153 réponses à ce sujet

[Kulyok]

I'm not sure it's worth it to place any reviews on the sites like Metacritic. I mean, look at the Rotten Tomatoes - half the horrible movies have 87++ rating there, and some of my favorites have 30--. No, thanks. And I just looked at DAI rating, anyway - user rating 5.8? Seriously? Given how much joy I got from the game, I'd give it a 10 without hesitation. 9 for the fetch quests, maybe.

[Elhanan]

What a total nonsense

Actually, the call for bias may be true through the use of flawed algorithms to determine totals. Though this may skew one way or the other, the final results may be quite inaccurate. At least this seemed to the case in 2011; the last time I recall having belief that this site had any merit.

[Dubya75]

Metacritic is bias as and usually paid to be

 

Oh, so who is going to pay me for my score when I post it there? Facebook? Bioware? ...You?

[Bioware-Critic]

Actually, the call for bias may be true through the use of flawed algorithms to determine totals. Though this may skew one way or the other, the final results may be quite inaccurate. At least this seemed to the case in 2011; the last time I recall having belief that this site had any merit.

 

Well, if a user is writing a review over on metacritic, he or she will be writing what they will be writing. No one is gonna tell them what to write or has only the slightest chance of influencing what will be said there. So I would argue that the reviews have as much integrity as the metacritic-members who write them. And when I read these reviews I will see them for what they are ...

 

That is all I am saying - nothing more!

[robertthebard]

I just don't get. We are intelligent people, are we?
 
Critics need to pay their bills, so their job is to review games... which need to be sold.
So the publisher is interested in good reviews.
So the publisher is interested in paying reviewers to get good reviews.
 
Did you see 'Game of the Year' awards that DA:I had won?
 
Well, those took the EA money for sure as it's not a GOTY game... Not yet and likely never.

This is exactly why I would never consider MetaCritic as a reliable source of information. The quote in my sig? It's from a conversation about the site. There doesn't have to be any truth to a review, in fact, one isn't even required to prove one has ever actually used any product up for review. All one needs is an account, and an opinion, based on facts, or youtube, it doesn't matter. 10/10 first day reviews? Really? I love the game, but it's still only a 7.5ish in my book. The same for 0/10 scores. Did these people even play the game, at all? I'm not just talking negatives here, but both ends of the spectrum.

So, what game was GotY then? I see a lot of "BioWare isn't allowed to have a GotY", but strangely, not a lot of games listed that should have been. I can, of course, take your approach and ask "How much is Developer X paying you to promote their game instead?", all things being equal. After all, surely people can't like games, or like more things about games than they dislike, right?

[Mummy22kids]

My perspective, when you say you like the game is akin to someone calling the help desk and saying "My monitor is not working, please help me."

 

I would like to see some contexual information to put a baseline on "you liked the game".

 

For example:

 

I personally enjoy playing this awesome game on my PS4, better than DA2

I liked DAI on the XB1 and the controls are good

I really find DAI wonderful to play using my PS4... better that DA2 or DA:O

 

Then I can say, Ok... it works on a console platform, but the PC game controls are just awful.

 

Bottom line, It's good for you but not so for me.... and we know why.

 

That's your opinion.  I play on PC with KB+M and I have no problems with the controls. I don't think they are awful, TBH I don't think about them at all.  They work for me, I can play the game with very little problem.  I enjoy the story and I've put in about 500 hours so far (more than one playthrough).  I also played DAO, DA2 and all the ME games. 

[Draining Dragon]

Why do we always have to accuse everyone of bribery?
 
Yes, there is corruption in the reviewing business but just like some negative reviews are based on reasonable criticism, some of the positive reviews are likewise based on people finding this game enjoyable.

Many positive reviews only mention things they like and glaze over what they didn't like.

IE not mentioning bugs

[Rizilliant]

Dear Winged Silver!

