1329 réponses à ce sujet

[phantomrachie]

ok, so... since when criticising a game dev for moving away from hardcore RPG (or, calling things by name: making baffling design choices) equals being homophobic and racist? you're joking, right?

 

people who cry about design choices don't give a f... about any pro-social content. wait. they do. because it means more time was spent on including pro-social crap instead of creating actual gameplay

 

I don't think anyone is saying that.

 

The only point I saw raised was that some criticism aimed at DA:I is of the  'forcing homos down my throat variety'. That is is criticism that is probably homophobic not any of the other issues people might have.  

[SofaJockey]

ok, so... since when criticising a game dev for moving away from hardcore RPG (or, calling things by name: making baffling design choices) equals being homophobic and racist? you're joking, right?

 

people who cry about design choices don't give a f... about any pro-social content. wait. they do. because it means more time was spent on including pro-social crap instead of creating actual gameplay

 

Simply:

• You are completely correct. Criticising design choices does not equal homophobia/racism. That's not what was said.
• However, unrelated to that, giving different gamers roleplay choices such as including characters of different races, genders and orientations is not pro-social crap, is is simply giving different gamers the opportunity to play the game. It's a small part of the content and should not affect the gameplay.

 

The only point I saw raised was that some criticism aimed at DA:I is of the  'forcing homos down my throat variety'. That is is criticism that is probably homophobic not any of the other issues people might have.  

 

Yes, exactly this.

[AllThatJazz]

 

 

Yes, and that narrows down very artificially people's options to vote for what they'd actually consider GOTY, they're just corralled into voting for a predetermined group of accepted games. It's entertainment value, and fine as such, but bear that award with the gravity it is given. 

 

 

Great! Congratulations on your GOTY, just don't expect others to take that as some kind of a real or actual accolade. The internet is full of different websites offering GOTY awards, there's no special standard they have to adhere to and in the end it's either for entertainment value or just the private opinions of airheads like the IGN crew.

 

So, just because DA:I won a bracket contest against mostly vapid AAA titles, does not reflect how the game is generally perceived. I concede that the lukewarm acceptance I see on the intarwebs to this game is largely anecdotal. If people are asked to give their opinion in a score, it's about 6/10 on average on the sites that I have seen. That's in accordance with people's comments, many who give the game a low score don't hate it but have had issues with stability, bugs, UI etc.

 

Which is why I don't think the reviews are "mixed", rather that people tend to be overly dramatic in giving scores based on perhaps only one issue, large though it may be, it probably can be fixed and will be fixed. 

 

As it stands, users seem to find this game on average to be... average.

I don't expect anyone to base their opinion on mine (though since DAI is a game I enjoyed, those awards are pleasing to me, obviously), my opinion is mine alone -  but nor should you expect the sometimes hyperbolic criticism online to translate to anything more real or actual to people who like the game. 

 

And perception is a funny thing, since it's always coloured by personal bias. You see the majority of users regarding the game as average or worse (which reflects your own view) with a loud hardcore contingent of fans defending it - and no doubt there are many who agree with you. I see the majority of users seeing it as a good game or better (which reflects my view), albeit one with technical problems that need a fix* with a loud hardcore contingent of people who can't stand it.

 

*Personally, I can't attest to the technical problems since I've had an incredibly smooth experience on PC, with only one crash in well over 120 hours of gameplay, and only minor bugs. DAI is not only the technically smoothest Bioware game I've ever played (trying to get DAO and NWN running nicely took weeks/months of sheer frustration) but the smoothest open (ish) world game I've played with the exception of RDR. The fact that that I've been able to play out of the box with absolutely no fiddling around has, I imagine, coloured my perception of the game as a whole, as I guess it will have done to the people having problems running it.

[Ashen Nedra]

 

Simply:

• You are completely correct. Criticising design choices does not equal homophobia/racism. That's not what was said.
• However, unrelated to that, giving different gamers roleplay choices such as including characters of different races, genders and
  orientations is not pro-social crap, is is simply giving different gamers the opportunity to play the game. It's a small part of the content
  and should not affect the gameplay.

