350 réponses à ce sujet

[BammBamm]

[DragonKingReborn]

Honestly, if you're on the forum, I doubt you really care about some user score on metacritic.

 

Unless you posted it yourself and are looking to create some mayhem.  Trolls will always be trollin'.

[cronshaw]

Metacritic user scores are a joke

[ZipZap2000]

It's just another shiny example of PC brats getting mad. Anyone taking them at their word is a bit of a fool really when it's obvious they're peeved because bioware didn't go out of their way to make them feel special.

[Gel214th]

It's just another shiny example of PC brats getting mad. Anyone taking them at their word is a bit of a fool really when it's obvious they're peeved because bioware didn't go out of their way to make them feel special.

Really?

 

What are some of the top problems that PC users , and mouse and keyboard players specifically, have with DA:I? 

[Rhiens VI]

Whole Metacritic model is a joke.

 

It's a battlefield of trolls and anti-troll trolls who beat eachother into a bloody pulp with "0/10" and "10/10" scores.

 

Just ignore it.

[Vanth]

It is interesting that the PC version gets (at the time of posting) a public score of 7.6 for PS4 but a 5.5 for PC. I think this reflects the (lack of) quality of the PC port.

[Heathen Oxman]

Anything that allows the unwashed masses to review anything should be taken with a grain of salt, if you look at it at all.  The online culture has turned into a culture of it's cool to hate EVERYTHING.

 

According to them every game is the worst game ever made, every TV show is the worst on television, and every movie is the worst thing ever filmed.

 

 

They have actually reached the point where they are just a parody.

 

Absolutely this.

[Sicae]

I keep seeing posts with folks referencing metacritic and even being discouraged as a result of the user scores and deciding to hold off based on those scores. One might get the impression if you were to go to metacritic and look at the user scores for the PC, PS4 and XBOX one that the game is horrible with the pS4 version being the best of the 3. Then you go start reading the user reviews and there are so many folks with duplicate accounts putting zero or not using any logic with their score.

 

Then you go to the Playstation store which has more than double the amount of PC reviews currently (3543 on PS4 votes to 1337 votes on Metacritic) and the game gets 5 stars on average for the PS4 and a 5.5 on Metacritic for the PC (basically 2 1/2 stars). The PS4 version gets only a 7.3 on Metacritic with 1/7th the amount of reviews.

 

What is wrong with that site? Anyone with any logic skills can see that its obvious that the critic scores are much more in line with the average user experience for the 99.9% of folks that don't go to Metacritic, don't rate the game, or don't visit forums in general. That site shouldn't even allow user scores as they are hurting the gaming industry, not helping when the reviews are so obviously filled with trolls...and no...I don't think the proportion of folks or their intent of rating a game a 10 is in line with the proportion of folks and their corresponding intent to rate the game a zero. People might be having a time of their life and rating the game a 10 despite bugs or issues installing...but to give the game a zero with this enormous complex world that is so easy on the eyes is a joke...even if it isn't your type of game. 

Scores are not reviews, and the important part of a review is the text and not the score since reducing an activity that could last 100 hours to a number between 0 to 10 is just silly. Taking an average of those numbers to create another numbers is just aggregated silliness.

 

When it comes to users, its better to see how many people are positive, mixed and negative because that is something you could actually understand. Doing so you would find that 50% are positive, 10% are mixed and 40% are negative. Compare that to PS4 and you find that twice as many PC players are negative about the game. If you read the sensible user reviews you would find out why.

 

 

Don't ignore criticism just because you don't agree with it.

[Merlanni]

When a site reviews a game, look at the size of the add....

 

Console review are often pasted and copied to PC.

 

And believe me, when we have a 100+ pages treads about PC problems, there are PC problems.  And when a site does not mention those....

[TheBigLebowski]

Well my brother has the pc version and I have the ps4 and at this moment I win. 

[Merlanni]

It's just another shiny example of PC brats getting mad. Anyone taking them at their word is a bit of a fool really when it's obvious they're peeved because bioware didn't go out of their way to make them feel special.

Put a sock in it. My PC crashes every 10 minutes. No other game does.

 

Is there a PC problem? Yes, a huge one.

 

And I did not mention the gameplay, just the stability.

[Keithian]

Scores are not reviews, and the important part of a review is the text and not the score since reducing an activity that could last 100 hours to a number between 0 to 10 is just silly. Taking an average of those numbers to create another numbers is just aggregated silliness.