 

What I could agree on is that more positive critics are posted on metacritic. But that has nothing to do with being payed for it! Everyone has the write to post there and when the happy folks do it more regularly - so be it. I could not care less ... But the user-reviews are mostly or at least to a very great amount not paid for. I never get the feeling to read paid user-reviews there.

It very interesting that almost every reviewer gave it glaring applause! Yet the fan base is split 50/50. 

 

Obviously you have those user reviews that are a minimal sentence saying "yay, i love it. Best thing ever", or "pure garbage. Do not buy". However, when reading over the user reviews, i find the negative ones to hold more passion, and detail about the "what", and the "why" they gave the score, and opinion. Thats not to say there arent well written, passionate positives. The positives seem to completely disreguard the technical issues(and there are many, whether one encounters them all, they are abundant), and the negatives dont give credit to the good (writing, characters,etc). 

 

To me personnally, after reading many of both sides, and playing 100 hrs myself, i find the negatives to hold more truth.. Though a 1-5/10 doesnt quite seem reasonable. As a "Dragon Age" title, i want to give it below a 5. But putting my personal feelings aside, i cant say above a 6 or 7. Im on the PC, therefore am quite disappointed in the turn out of the console port.

 

-Cons:

Technical issues, bad UI, terrible m+kb controls, the loss of player behavior & situational modifiers, tactical mode is useless because of aforementioned, and the camera view of it. Bad coding, and crashes, shoehorning in a shallow multiplayer for what seems only for microtransactions. Main story is painfully short, and probably 3/4 of the side missions feel like filler content, with no baring, meaning, or impact on the story. The so-called "impact" of my decisions seem to be purely cosmetic. You may get a new npc at Skyhold, that at best, gives another filler quest, but other than that, seems to have little to no baring on the story overall. Companion attitude doesnt seem to matter, other than maybe the choices in conversation.perhaps you dont get to romance, or get their side-quest, but of those 2 i am unsure. If that be the case, maybe its better than i thought.It used to impact combat effectiveness, and power in battle!One of my biggest gripes is the "dumbing down" effect. Mage's are mere shadows of what they used to be. 3/4 of the ability trees they now have, were all in one in Origins, PLUS earthen element. Healing is completely removed, as well as entropy. Spirit was replaced with a barrier/dispel tree, with its more offensive and CC abilities flung throughout the 3 primals'. Yet the game still refers to having "Healing Mage's" in many parts of the conversations, and codex! Have they forgotten how to be Mage's in less than a decade?! A warrior can no longer dual wield, nor can a rogue take on a heavier weapon! Gloves, boots, and armor sets are gone, and confined to class type, or race. So many abilities do not work, or the passives (though i guess this can be summed up with tech issues, so ill not go into detail about each one) The movement is very sluggish, and unresponsive! The game has taken a more action-oriented, fast paced approach to combat, and Dragon Age was always a tactical crpg! No storage! with 90 spaces, im having to throw away alot of what i would like to keep. Purple items especially, or having multiple weapons for Dragons, Demons, Living, etc. Same for Armors. I dont ven bother using the element specific attributes, as it would take up too much space. Its better to just go with Melee, Ranged, or Magic resist because of storage. Not to mention all the rings! Difficulty. The game got very easy, and has remained as such. Before i got to skyhold i was steamrolling everything. Im still on my 1st playthrough (right now just over 100hrs) and am on Hard. Its too easy. I thought it was difficult at 1st, but i now attribute this to not being able to utilize a tactical camera like i was used too! I dont really play action games, as i dont find them rewarding or challenging whatsoever! The enemies are pathetic aside from Dragons. Literally you fight a dagger rogue, archer rogue, shield warrior, or 2 handed warrior and nothing else. Even when you encouter demons or undead, they follow the same formula, and they dont seem to be intelligent at all! unless i directly hit them, or aoe them, theyll stand by while i very loudly, and explosively murder their comrades. They dont take cover, and likewise mine dont move out of melee range, or aoe! Enemy combatants dont seem to have any kind of ability tree. they have 1 main attack, and a basic. Pathetic. More so because how dumb they are! As cheap, and rushed as this game feels, im sure that "difficulty" will be a simple number jump.. More dmg, higher Hp, as opposed to actual style, and tactics! Very lazy considering weve seen games incorporate those exact specifications! Enemies do not scale with lvl. For obvious reasons, this sucks!