 

Let me quote myself (sorry) from another thread:

 

 

In Topic: Just thought of this.... Where is our whorehouses!?!?!?!

Today, 01:09 PM

 

By using EA's resources (a multi-billion dollars company) to:

 

- Apply 'pressure' on the industry, or you could call them their indirect employees (gaming journalist, You Tubers, Twitch casters), for one, and,

 

- by using the loyalty of younger fans -let's call them 'leftists'- to do their PR work on the Web (although they even hired a private company specializing in e-reputation) for them, using values based marketing techniques, for two.

 

You can also check the contributions of the Master Thread, aka PC community concerns (user Pen-and-Paper's and my own posts, among countless other users saying the same thing) on the subject.  You can verify each and every opinion expressed therein easily on the Web.

 

 

 

I even went as far as checking EA 10K-A three months ago.  FOR FREE

 

Regards,

 

Ashen

Modifié par Ashen Nedra, 19 janvier 2015 - 01:57 .

[SofaJockey]

Let me quote myself (sorry) from another thread:

 

In Topic: Just thought of this.... Where is our whorehouses!?!?!?!

Today, 01:09 PM

 

By using EA's resources (a multi-billion dollars company) to:

 

*snip*

 

ok, I'm not sure how that relates to my post, just sounds like EA doing marketing to me, but I respect your view.

This is hardly the place to argue that one. Trying hard not to divert the thread any further.

[AntiChri5]

Yes, and that narrows down very artificially people's options to vote for what they'd actually consider GOTY, they're just corralled into voting for a predetermined group of accepted games. It's entertainment value, and fine as such, but bear that award with the gravity it is given. 

 

 

 

They HAD their choice to vote for Game of the Year. The most relevant and popular games of the year were featured. Their choice either lost to Inquisition, or lost to something that went on to lose to Inquisition.

 

Don't insist that the people who voted for Inquisition were manipulated into it. Just accept that people like a thing you don't.

 

Inquisition has consistently won Game of the Year from individual reviewers, the staff of review sites and consumers choice polls on non BioWare forums. People. Like. Inquisition.

 

Im not sure i agree with their decision and i am rather annoyed that the problems i have with the game went unnoticed by so many reviewers, but responding to that by shoving my head up my own ass so i have a nice warm echo chamber where i can deny that a lot of people found it to be Game Of The Year would be childish.

[Ashen Nedra]

ok, I'm not sure how that relates to my post, just sounds like EA doing marketing to me, but I respect your view.

This is hardly the place to argue that one.

 

I've recently stopped caring about politeness towards EA.  I wonder why...Ok , then.

[AntiChri5]

I suppose all the people who voted for Inquisition in users choice contests were also payed off? ****, i wish i could have got in on that. I could really use some cash.

[Farangbaa]

They HAD their choice to vote for Game of the Year. The most relevant and popular games of the year were featured. Their choice either lost to Inquisition, or lost to something that went on to lose to Inquisition.
 
Don't insist that the people who voted for Inquisition were manipulated into it. Just accept that people like a thing you don't.
 
Inquisition has consistently won Game of the Year from individual reviewers, the staff of review sites and consumers choice polls on non BioWare forums. People. Like. Inquisition.
 
Im not sure i agree with their decision and i am rather annoyed that the problems i have with the game went unnoticed by so many reviewers, but responding to that by shoving my head up my own ass so i have a nice warm echo chamber where i can deny that a lot of people found it to be Game Of The Year would be childish.

I'm just going to eat some popcorn until somebody jumps up and says you're payed by EA to post this.

Cause that's how people roll these days.

[SofaJockey]

I suppose all the people who voted for Inquisition in users choice contests were also payed off? ****, i wish i could have got in on that. I could really use some cash.

 

You had a multiplayer chest for free over the holidays.