 

When it comes to users, its better to see how many people are positive, mixed and negative because that is something you could actually understand. Doing so you would find that 50% are positive, 10% are mixed and 40% are negative. Compare that to PS4 and you find that twice as many PC players are negative about the game. If you read the sensible user reviews you would find out why.

 

 

Don't ignore criticism just because you don't agree with it.

 

First of all, its not wise to put words in peoples mouths.Who said anything about ignoring criticism? Maybe you need to start your own thread about how negative reviews can still provide good criticism. This thread was about how I was seeing posts of people being discouraged by the scores themselves. I've even seen references by media commenting on the negative metacritic user scores. Then someone who isn't as familiar with forums, or metacritic, etc see's something like that and passes on what may end up being one of their favorite games. 

 

Of course there is valid criticism. I have my own. There is a reason why I didn't get this on a PC even though I'm a HUGE pc gamer, especially MMOs. It was to avoid all of the crap I've gone through with various unresolved anomalies after playing Skyrim, Age of Conan online, Elder Scrolls Online, etc where I spent more time troubleshooting driver issues, sound issues, fps quirks, stuttering, etc then I did playing the games sometimes. For this game, I wish the companions wouldn't do weird things when walking around the cities, I wish that the very beginning of the game wasn't in an ugly setting and was just a better newcomer experience in general (lore and tutorial wise), I wish the game had day night cycles, I wish the inventory would give a much better idea of what can be sold and if you accidentally sell something...that 5 days later you can go and get it..etc...etc...etc.....but I still think this is a fantastic playing experience and this thread is about the ridiculousness I see specifically on metacritic and the rampant duplicate accounts of copy and paste negativity giving zero when anyone with half a brain would realize this game is not a zero whether you like it or not.

[Keithian]

It is interesting that the PC version gets (at the time of posting) a public score of 7.6 for PS4 but a 5.5 for PC. I think this reflects the (lack of) quality of the PC port.

 

I agree with you, one could generalize based on what you wrote and I agree the PS4 version on average is probably a more stable  and enjoyable playing environment for now..at least until they address in subsequent patches, but the scores themselves on all platforms I would still wager that the rating of the 99.9% of people playing the game who don't visit forum, or metacritic, etc are a lot higher than what people are posting on metacritic.

[DukeMcFishy]

Who takes Metacritic seriously nowadays? The Metacritic system is broken beyond believe. I never ever look on Metacritic to get an idea whether a game is good or not. It's trash.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Metacritic's system may be broken, but that doesn't mean that there are a LOT of people out there who don't like the game (myself included).

 

At this moment in time

 

50% of reviewers have reviewed it positively.

7% gave it an average review.

43% gave it a negative review.

 

Now there'll be double accounts and such fixing on both sides of the scale, but what you can't deny is that a significant number of people don't like the game. And if you read the reviews a lot of those people explain their views and reasons why very well.

 

From the percentages above it's would probably be a 6/10 game, which I personally disagree with (4/10 for me) but I can see why some people would like it so why it would deserve a 6/10 mark.

 

What it isn't is the stunning game which we're told it is by many reviewers, even the biggest fans on here acknowledge the flaws. You only have to look at Metacritic's Witcher 2 review to see that - if someone makes a good game - then generally it gets a decent score.

 

Sorry, but those who dismiss Metacritic are simply in denial. It's good that they have found enjoyment in the game, but that doesn't mean it's as good as other games out there and that everyone else likes it.

[DragonKingReborn]

Metacritic's system may be broken, but that doesn't mean that there are a LOT of people out there who don't like the game (myself included).

 

At this moment in time

 

50% of reviewers have reviewed it positively.

7% gave it an average review.

43% gave it a negative review.

 

Now there'll be double accounts and such fixing on both sides of the scale, but what you can't deny is that a significant number of people don't like the game. And if you read the reviews a lot of those people explain their views and reasons why very well.

 

From the percentages above it's would probably be a 6/10 game, which I personally disagree with (4/10 for me) but I can see why some people would like it so why it would deserve a 6/10 mark.

 

What it isn't is the stunning game which we're told it is by many reviewers, even the biggest fans on here acknowledge the flaws. You only have to look at Metacritic's Witcher 2 review to see that - if someone makes a good game - then generally it gets a decent score.

