263 réponses à ce sujet

[Miggs]

Strange how the most pointless threads end up being some of the longest?

[InfinitePaths]

Seems like the community and actual reviewers agree that actually good games are, you know, good.

 

You guys need to put things into prespective in regards to how metacritic works.

 

1.) If some angry trolls who are displeased with having gay people in their games, or having a tactical camera/UI different from the one they so nostalgically love (from Origins) they can just go on the site and give 0's mindlessly, as many do, without actually evaluating whether the game is good or not.They just tank the rating.

 

2)Games that are older and/or have no controversy usually have no such trolls on metacritic, ergo better rating.

 

Think logically guys.It's not like every person in the world votes on metacritic fairly.It's mostly angry trolls who feel it is their sacred duty to make the score lower.

[joejoe099]

Actually, most RPG fans consider Mass Effect 2 the worst RPG of the series. The trolls flooded Metacritic for Mass Effect 3.

 

I see Dlux is still dismissing every opinion which doesn't agree with him. Pretty amusing seeing him accusing others of "cherry picking". 

 

rpg fans consider me2 as the worst for its dumbing down of rpg controls, or it's so called 'filler' game-style, focusing only on side characters? I'll admit to not liking how much to a degree they dumbed it down, but it was good filler-isque content.

[Farangbaa]

Ah, ME2. Dr Phil simulator in space.

[ZipZap2000]

Let's not start on ME2 because you'll get another example of the most popular installment of a series being unpopular to a significant number of forum goers.  

[keyip]

rpg fans consider me2 as the worst for its dumbing down of rpg controls, or it's so called 'filler' game-style, focusing only on side characters? I'll admit to not liking how much to a degree they dumbed it down, but it was good filler-isque content.

 

The former. ME3 had a bad ending, but it was a better RPG than ME2. 

[joejoe099]

The former. ME3 had a bad ending, but it was a better RPG than ME2. 

 

ah, so like how DAI has killed off its rpg elements compared to DA2's then, taking away stat control and move-per-move tactic menu.

[keyip]

ah, so like how DAI has killed off its rpg elements compared to DA2's then, taking away stat control and move-per-move tactic menu.

 

Trickier to gauge, but let's assume you're correct for a minute. ME2 was rated highly on Metacritic despite being a poor RPG, DA:I is rated poorly because it turned its back on its RPG roots. And yet not as poorly as DA:2 which, according to you, had more RPG elements.

 

This is part of the reason the user rating system on Metacritic is laughed at. There's no rhyme or reason to the ratings on Metacritic, is all done by people who are emotionally butthurt.

[joejoe099]

Trickier to gauge, but let's assume you're correct for a minute. ME2 was rated highly on Metacritic despite being a poor RPG, DA:I is rated poorly because it turned its back on its RPG roots. And yet not as poorly as DA:2 which, according to you, had more RPG elements.

 

This is part of the reason the user rating system on Metacritic is laughed at. There's no rhyme or reason to the ratings on Metacritic, is all done by people who are emotionally butthurt.

 

Oh no, DA2 dumbed down rpg elements of equipment and skills each, it just kept the pre-battle planning and stat controls. DAI returned equipment control and slightly increased skills, but took away stat control and pre-battle planning, replacing it with 'single-move mid-combat' planing.

 

and it should only be laughed at when it first comes out, not after time considering enough people would have voted on it that troll votes would have little to no impact.

[keyip]

and it should only be laughed at when it first comes out, not after time considering enough people would have voted on it that troll votes would have little to no impact.

 

 

Nah, the problem is people like to bombard the site with 0 votes when they're unhappy with a game. This has a much greater impact on the average score than someone who voted a 10. 

 

Too many people voting "0's" and "10's" which taint the whole system. Most people look elsewhere now. Reddit is pretty much the place people go to talk about gaming the most, and even they tell people to steer clear of Metacritic.

[Farangbaa]

Oh no, DA2 dumbed down rpg elements of equipment and skills each, it just kept the pre-battle planning and stat controls. DAI returned equipment control and slightly increased skills, but took away stat control and pre-battle planning, replacing it with 'single-move mid-combat' planing.

 

and it should only be laughed at when it first comes out, not after time considering enough people would have voted on it that troll votes would have little to no impact.

 

Stat control is in the passive skills and crafting in this game.