That was your payment 

[AntiChri5]

I'm just going to eat some popcorn until somebody jumps up and says you're payed by EA to post this.

Cause that's how people roll these days.

I have no doubt that someone will. Why people find it so hard to accept it when folks like something they don't is baffling to me.

[AntiChri5]

You had a multiplayer chest for free over the holidays.

That was your payment 

Damn, thats a pretty shitty bribe 

 

Giving me schematics in singleplayer would have been FAR more effective. 

[robertthebard]

Yeah, that's kinda the point. It ends up being a popularity contest between the fans of two games, which hardly reflects what any kind of majority thinks. It just shows that there were more DA:I fans than SoM fans. GOTY? For that?
 
No.

So what you're saying is, the "I have to give this game a 10 or 0 to 'balance out' the 0 or 10s" posters from MetaCritic couldn't go vote for the other entry instead? Maybe if they spent less time on MetaCritic trying to aritificially alter the scores they could have casted a vote where it legitimately matters? It's interesting to note, however, that user reviews wind up being just that, a popularity contest. Given the track record for EA, it doesn't even have to be in regard to the actual game, the publisher is, to some people, reason enough to vote for something else. So, where were all those people that, given a chance to voice their opinion, didn't prevent DA I from getting game of the year?

I know in our last two presidential elections I didn't vote. The lesser of two evils was not a choice I wanted to have foisted on me, and I haven't cast a vote for GotY anywhere, for any game, for that matter, because at the end of the day, GotY doesn't mean anything to me. If CoD gets game of the year for it's latest installment, I'm not going to go out and buy a console and the game. I simply don't care about it, one way or the other.

What I care about is "Am I going to enjoy the game?", which, in this case is "Yes, yes I am". I spent a considerable amount of time in it yesterday, and would have spent more, but I remembered that the NFL's playoff games were on. I only caught the last half of the fourth quarter of the NFC playoff game, which, as it turns out, was probably the best part of that whole game, no matter which team one wanted to win, because I was busy in DA I. Another cup of coffee, and I'll be busy in it again. Guess what, neither EA nor BioWare is paying me to play it, or to post about it. I play it, and post about it because I do like it, and I couldn't give a rat's ass what someone else thinks about that.

[Ashen Nedra]

So what you're saying is, the "I have to give this game a 10 or 0 to 'balance out' the 0 or 10s" posters from MetaCritic couldn't go vote for the other entry instead? Maybe if they spent less time on MetaCritic trying to aritificially alter the scores they could have casted a vote where it legitimately matters? It's interesting to note, however, that user reviews wind up being just that, a popularity contest. Given the track record for EA, it doesn't even have to be in regard to the actual game, the publisher is, to some people, reason enough to vote for something else. So, where were all those people that, given a chance to voice their opinion, didn't prevent DA I from getting game of the year?

I know in our last two presidential elections I didn't vote. The lesser of two evils was not a choice I wanted to have foisted on me, and I haven't cast a vote for GotY anywhere, for any game, for that matter, because at the end of the day, GotY doesn't mean anything to me. If CoD gets game of the year for it's latest installment, I'm not going to go out and buy a console and the game. I simply don't care about it, one way or the other.

What I care about is "Am I going to enjoy the game?", which, in this case is "Yes, yes I am". I spent a considerable amount of time in it yesterday, and would have spent more, but I remembered that the NFL's playoff games were on. I only caught the last half of the fourth quarter of the NFC playoff game, which, as it turns out, was probably the best part of that whole game, no matter which team one wanted to win, because I was busy in DA I. Another cup of coffee, and I'll be busy in it again. Guess what, neither EA nor BioWare is paying me to play it, or to post about it. I play it, and post about it because I do like it, and I couldn't give a rat's ass what someone else thinks about that.

 

Happy for you (not irony at all)

[Ashen Nedra]

 

 

This is a despicable quote but maybe it applies

 

'It doesn't matter who votes, it matters who counts the votes.' - Joe Stalin

 

I'm not saying that EA do this, I'm only saying that it's possible to pay the ones that count the votes.