 

-Pros:

Its beautiful! The environments are well thought out, and just a delight to take in(Though i get very annoyed trying to navigate silly things. Having to constantly jump because my guy cannot step over a small rock, grr)! the soundtrack (for those lucky enough that it does work) is astounding.. Absolutely beautiful. The campanions, their personalities, and the side-quests they open up are very well done! Its a very diverse group, and i really enjoyed them all. Crafting. I am a person who enjoys crafting, and getting every little thing out of a game. These were welcome additions, and i really liked how original you could make each item. Though they are far too powerful for whats gotten. I crafted a mace and shield for Casandra at maybe lvl 8ish, and at 15 she is just now beginning to find anything comparable, and yet the dps is still 20-30 higher. Darkspawn Alpha Shield, and im not sure the mace, but the better version of it i made is 167 dps, which was more than 100 dps higher than anything i was finding at the time. Basically, crafting can be too powerful early on, These were looted schematics, so maybe it was random? The voice acting is very well done. The Party banter (those for whom it works) is very entertaining, and amusing at times. I get it quite often, and always enjoy it. Though i accidentally cut it off when it starts as im looting, or entering a new load screen, and beginning a conversation, or mounting my horse(which sucks btw).

 

There may be a few more minor additions to both lists, but as you can see, my cons far outweigh the pros. Many times i find myself just not wanting to play the game, and either dont, or force myself too! I never could bring myself to play DA2 a 2nd time fully. Origins i have played through entirely well over a dozen times. Even purchased it on console to continue playing it when my pc went up! I still, to this day enjoy  playing it(admittedly, i wish there was more combat).Something is very wrong, when i am not excited enough to want to play a brand new game, when im still on my first play-through! Rpg's are my genre. Always will be! Ive rambled long enough. No one will read all this anyway.

[Elhanan]

Well, if a user is writing a review over on metacritic, he or she will be writing what they will be writing. No one is gonna tell them what to write or has only the slightest chance of influencing what will be said there. So I would argue that the reviews have as much integrity as the metacritic-members who write them. And when I read these reviews I will see them for what they are ...
 
That is all I am saying - nothing more!

If they are actually a user, perhaps the review itself may have credibility. But since the site allows anyone to post, unless one knows who has actually played the game and not simply lifted another review from elsewhere, even these are spoiled by the surrounding bad apples in the barrel.

There are better sites for gathering intel.

[Rizilliant]

This is exactly why I would never consider MetaCritic as a reliable source of information. The quote in my sig? It's from a conversation about the site. There doesn't have to be any truth to a review, in fact, one isn't even required to prove one has ever actually used any product up for review. All one needs is an account, and an opinion, based on facts, or youtube, it doesn't matter. 10/10 first day reviews? Really? I love the game, but it's still only a 7.5ish in my book. The same for 0/10 scores. Did these people even play the game, at all? I'm not just talking negatives here, but both ends of the spectrum.

So, what game was GotY then? I see a lot of "BioWare isn't allowed to have a GotY", but strangely, not a lot of games listed that should have been. I can, of course, take your approach and ask "How much is Developer X paying you to promote their game instead?", all things being equal. After all, surely people can't like games, or like more things about games than they dislike, right?

The negative reviews post far more passion, and specific detail as to why they disliked the game, than the positive ones do. Not that they do not also on positive ones.. Its just more of the negative ones go into explanation, and detail, than their counterparts...

