225 réponses à ce sujet

[eyekantspell]

Someone summed it up.
 


www.gamefaqs.com/console/xbox360/review/R139238.html

Modifié par eyekantspell, 08 février 2010 - 11:53 .

[Ezohiguma]

Yeah, because one review is the ultimate truth. Yep, totally..



Let me sum up the review: "Boohoo! I not getting what I want! Whaaa! Whaaa! Whaaa!"



Quick! Call the whaaaaaaaambulance!

[Sibbwolf]

And yet, another reviewer who missed the overall plot and point of the Mass Effect universe.

[Akimb0]

It's nice to see someone actually give ME2 a fair review.

[Sibbwolf]

"Fair"? Hardly. He's comparing it to what he likes, not what the game was designed to be.



The biggest problems against the game are people thinking "My character". Bioware pointed out it's not the player's character, the player merely controls it. Until reviewers realise this, these reviews are anything but fair.

[Akimb0]

Sibbwolf wrote...

"Fair"? Hardly. He's comparing it to what he likes, not what the game was designed to be.

The biggest problems against the game are people thinking "My character". Bioware pointed out it's not the player's character, the player merely controls it. Until reviewers realise this, these reviews are anything but fair.

Did you even read the review? It's more than fair. It's one of the few I've seen so far which actually mention the downsides to the game. I won't bother arguing with you, since you're just a fanboy, so you won't accept anything about the game being bad even when it's true.

Modifié par Akimb0, 08 février 2010 - 12:02 .

[Sibbwolf]

Yes.

It has some valid points, but still compares to the reviewers expectation, not to Bioware's idea.

I raised the character issue as one good example as to why many reviewers fail. This reviewer didn't mention that at all (thankfully).

As a side, the control issues (especially cover, sprint) do need sorting out.

Modifié par Sibbwolf, 08 février 2010 - 12:06 .

[Traumacrazy]

...what is Bioware's idea :/

[LordLothars]

That's still a pretty bad review

[LordLothars]

That's still a pretty bad review

[banshee768]

Yes, he spoke at great length about bad things about this game. But he didn't say anything positive. And he still gave it a 6/10. Why? From reading his review, you get the impression that he would give it a 2/10 at most. He might have some points, but he's not a good reviewer.

[Raygereio]

Sibbwolf wrote...
"Fair"? Hardly. He's comparing it to what he likes, not what the game was designed to be.

Err, how else would you review something? "I'm really bored with planetscaning, but the game was designed to have planet scanning, so it must be really exciting!".
Daikatana's single player was 'designed' to have to AI puppets following you around and let's you have a gameover whenever one of them dies. Would you like that? The game was designed to be like that.

Now I'm not saying that linked review was good as that was more of a rant, not a review. But still, that statement was just silly.

Modifié par Raygereio, 08 février 2010 - 12:09 .

[Sibbwolf]

Traumacrazy - everything in the top half of the review the reviewer thinks is wrong.

[Akimb0]

Sibbwolf wrote...

Yes.

It has some valid points, but still compares to the reviewers expectation, not to Bioware's idea.

I raised the character issue as one good example as to why many reviewers fail. This reviewer didn't mention that at all (thankfully).

The majority of it isn't his expectations at all. Besides, why should he not write according to what he expected from the game, seeing as he's obviously played ME1 as well? Just because it wasn't part of "Biowares idea" doesn't mean it's not open to criticism if that happens to be a bad idea.

Don't get me wrong, I think he missed out or mistook a few points along the way and his review is negative, even though there are some good things about ME2. However it was still refreshing to see someone not scared (or payed) into giving ME2 a good review just because it was a Bioware game.

[gethsemani87]

Some of the points are valid and are the exact same things I feel is lacklustre about ME2. I still think it is a good game (really good even), but I felt more inclined to replay ME1 and felt more engaged by ME1 then I did by ME2.



For me, it has to do with the somewhat repetitive combat (hide, shoot, run, hide, shoot. This is especially true on Insanity where hide and shoot are just about the only things you do) but mostly with the fact that the story isn't engaging enough. I am supposed to battle the collectors, but apart from 2 missions and the end game, you aren't actively fighting them but rather preparing to fight them.

It kind of feels like I am packing for this HUGE trip when I recruit all my group members, only once I get on the trip it is nowhere as satisfyingly huge as I wanted it to be.



And the problem with space doing everything is very valid. In my first playthrough, 6 out of 9 deaths was caused by me rushing towardw cover while holding W, not connecting properly because the storm landed a few inches short and having to tap space again which instead caused me to vault over cover and into enemy fire.



Still, the review is unduly harsh I think. ME2 is nowhere near that bad of a game and it still offers a good experience.

[Sibbwolf]

Raygereio wrote...

Sibbwolf wrote...
"Fair"? Hardly. He's comparing it to what he likes, not what the game was designed to be.

Err, how else would you review something? "I'm really bored with planetscaning, but the game was designed to have planet scanning, so it must be really exciting!".

Split it into two parts, or handle it in two parts.

1 - What was the game supposed to be, did it match up.
2 - Then include the opinion.

This 'review' is all opinion about the implementation for the first half - without actually asking the question does it match with the concept.

Only in the second half does it actually address real wrongs in the game.

Modifié par Sibbwolf, 08 février 2010 - 12:11 .

[rayvioletta]

the truth: everyone has different tastes, different likes and dislikes. one persons "game of the year" is another persons "biggest steaming pile of solid waste excrement ever"

[Akimb0]

Sibbwolf wrote...

Raygereio wrote...

Sibbwolf wrote...
"Fair"? Hardly. He's comparing it to what he likes, not what the game was designed to be.

Err, how else would you review something? "I'm really bored with planetscaning, but the game was designed to have planet scanning, so it must be really exciting!".