 

Indeed.  Indirectly in this case (revenue from advertising, jobs...links to IGN for bloggers and youtubers, you name it)

[LinksOcarina]

 

 

This is a despicable quote but maybe it applies

 

'It doesn't matter who votes, it matters who counts the votes.' - Joe Stalin

 

I'm not saying that EA do this, I'm only saying that it's possible to pay the ones that count the votes.

 

 

And once again, conspiracy theories come out. 

[SofaJockey]

Yeah, that's kinda the point. It ends up being a popularity contest between the fans of two games, which hardly reflects what any kind of majority thinks. It just shows that there were more DA:I fans than SoM fans. GOTY? For that?

 

No. 

 

No, I think you are incorrect in almost every regard.

 

If it were a popularity content, (not a critical judgment) the winner of GOTY would be an ok game that is played by the most players.

There are other threads pointing out that there are plenty of games that sell many, many more copies than DAI.

 

DAI did not win GOTY so many times because there are are more DAI fans than all those other games.

 

Secondly, whilst there are some enthusiastic players who slavishly follow DAI, SoM, the Witcher, etc,

(and I would also exclude slavish anti-votes, people who make make voting decisions on the basis of their prejudices),

these are not the majority.

 

The Lord of the Rings 'franchise' has many, many obsessive fans, BioWare has it's share of haters

and DAI still wins. That's not down to a fan contest.

 

I believe most people are more than capable of deciding which game is the better one.

 

I have played and enjoyed both DAI and SoM and I feel capable of differentiating between the relative merits of both.

Shadow of Mordor did remarkably well despite being from a smaller studio and having a fairly rudimentary game,
but with the highly innovative Nemesis system.

 

So, no, it doesn't end up being a fan popularity contest,

it does reflect what the majority thinks.

The relative number of DAI and SoM(LoTR) fans is not relevant.

GOTY? Yes.

[atlantico]

They HAD their choice to vote for Game of the Year. The most relevant and popular games of the year were featured. 

 

If you want to think that people in general are ecstatic about this game, no harm done, but that's hardly an honest reading of people's comments on it. That being said, the remark about the "most relevant and popular games of the year" being featured makes no sense. Relevant to whom? It's all pretty arbitrary. Further, a game released at the end of November with no sales figures released can only be categorized as popular by fiat. Further still, why should a popular game be even considered GOTY on those merits? 

 

The point remains, that some airheads like those on IGN pick what they think is "most relevant" gives them far more credit than they deserve. They're basically mouthbreathing idiots.

 

So what you're saying is, the "I have to give this game a 10 or 0 to 'balance out' the 0 or 10s" posters from MetaCritic couldn't go vote for the other entry instead? 

 

No, I never said that. Read, comprehend, post. I can't be bothered with replying to fantasy. I'll be happy to reply if you want to refer to something I actually wrote.

 

No, I think you are incorrect in almost every regard.

 

If it were a popularity content, (not a critical judgment) the winner of GOTY would be an ok game that is played by the most players.

There are other threads pointing out that there are plenty of games that sell many, many more copies than DAI.

 

DAI did not win GOTY so many times because there are are more DAI fans than all those other games.

 

Secondly, whilst there are some enthusiastic players who slavishly follow DAI, SoM, the Witcher, etc,

(and I would also exclude slavish anti-votes, people who make make voting decisions on the basis of their prejudices),

these are not the majority.

 

The Lord of the Rings 'franchise' has many, many obsessive fans, BioWare has it's share of haters

and DAI still wins. That's not down to a fan contest.

 

I believe most people are more than capable of deciding which game is the better one.

 

I have played and enjoyed both DAI and SoM and I feel capable of differentiating between the relative merits of both.

Shadow of Mordor did remarkably well despite being from a smaller studio and having a fairly rudimentary game,
but with the highly innovative Nemesis system.