[XxPrincess(x)ThreatxX]

Who takes MetaCritic user reviews seriously? a place where fanboys give 10's & haters give 0's usually without even playing the game their reviewing. I also gotta laugh at some people's "anyone whose positive about DA:I has been paid off" attitude, people have different opinions & just cos you hate the game doesn't mean that everyone who disagrees has been bribed by EA

[luism]

Because EA has been caught doing that crap plenty of times.

Hell a da2 dev wasn't above going on metacritic and making his own reviews lol.

I admire his passion and his loyalty to his work though.

[Terodil]

I also gotta laugh at some people's "anyone whose positive about DA:I has been paid off" attitude, people have different opinions & just cos you hate the game doesn't mean that everyone who disagrees has been bribed by EA

 

I may be caught out on this, but can you actually make a verbatim quote of anybody saying that? Because as far as I'm aware, a lot of people simply, and IMO rightfully, believe that a non-zero portion of positive reviews have been 'engineered', ergo, the average is intentionally manipulated.

[Rizilliant]

Who takes MetaCritic user reviews seriously? a place where fanboys give 10's & haters give 0's usually without even playing the game their reviewing. I also gotta laugh at some people's "anyone whose positive about DA:I has been paid off" attitude, people have different opinions & just cos you hate the game doesn't mean that everyone who disagrees has been bribed by EA

Those reviewers were giving it 9's and 10's with no mention of the plethora of bugs, glitches, bad coding, and lack of pc attunement. And not just pc. The last gen consoles are also having large amounts of issue! Do you understand that a reviewer, is given a checklist of things to specifically identify? How can you give it a 10, if basic functions are in fact not functioning? Ignorance is indeed, bliss!

[XxPrincess(x)ThreatxX]

Those reviewers were giving it 9's and 10's with no mention of the plethora of bugs, glitches, bad coding, and lack of pc attunement. And not just pc. The last gen consoles are also having large amounts of issue! Do you understand that a reviewer, is given a checklist of things to specifically identify? How can you give it a 10, if basic functions are in fact not functioning? Ignorance is indeed, bliss!

Im not disagreeing, fanboys are just as bad as haters on MetaCritic, good reason why i haven't used in years

[robertthebard]

I may be caught out on this, but can you actually make a verbatim quote of anybody saying that? Because as far as I'm aware, a lot of people simply, and IMO rightfully, believe that a non-zero portion of positive reviews have been 'engineered', ergo, the average is intentionally manipulated.

So what you're saying here is that my own personal 7.5 vision of the game had to "engineered", meaning someone is compensating me for saying that's what I think of the game? Aren't you, by supporting this claim, insinuating that I must have been paid to like the game? Why is that, I wonder? Why is it that you believe that your opinion of a game should be rated so highly that anyone with a different view must have their view "engineered"?

[Terodil]

So what you're saying here is that my own personal 7.5 vision of the game had to "engineered", meaning someone is compensating me for saying that's what I think of the game? Aren't you, by supporting this claim, insinuating that I must have been paid to like the game? Why is that, I wonder? Why is it that you believe that your opinion of a game should be rated so highly that anyone with a different view must have their view "engineered"?

 

Excuse me, what?

 

That's not what I've been saying at all.

 

Perhaps I need to rephrase:

 

- Are all positive reviews engineered? -- No.

- Are some positive reviews engineered? -- Yes.

- Is the ratio of engineered to non-engineered positive reviews larger than the ratio of engineered to non-engineered negative reviews? -- Yes.

- Thus, is the average rating of the game intentionally manipulated towards higher scores? -- Yes.

[XxPrincess(x)ThreatxX]

I may be caught out on this, but can you actually make a verbatim quote of anybody saying that? Because as far as I'm aware, a lot of people simply, and IMO rightfully, believe that a non-zero portion of positive reviews have been 'engineered', ergo, the average is intentionally manipulated.

Maybe some are manipulated, most people seem to enjoy the game tho & it gets tiresome that people who just flat out detest DA:I feel the need to constantly say that all rewards & good reviews are lies while acting like only "dumb console users" genuinely enjoy playing it

[robertthebard]

Excuse me, what?
 