 

People should stop acting like it's not there. It's not there like it used to be, but you still have a lot of control over what your character turns out to be.

[Tsunami Chef]

Stat control is in the passive skills and crafting in this game.

 

People should stop acting like it's not there. It's not there like it used to be, but you still have a lot of control over what your character turns out to be.

Exactly...the crafting system took over attributes. You can basically make yourself have as high of any stat you want in comparison to other games if you craft it with parts that increase that stat.

 

And honestly...how is adjusting your stats so damn important when you have so many other ways of customization with gear/skills/specializations. I don't understand the fundamental necessity of being able to adjust your dexterity or cunning to the exact number you want at the level up screen. It certainly doesn't help me immerse myself to know i have 2 extra cunning or dexterity, and I don't think it takes away from the strategy since you can, like I said, still adjust attributes through crafting. THat's why you see all the posts about how to make your rogue awesome by giving him guard on his weapons, etc.

[Hydwn]

You guys need to put things into prespective in regards to how metacritic works.

 

1.) If some angry trolls who are displeased with having gay people in their games, or having a tactical camera/UI different from the one they so nostalgically love (from Origins) they can just go on the site and give 0's mindlessly, as many do, without actually evaluating whether the game is good or not.They just tank the rating.

 

2)Games that are older and/or have no controversy usually have no such trolls on metacritic, ergo better rating.

 

Think logically guys.It's not like every person in the world votes on metacritic fairly.It's mostly angry trolls who feel it is their sacred duty to make the score lower.

 

It's particularly suspicious that those 0s mostly flooded in the day the game was released.  Some people were frustrated by early bugs, no doubt, but a 0 rating for 120-hour game the second it's released to the public...?

 

First off, there has not been a game that merited a flat 0 since Montezuma's Revenge in 1984.  Ride to Hell Retribution usually gets at least a 1 by people who've played it.  A 0 isn't a serious score.  It tells more about the rater than the game.

 

Secondly, no one who's played this game would give it that low a mark.  There were people who didn't like it for either format or bugs, and that's fine.  But I've never seen a serious review by an actual player that went lower than a 5.

 

So what are these people?  Traditional trolls, trying to get people riled up for the fun of it?  Paid trolls in the employ of a competing company?  Gamer-gaters who heard this game treated women and gays as people?  Someone here had an agenda that went way beyond the game, and seems to have either been a lot of someones, or a few someones with randomized URLs.  

 

Either way, it shows how incredibly open Metacritic is to manipulation.

[Hydwn]

Ah, ME2. Dr Phil simulator in space.

 

Not quite.  Shepard's therapy worked

[MrSnoozer]

Metacritic needs to die in a fire... Scoring is stupid. How do you compare CoD to DA or GTA to DA etc via scores?

[Epyon5757]

Thanks for proving that your cherry picked sites are full of brainless drones. Not to mention that Metacritic has 3 to 4 times as many user ratings as all of those sites.

Wow. So anyone who disagrees with you or liked games you hate is a "brainless drone" now? Just...trying to think about how ignorant and closed minded someone would need to be to even make that kind of blanket statement is boggling.

However, you think metacritic and charts that use estimates to give numbers are the be all, end all of games. So maybe you really are that ignorant.

It is clear you have no concept of how entertainment markets actually work, and no concept of how internal expectations work.

[Ieldra]

The former. ME3 had a bad ending, but it was a better RPG than ME2. 

Are you kidding? At least ME2 didn't take away control of my character to the point that I say ME3 has destroyed his soul. Also, ME3 had as many dialogue wheel options in the whole game as a single mission in ME2, or so it felt at times.

 

None of the ME games was particularly good in roleplaying, but ME3 was so much worse than both others in anything related to character expression that I'm having serious trouble understanding that statement.

 

Meanwhile, all DA games have a better roleplaying dimension than any of the ME games. ME3 had a barely tolerable ending, but it's the failure in roleplaying that broke its neck for me.

[Vyndral]

Wow. So anyone who disagrees with you or liked games you hate is a "brainless drone" now? Just...trying to think about how ignorant and closed minded someone would need to be to even make that kind of blanket statement is boggling.
However, you think metacritic and charts that use estimates to give numbers are the be all, end all of games. So maybe you really are that ignorant.
It is clear you have no concept of how entertainment markets actually work, and no concept of how internal expectations work.