 

Sorry, but those who dismiss Metacritic are simply in denial. It's good that they have found enjoyment in the game, but that doesn't mean it's as good as other games out there and that everyone else likes it.

 

And giving something credence it doesn't deserve because it fits with your perception is confirmation bias.

 

Some of the bad reviews will be genuine.  No doubt.  There will be people that absolutely did not like the game.  But the number of 0/10 reviews that are everpresent with Bioware/EA titles is too suggestive of an agenda.

 

0/10 suggests the game(s) in question failed completely at everything it tried to accomplish.  Which is demonstrably untrue.  10/10 is almost as useless (not quite, but almost) as it suggests that the game achieved everything it set out to do.  This is only believable if we assume they set out to anger keyboard/mouse PC players, which I find difficult to accept as fact.

 

Metacritic might (and I don't believe this to be true, but I've been wrong about things before) be useful with regards to games that aren't published by EA/Ubisoft/Activision but with games from those publishers....no.  There will be people that don't like the games - like DA:I - but almost all the 0/10s are from people that just want to poke 'the big guys'.

[SpunkyMonkey]

And giving something credence it doesn't deserve because it fits with your perception is confirmation bias.

 

Some of the bad reviews will be genuine.  No doubt.  There will be people that absolutely did not like the game.  But the number of 0/10 reviews that are everpresent with Bioware/EA titles is too suggestive of an agenda.

 

0/10 suggests the game(s) in question failed completely at everything it tried to accomplish.  Which is demonstrably untrue.  10/10 is almost as useless (not quite, but almost) as it suggests that the game achieved everything it set out to do.  This is only believable if we assume they set out to anger keyboard/mouse PC players, which I find difficult to accept as fact.

 

Metacritic might (and I don't believe this to be true, but I've been wrong about things before) be useful with regards to games that aren't published by EA/Ubisoft/Activision but with games from those publishers....no.  There will be people that don't like the games - like DA:I - but almost all the 0/10s are from people that just want to poke 'the big guys'.

 

It paints a clearer picture if you stop reading 0/10 as a rating, and just read it as a dislike for the game. That's all you need to know really, the ratings may be "false" but there's plenty of genuine, no biase dislike for the game there.

 

Read the reviews. To think that they are all from people out for "big guys" blood is just being ignorent of them. Many people make their points very well, and if you read through 20-30 you can see how many are genuinely gutted at what DA:I is.

[Lebanese Dude]

It paints a clearer picture if you stop reading 0/10 as a rating, and just read it as a dislike for the game. That's all you need to know really, the ratings may be "false" but there's plenty of genuine, no biase dislike for the game there.

 

Read the reviews. To think that they are all from people out for "big guys" blood is just being ignorent of them. Many people make their points very well, and if you read through 20-30 you can see how many are genuinely gutted at what DA:I is.

 

But...it is a rating...

If you dislike the game, then give it a fair rating. A zero rating implies nothing of value.

 

It's not even like rating a movie or a book. This game took years to develop and is a 100 hour experience.

 

So no.... a rating of zero is massively unfair when DAI has many good attributes, irrespective of how many faults you may find.

[Prideaux]

Im not sure what is more of a joke 1) people write on such sites, especially the obviously negative and false ones 2) people use such sites and think they are what people really think 3) people think those sites and ratings actually mean something

 

look I am loving this game, despite massive oversights in the design (no weapon swtiching, lack of cueing in the tactics, lack of actually tactics, lack of healing class) but I i still give the world and idea and playing a 8/10 but give the absolutely pitiful UI 1/10. It is truly ghastly at every turn and on every screen. its been a long time since I have been so put off from playing a game by the UI alone... all that said I still give this game a solid 7/10, gosh if the UI was different and if it didnt feel like the gameplay was 'cheapen' by consoles (IE eight skills only, awful UI) it would be close on 9.5 (and I say that as a proud PS4 gamer and this game I am playing on PC with a controller)

[SpunkyMonkey]

But...it is a rating...

If you dislike the game, then give it a fair rating. A zero rating implies nothing of value.

 

It's not even like rating a movie or a book. The game takes years to develop and is a 100 hour experience.

 

So no.... a rating of zero is massively unfair when DAI has many good attributes, irrespective of how many faults you may find.

 

Oh I agree with that. But on the flipside there will be 10/10's where gamers would probably rate it 8 or 9/10 instead if fair.