 

So, no, it doesn't end up being a fan popularity contest,

it does reflect what the majority thinks.

The relative number of DAI and SoM(LoTR) fans is not relevant.

GOTY? Yes.

 

Perhaps that's just because you obfuscate the situation to attempt to make sense, and failing, I might add. 

 

I can only refer to individual cases, because this nebulous GOTY title is awarded in as many ways as there are GOTY titles to be had. 

In the case of the Escapist, they just picked a dozen AAA titles at their pleasure and offered people to vote between two at a time. 

 

It wasn't even a popularity contest, if it had been then at the very least people would have been granted the chance to vote between all the arbitrary titles on offer. But in that case it was not so, and therefore in the end it was just title A vs. title B and nothing else. While title C may have lost to B which lost to A, title C may have handily beaten title A. But that was never a choice, bracket voting just doesn't work like that.

 

In the case of IGN, it's just a committee of airheads who pick the titles, I don't know their criteria. And so it goes, website to website. Different methods each time. 

 

Who knows why DA:I won many GOTY awards, because there was never any consistent benchmark between those awards. The only thing they have in common is the name. 

 

Who voted for the games, where voting was possible? I don't know, and neither do you. Speculation on that is a waste of time at best.

 

So, no - it doesn't reflect what the "majority" thinks, it can't. The majority was never asked. Obviously in cases where the winner is picked by "experts" and also quite obviously where the websites users are allowed to vote, since no website has the "majority" of players or owners or fans of any game. 

 

This isn't hard to understand, but well. Maybe it is.

[LinksOcarina]

If you want to think that people in general are ecstatic about this game, no harm done, but that's hardly an honest reading of people's comments on it. That being said, the remark about the "most relevant and popular games of the year" being featured makes no sense. Relevant to whom? It's all pretty arbitrary. Further, a game released at the end of November with no sales figures released can only be categorized as popular by fiat. Further still, why should a popular game be even considered GOTY on those merits? 

 

The point remains, that some airheads like those on IGN pick what they think is "most relevant" gives them far more credit than they deserve. They're basically mouthbreathing idiots.

 

 

No, I never said that. Read, comprehend, post. I can't be bothered with replying to fantasy. I'll be happy to reply if you want to refer to something I actually wrote.

 

People do that all the time, why is Hearthstone considered the best game of the year by Forbes?

 

Popularity is one aspect of it. So is overall presentation and enjoyment, something that we have seen out of reader choice awards and the press on this one regarding Inquisition for the most part. It is arbitrary, but at that same token, it also is something that really only matters to those who enjoy such statistics. 

 

Besides, let's call a spade a spade. Most people on this very forum, hell, the gaming community at large, are idiots too, more so than the critics. Tribal loyalties, old grudges, believing they know something when they don't, a confirmation bias on how things work, when folks are by and large clueless about the very hobby they enjoy. It is a game of vindication for their nerd prowess over actually being right, demagogues more than anything else. 

[Ashen Nedra]

People do that all the time, why is Hearthstone considered the best game of the year by Forbes?

 

Popularity is one aspect of it. So is overall presentation and enjoyment, something that we have seen out of reader choice awards and the press on this one regarding Inquisition for the most part. It is arbitrary, but at that same token, it also is something that really only matters to those who enjoy such statistics. 

 

Besides, let's call a spade a spade. Most people on this very forum, hell, the gaming community at large, are idiots too, more so than the critics. Tribal loyalties, old grudges, believing they know something when they don't, a confirmation bias on how things work, when folks are by and large clueless about the very hobby they enjoy. It is a game of vindication for their nerd prowess over actually being right, demagogues more than anything else. 

 

 

 

They called it a 'cultural/economical phenomenon in gaming' or something, which it was. It's about money. It's Forbes after all.

[atlantico]

People do that all the time, why is Hearthstone considered the best game of the year by Forbes?

 

Popularity is one aspect of it. So is overall presentation and enjoyment, something that we have seen out of reader choice awards and the press on this one regarding Inquisition for the most part. It is arbitrary, but at that same token, it also is something that really only matters to those who enjoy such statistics. 