That's not what I've been saying at all.
 
Perhaps I need to rephrase:
 
- Are all positive reviews engineered? -- No.
- Are some positive reviews engineered? -- Yes.
- Is the ratio of engineered to non-engineered positive reviews larger than the ratio of engineered to non-engineered negative reviews? -- Yes.
- Thus, is the average rating of the game intentionally manipulated towards higher scores? -- Yes.

So there is nothing here that discredits what I posited. If the majority of positive views are, you state right here, engineered, you're saying those people must have been compensated in some way? Here's the thing, how many of the negative reviews were "engineered"? At the end, what does it matter? If the scores can be so easily manipulated, and the site's primary purpose is to provide said score, it's worthless. BTW, it's interesting to note that that last bit isn't speculation, but what the site claims it exists to provide, a Metascore to rate products by.

Find the critics' consensus in one place, with a single “Metascore”

Metacritic's proprietary Metascore distills the opinions of the most respected critics writing online and in print to a single number.

Source

So what you're saying here is that, according to their own intentions, the site is worthless, since the scores can be so easily manipulated.

[Terodil]

You somehow came up with the ludicrous idea that I claimed my opinion was the benchmark by which reviews were segregated into "good" (honest) ones and "bad" (engineered) ones. It doesn't matter what my opinion is.

 

Look, I'm saying that the critic score is higher than it should be, for the reasons clearly outlined above. I cannot exactly tell by how much, I'm not omniscient. However, I humbly propose that comparing the critic score with the user score may give a more accurate approximation than a dart toss.

 

(Aside: Who do you suggest would be paid to submit negative reviews? BW's competitors? I wouldn't rule it out, but I don't consider that very probable since they'd damage themselves too in the process. Anybody else you have in mind?)

[Danoniero]

Sure some critics could be paid for good reviews, and I am sure some of them get good money and its normal, we have corruption in every goverment so why not in game industry whoever belives different is just naive. Now that is not a big problem couse If you read 5-10 reviews including mostly some small gaming sites you can have a quite good picture of the game.

Never look at user score though becouse most of reviewers are either fanboys or haters or they reviewing game after 1 hour of playing becouse they are so excited/frustrated.

 

Best is to go to the forum like this, when you see multiple threads and posts complaining at the game then you know something is not right and you can always discuss/upload a gameplay or whatever.

 

 DAI is fantastic, user scores on metacritic lost all credibility after Diablo, Simcity and Mass Effect 3. Assassins Creed, COD and Sims 4 are also suffering from trolls thinking their opinion is fact just like yourself.

DA:I is great, not fantastic and definitely not a GOTY. If really people think that is a material for the game of the year then I am really afraid of what quality games we will have this year.

[Bioware-Critic]

If they are actually a user, perhaps the review itself may have credibility. But since the site allows anyone to post, unless one knows who has actually played the game and not simply lifted another review from elsewhere, even these are spoiled by the surrounding bad apples in the barrel.

There are better sites for gathering intel.

 

I fully understand your argument, Elhanan. But I can make up my own mind about content in the internet. I do not argue that there will be fake reviews. But anybody with a brain can use his or her best judgement when reading content in the 'net!

And metacritic is hardly the only site in the internet worthy of critizism.

 

But the fact that there will always be some fake and manipulative reviews doesn't change or take away from the fact that there will always be thousands of genuine reviews form regular users with (some sort of) integrity as well!

 

The internet will never change in that regard. It is a democratic medium!

[Terodil]

Just by way of example, I find it shocking that I could find NO professional review that mentioned anything about what an "acquired taste" (= how bad) the KB+M control scheme is. You could even be "lucky" if you found any mention of the messed up camera in the professional reviews. Anybody who actually played the game would run into this issue at the end of the tutorial at the latest, because the rift is hellishly difficult to target. It really makes me wonder why the reviewers opted to not mention it.