 

Both are in the wrong, but just because some dishonest reviewers try and skew the score doesn't mean people should write Metacritic off. It's quite clear t me that there are mixed feeling towards DA:I and Metacritic does reflect that, albiet in a flawed way.

[Sicae]

First of all, its not wise to put words in peoples mouths.Who said anything about ignoring criticism? Maybe you need to start your own thread about how negative reviews can still provide good criticism. This thread was about how I was seeing posts of people being discouraged by the scores themselves. I've even seen references by media commenting on the negative metacritic user scores. Then someone who isn't as familiar with forums, or metacritic, etc see's something like that and passes on what may end up being one of their favorite games. 

 

Of course there is valid criticism. I have my own. There is a reason why I didn't get this on a PC even though I'm a HUGE pc gamer, especially MMOs. It was to avoid all of the crap I've gone through with various unresolved anomalies after playing Skyrim, Age of Conan online, Elder Scrolls Online, etc where I spent more time troubleshooting driver issues, sound issues, fps quirks, stuttering, etc then I did playing the games sometimes. For this game, I wish the companions wouldn't do weird things when walking around the cities, I wish that the very beginning of the game wasn't in an ugly setting and was just a better newcomer experience in general (lore and tutorial wise), I wish the game had day night cycles, I wish the inventory would give a much better idea of what can be sold and if you accidentally sell something...that 5 days later you can go and get it..etc...etc...etc.....but I still think this is a fantastic playing experience and this thread is about the ridiculousness I see specifically on metacritic and the rampant duplicate accounts of copy and paste negativity giving zero when anyone with half a brain would realize this game is not a zero whether you like it or not.

The typical critic was very positive about the game, I have read all kinds of praise for how great the game is, which is represented by a very high score among critics. When I read user reviews, I get a huge variety of praise and issues people have. This is represented in the user score that is much lower. Its not just on metacritic people argue about the game, its on pretty much every gaming site. With that known, its clear that the views and the high score that critics gave isn't a good representation of how players perceive the game.

 

I do agree that people take too much value of numbers on metacritic but that goes for both critics and users ratings. However, when it comes to reviews I find that critical players do a far better job at telling me all aspects of the quality of the game than the actual reviewers.

 

In the end, all 5.5 means is mixed ratings and even if you remove the duplicates the game would still get mixed ratings.

[Arngeld]

While I do believe that 10 is just as silly a rating as 0 for this game, I don't believe that they have equal weight. Someone who rates the game a 10 almost certainly has the game, but the same is not always true of the people who rate the game a 0. Some people won't buy anything that requires Origin, and others simply won't buy anything by EA(also applies to Ubisoft). So some unknown percentage of the 0 ratings are from people who have not played the game and never plan to for reasons unrelated to the game itself. This percentage could be either 0% or 100% but most likely falls between the two.

Now I can see why someone would want to post a low review as a political statement, but I personally find the practice to be scummy, whereas I find the fanboyism that leads to perfect reviews on a flawed product to simply be naive, sort of like kids who swear they're in love and get married, only to get divorced 2 years later because they have nothing in common other than thinking sex is fun.

[HozzMidnight]

The PC version of the game is suspect.

First, there are a lot of people having technical issues.  Whether or not this is the user's PC at fault or not, these guys are dinging the game.

 

Second, Bioware lied about the game.  It was made for PC Gamers, by PC Gamers, according to them.  Except anyone playing on a PC with a KB+Mouse realizes that is not the case within 15 minutes.  The UI is dogshit, a lazy console port.  The tac cam is anything but tactical.  Some people bought this game on a PC because of Bioware's empty promises, they are venting on metacritic.

Great games have critic and user scores within a point of each other.  Most all of Bioware's previous games are this way.  They lost their way with DA2.  ME3 followed suit and now we have DAI.  Everything before that?  Critics and fans alike loved.

[Rasande]

Scoring 0 or 10 is perfectly logical if your intention is to maximise the impact of your review on the average score.

If you're looking at just the average score --and if you assume a real 0-10 scale rather than a game critic 7-10 scale-- then ~6 isn't an unreasonable score for the PC version. It doesn't matter how pretty the world is if the half-assed control scheme and UI make experiencing it a chore.

 

And that's why the scores are a complete joke. If you feel the need to influence the score in one way or the other you're increadibly biased and a dickhead.