It is actually what makes threads like this entertaining. If you think one way you are a mindless biodrone spitting out the company line and eating up the crap they shovel you. If you think the other you are a mindless troll spitting hate and bile out against the product that will soon solve all the worlds woes.

There is no middle ground for either side, so trying to appeal to either is pointless and the thread quickly turns into a i have to have the last word race. Good times.

[dlux]

Wow. So anyone who disagrees with you or liked games you hate is a "brainless drone" now? Just...trying to think about how ignorant and closed minded someone would need to be to even make that kind of blanket statement is boggling.

No, I am saying that a game like ME3, which is responsible for the biggest s***storm about a game ever on the internet, received unrealistically high user ratings on those sites.

Not very hard to understand, but oh well.
 

However, you think metacritic and charts that use estimates to give numbers are the be all, end all of games. So maybe you really are that ignorant.

You're saying that all metacritic user scores are completely useless because of trolls, because all awesome games have a bad user score on metacritic or something. I showed you proof that this is not the case, yet I am the ignorant one.
 

It is clear you have no concept of how entertainment markets actually work, and no concept of how internal expectations work.

Sure I do.

EA dumbed down the franchise with the attempt to boost sales. Internal expectations will therefore indicate that the game will sell better than previous installments.

[dreamgazer]

Oooooh, can we cherry-pick good games that got Metacritic-bombed next? That could be fun.

Also, can we read the actual user reviews on Metacritic again to reveal how spiteful and irrational ratings bombers are?

[OriginalTibs]

Stats can only tell us so much. What matters is whether an individual likes or dislikes a game.

 

I like DA:I and so does my daughter. So long as Bioware is successful and produces good DLC for it later, then to me the rest of this teapot-tempest is of little interest.

[Giantdeathrobot]

Stats can only tell us so much. What matters is whether an individual likes or dislikes a game.

 

I like DA:I and so does my daughter. So long as Bioware is successful and produces good DLC for it later, then to me the rest of this teapot-tempest is of little interest.

 

Shh, stop ruining everyone's fun by being reasonable!

[XxPrincess(x)ThreatxX]

Stats can only tell us so much. What matters is whether an individual likes or dislikes a game.
 
I like DA:I and so does my daughter. So long as Bioware is successful and produces good DLC for it later, then to me the rest of this teapot-tempest is of little interest.

It should be about individual opinions, just a shame that so many people see their opinion as fact & attack/mock anyone who disagrees, dare to say you think DA:I is a great game & be prepared to get replies detailing why its actually the worst game ever made & how your a dumb biodrone for not treating BW with disgust over it

[Kel Eligor]

How dare anyone enjoy a game over one that I preferred? They're wrong! 

 

It sucks when I'm in the position where I enjoyed every DA games. It's clearly not allowed. 

[katokires]

But..but..wait! According to some gaming gods in this forum, DAI was met with a HUGGGGGE!!1!1!! backlash!

 

Worst game of the decade/millennium/eon!

 

I guess the thousands of people that love it like me didn't get the memo in time. Oh well.

I would really love to understand how sales connect to quality...

In my first rant, FIRST, I was sure Inquisition would be a HUGE success because it is obvious they made a funny, enjoyable, wonderful game FOR PEOPLE WITHOUT BRAINS, which accounts for 99.99% of humans. It is the same with music, movies and so on.

In fact what made me sad after the first few hours in the game was exactly how sure I was it would sell infinitillions of copies because it pleases the masses, Inquisition is the true "mass effect", and it is pretty obvious the game was designed with this in mind, from console focus to skyrim "inspirations"

Well, the game is great but let me put a thought here: If all pop artist started to sound exactly like Beyonce, male, female, all, wouldn't it be sad for people who like Shakira, Justin Timberlake and others? You people sound like "if Beyonce is great there is no problem if everbody sounds like that, since it would be sounding great right?" Following people reasoning here it is ok for a style of games to die in favor of a "better" one...

Perhaps people misunderstand evolution? It doesn't matter how evolved a species is, without important variaions in their species if a single deadly threat comes they all die. Sometimes a predator, others a desease or a climate change. More variation equals more chances of survival.

If all games go flashy lord of the rings powered by michael bay in skyrim we will lack variation and this is devolution.

But I do agree with people saying this ship has sailed, yeah, it is gone, it won't be back. Sadly.