviews done even way before release in their heads. Not all of them. And others are just too blind sometimes to see obvious flaws

[Gigamantis]

Yes Professional reviews which normally are bought by the company to begin with in the most industries.  I value everyday honest gamer's opinions then I do opinion of "Professional Reviewers".  Key word though for that is honest, that's something you'll have a hard time finding anymore.

 

I'm sure you're equipped to prove this ridiculous, made up point?  Of course not.  Professional reviews are well constructed and actually talk about the game instead of flaming the publisher.  User reviews are in majority useless garbage.  The end.

[Elhanan]

I'm sure you're equipped to prove this ridiculous, made up point?  Of course not.  Professional reviews are well constructed and actually talk about the game instead of flaming the publisher.  User reviews are in majority useless garbage.  The end.

Not quite, as some so-called professional reviews allow their own bias to taint the reviews, too. They should be well constructed and informative, but some also appear to fail here.

[JimBlandings]

I'm sure you're equipped to prove this ridiculous, made up point?  Of course not.  Professional reviews are well constructed and actually talk about the game instead of flaming the publisher.  User reviews are in majority useless garbage.  The end.

 

It is well known that reviewers are bought or blackmailed by publishers into giving their games good reviews.  Don't be so naive/ignorant.  Educate yourself.

[Elhanan]

It is well known that reviewers are bought or blackmailed by publishers into giving their games good reviews.  Don't be so naive/ignorant.  Educate yourself.

if it well known, then providing evidentiary links should not present a problem. Gossip =/= fact.

[Gigamantis]

It is well known that reviewers are bought or blackmailed by publishers into giving their games good reviews.  Don't be so naive/ignorant.  Educate yourself.

Well known by who?  A lot of idiots spout this nonsense without providing actual proof that this is a wide-spread practice, but that doesn't make it well known. 

 

I think you need to stop basing your understanding of the industry on forum conspiracy nonsense.  Professional reviews are usually pretty spot-on while user-reviews usually bash the publisher and give the game a 0.  Tell me who is objectively more trustworthy?

[Rawgrim]

I'm sure you're equipped to prove this ridiculous, made up point?  Of course not.  Professional reviews are well constructed and actually talk about the game instead of flaming the publisher.  User reviews are in majority useless garbage.  The end.

 

I know a few game developers personally, and they have told me flat out that reviewers are bought and paid. It is corrupt as hell. One of the devs I know was even embarrassed when a game he had been involved with making got a 9 or a 10. He new perfectly well it wasn't the quality of the game that got a score that high.