 

Besides, let's call a spade a spade. Most people on this very forum, hell, the gaming community at large, are idiots too, more so than the critics. Tribal loyalties, old grudges, believing they know something when they don't, a confirmation bias on how things work, when folks are by and large clueless about the very hobby they enjoy. It is a game of vindication for their nerd prowess over actually being right, demagogues more than anything else. 

 

Quoted for truth. Very well said, sir.

[robertthebard]

If you want to think that people in general are ecstatic about this game, no harm done, but that's hardly an honest reading of people's comments on it. That being said, the remark about the "most relevant and popular games of the year" being featured makes no sense. Relevant to whom? It's all pretty arbitrary. Further, a game released at the end of November with no sales figures released can only be categorized as popular by fiat. Further still, why should a popular game be even considered GOTY on those merits? 
 
The point remains, that some airheads like those on IGN pick what they think is "most relevant" gives them far more credit than they deserve. They're basically mouthbreathing idiots.
 
 
No, I never said that. Read, comprehend, post. I can't be bothered with replying to fantasy. I'll be happy to reply if you want to refer to something I actually wrote.

That's the problem with cherry picking, you inevitably miss the point. This is a primary reason to skip sites like MetaCritic though. You should note here: I don't care if the score is a 0 or a 10. I don't care if the reviewer works for a game review site, or lives in their mom's basement playing video games 24 hours a day, review sites can be completely ignored, including, as I mentioned in the part of the post you decided you didn't want to deal with, which games get GotY from whom. None of this has any relevance to me. You seem quite invested in it, but the reality of my situation is, I don't care. My tastes are defined by me. I'm not one of the sheep that needs someone else to tell me what I should or shouldn't like, what music I should or shouldn't listen to, or what publishers I should or shouldn't support. I make my choices based on how I feel about what's been presented.

That means that, for me, this game was purchased because I liked what I saw. My deal breaking condition didn't occur, MP is not tied to SP. I was hot and heavy in that debate, with the position that the reward for MP should be playing MP. I'm not happy with the controls for PC, but I already had a controller for AC and the Witcher 2, so I use it. I'm not happy with the skill limitations, especially on PC, the platform that I play, but I still wouldn't waste my time on MetaCritic, or any other review site, giving the game a 0. Of course, I'm also not upset that I couldn't play my Warden, or that my Warden wasn't an integral part of this game, especially given my love of the US ending. I chose to weigh this game based on it's own merits, and came away not only glad that I bought it, but glad that I pre-ordered it. So ultimately, I'm not worried about it's future, and the BioWare post in this thread didn't make me paranoid about them posting, it reinforced my position that the game is a solid entry into the franchise.

[Ashen Nedra]

Quoted for truth. Very well said, sir.

 

People do that all the time, why is Hearthstone considered the best game of the year by Forbes?

 

Popularity is one aspect of it. So is overall presentation and enjoyment, something that we have seen out of reader choice awards and the press on this one regarding Inquisition for the most part. It is arbitrary, but at that same token, it also is something that really only matters to those who enjoy such statistics. 

 

Besides, let's call a spade a spade. Most people on this very forum, hell, the gaming community at large, are idiots too, more so than the critics. Tribal loyalties, old grudges, believing they know something when they don't, a confirmation bias on how things work, when folks are by and large clueless about the very hobby they enjoy. It is a game of vindication for their nerd prowess over actually being right, demagogues more than anything else. 

 

Indeed well said (didn't read your whole post, sorry) a cynical view on human nature that I agree with, most of the times

Modifié par Ashen Nedra, 19 janvier 2015 - 04:14 .

[LinksOcarina]

They called it a 'cultural/economical phenomenon in gaming' or something, which it was. It's about money. It's Forbes after all.

 

Gaming is all about money though. It is commercial art in the end, it's why big budgeted and small time games exist, there is a market for them.