Split it into two parts, or handle it in two parts.

1 - What was the game supposed to be, did it match up.
2 - Then include the opinion.

This 'review' is all opinion about the implementation for the first half.

Only in the second half does it actually address real wrongs in the game.

"Real Wrongs" that's a matter of opinion as well. In fact, he included both parts (what is was supposed to be and his own opinion), just the opposite way round to the way you said they should be written. Does that in fact mean his entire view is valid? Also just because you disagree with his opinions, doesn't mean they arn't "real wrongs" with the game.

rayvioletta wrote...

the truth: everyone has different
tastes, different likes and dislikes. one persons "game of the year" is
another persons "biggest steaming pile of solid waste excrement
ever"

Thanks for adding absolutely nothing to this thread.

Modifié par Akimb0, 08 février 2010 - 12:13 .

[KPnuts123]

So if that's a fair review I guess that Games tm here in the UK is totally wrong about the game and I should never take anything they say about a game seriously ever again.



The guy or girl who wrote the review here has not included any positives about the game they are basically just whining that the game isn't more of the same as ME 1.

[AudioEpics]

People may think of the game whatever they want, but posting an average to bad review of the game in a new thread and calling it "the truth hurts" is kind of ridiculous. It's basically saying: "all you people who like the game are deluded, we, the wise council of dissenters, the small band of resistance, we of superior taste and intelligence have the class to realize it is actually bad instead of good. Hahaaa, take that, you foolish majority!"

And you know what, maybe the game is bad to you, and you were probably looking forward to it and were disappointed. I'm sorry for your disappointment. But I love the game, and so do millions of other people. So what do you expect? That everyone's going to change their minds after that review? That they'll say "oh no, we were wrong the whole time, we shouldn't have been enjoying it!"

Unlikely. Just let it be. We all have different tastes.

[Sibbwolf]

The majority of it isn't his expectations at all.

No, it's "compared to". As in, he's expected something, (I'm loath to say) that follows established RPG. That's fairly evident if you read the first half.

Besides, why should he not write according to what he expected from the game, seeing as he's obviously played ME1 as well?

He should, but needs to include the concept from Bioware to make it "fair".

Don't get me wrong, I think he missed out or mistook a few points along the way and his review is negative, even though there are some good things about ME2.

So, you call it fair, yet acknowledge there's no attempt at balance? Odd.

However it was still refreshing to see someone not scared (or payed) into giving ME2 a good review just because it was a Bioware game.

Agreed, but that does not make it "fair".

Just because it wasn't part of "Biowares idea" doesn't mean it's not open to criticism if that happens to be a bad idea.

But how can he substantiate his dislike without including "Biowares idea"? That's the problem.

Modifié par Sibbwolf, 08 février 2010 - 12:18 .

[Ozymandias23]

Personally I feel the review is accurate. Mass Effect 2 was inferior in many, many ways to ME1. The ridiculously poor story, among other things, creates a very unsatisfying game.

[Sibbwolf]

Akimb0 wrote...

Sibbwolf wrote...

Raygereio wrote...

Sibbwolf wrote...
"Fair"? Hardly. He's comparing it to what he likes, not what the game was designed to be.

Err, how else would you review something? "I'm really bored with planetscaning, but the game was designed to have planet scanning, so it must be really exciting!".

Split it into two parts, or handle it in two parts.

1 - What was the game supposed to be, did it match up.
2 - Then include the opinion.

This 'review' is all opinion about the implementation for the first half.

Only in the second half does it actually address real wrongs in the game.

"Real Wrongs" that's a matter of opinion as well. In fact, he included both parts (what is was supposed to be and his own opinion), just the opposite way round to the way you said they should be written. Does that in fact mean his entire view is valid? Also just because you disagree with his opinions, doesn't mean they arn't "real wrongs" with the game.

I'm sorry, I don't see where he acknowledges Bioware's concept for the characters, their development, just his opinion about how poor it is.

[Carmarkcaine]

They are spot on. Me1 I played 3 or times, this game I just dont feel like trying one more time. I dont wanna "mine" all that crap again. If I wanted to waste time with a in game-game I'd build fishing skill up in wow( and dont I might add)



Also there is no sense of freedom in the game and its way to short. Hardly any missions, besides getting the loyalti of you crew members, and it seems more like work than anything else.



It feels like it was made more for consols and that type of players and not the more mature PC players. Im sure not sure Im going to buy ME3, atleast I think Ill wait for a month or so until the hype is down and the more serious and mature players are through the game.

[Akimb0]

Sibbwolf wrote...

Akimb0 wrote...

Sibbwolf wrote...

Raygereio wrote...

Sibbwolf wrote...
"Fair"? Hardly. He's comparing it to what he likes, not what the game was designed to be.

Err, how else would you review something? "I'm really bored with planetscaning, but the game was designed to have planet scanning, so it must be really exciting!".

Split it into two parts, or handle it in two parts.

1 - What was the game supposed to be, did it match up.
2 - Then include the opinion.

This 'review' is all opinion about the implementation for the first half.

Only in the second half does it actually address real wrongs in the game.

"Real Wrongs" that's a matter of opinion as well. In fact, he included both parts (what is was supposed to be and his own opinion), just the opposite way round to the way you said they should be written. Does that in fact mean his entire view is valid? Also just because you disagree with his opinions, doesn't mean they arn't "real wrongs" with the game.

I'm sorry, I don't see where he acknowledges Bioware's concept for the characters, their development, just his opinion about how poor it is.

Biowares concept, development and implementation of characters (their "idea") is irrelevant if the reviewer still found them boring, contrived, stereotyped and lacking in character. It just shows that in his opinion, Biowares "idea" was wrong or poorly implemented.

Modifié par Akimb0, 08 février 2010 - 12:23 .