93 réponses à ce sujet

[Doug84]

Mikazukinoyaiba2 wrote...

I never heard of Game Critics and based on what I've seen, it is for good reason.

Edit: Upon reading his review further... it's not so bad. I don't understand his score, but the review wasn't written terribly.

Same here. Dunno about the review, but I don't really care. I think 7.5 is a low grade for an excellent game.

[Dudalizer]

This tool complained about not having as much character depth as Mass Effect? There is way more character progression in ME 2 than there was in ME 1. I agree about the Mako and inventory complaints though. I hope they have some sort of middle ground ME 1 and ME 2's exploratin and inventory features in ME 3.

[aeetos21]

Best to look at the review as an "outlying factor."

[Dave the Seagull]

Oh you'll probably hate the Zero Punctuation review, if 7.5 annoys you

[Adon 9]

Dave the Seagull wrote...

Oh you'll probably hate the Zero Punctuation review, if 7.5 annoys you

You kind of have to take any Zero Punctuation review with a heaping dose of salt, though... it's pretty much built on being negative.

[SL22]

So it got a 7.5 because of the choices you can make romance wise and also because Shepard was brought back to life... what? This is probably the worst review I've ever read.

The other stuff sort of makes sense but the above two points are hardly bad.

Modifié par SL22, 14 février 2010 - 03:14 .

[PingoBlack]

Adon 9 wrote...

Dave the Seagull wrote...

Oh you'll probably hate the Zero Punctuation review, if 7.5 annoys you

You kind of have to take any Zero Punctuation review with a heaping dose of salt, though... it's pretty much built on being negative.

But he can always back up what he complains about ... unlike this reviewer.
This was just a weird review, he seems to have liked it a lot, just complained about anything he could.

Like weapon proficiency stats ...

[PT.Vohnsen]

Tamcia wrote...

PT.Vohnsen wrote...

Tamcia wrote...

I stopped caring about game reviews long a go. Games rated high are crap, games rated low are good. Sometimes a critic hits spot on, but honestly I don't really care about that, since I can have my own opinion, thank you.

Then go get 10 low rated games and have fun...

I mostly play high rated, not because they are rated high, but because i think they are very good games. And some of the best games i have played, they are rated high, go figure.....

I'm not talking about trash games that get scores like 1 out of 10, is an indy game and has a name like "Stalin vs Marsians".

And I do have fun. Thats the point - I don't think its fun only because some dude near a PC thinks hes an expert cause he writes game reviews. I don't trust them, because you think sometimes companies don't buy reviews?

Lets see -
Bioschock 2 IGN gave 9.1 - overrated. 2nd part can't compare to the 1st part . Glad I did not waste money.
World of Warcraft - average above 9 - I found it waste of my time, want my cash back.
Some critics gave Dragon age a 7 , while I found it a wonderfulg game.


Sarcasm:

Whats that? Different type of games? People actually have their own tastes?  Well how do critics know that? Are critics objective or biased on their reviews? Do they have their won personal opinions? Critics give different scores? Opinions differ???


Not playing a game simply because it got a 7 from review is foolish. Of course if you prefer everyone else make the decision for you its ok, I know some people find thinking for themselves too hard :innocent:

I'm not talking about following one review, when I need guidance i read a lot of reviews and compare them.
According to you, if you should follow Game Critics, ME 2 should be a perfect game for you then? I mean, 7,5 not low and not among the highest scores. But if you follow the average score, the game would not be for you, because it scores to high!

The WOW score is fair i think. I don't play it, because it's not my style. But i know it's a great game that many love playing, and the reviews are fair about it.

I understand now that you go for games that score about 7-8 and try to awoid games on 9 and higher.
And that's just the lamest thing i have ever heard. People don't make decisions for me concerning which games i should play, fact is that the best games i know, also scores best. I just agree with 90% reviewers where you agree with 10%.

[Tamcia]

PT.Vohnsen wrote...

Tamcia wrote...

PT.Vohnsen wrote...

Tamcia wrote...

I stopped caring about game reviews long a go. Games rated high are crap, games rated low are good. Sometimes a critic hits spot on, but honestly I don't really care about that, since I can have my own opinion, thank you.

Then go get 10 low rated games and have fun...

I mostly play high rated, not because they are rated high, but because i think they are very good games. And some of the best games i have played, they are rated high, go figure.....

I'm not talking about trash games that get scores like 1 out of 10, is an indy game and has a name like "Stalin vs Marsians".

And I do have fun. Thats the point - I don't think its fun only because some dude near a PC thinks hes an expert cause he writes game reviews. I don't trust them, because you think sometimes companies don't buy reviews?

Lets see -
Bioschock 2 IGN gave 9.1 - overrated. 2nd part can't compare to the 1st part . Glad I did not waste money.
World of Warcraft - average above 9 - I found it waste of my time, want my cash back.
Some critics gave Dragon age a 7 , while I found it a wonderfulg game.


Sarcasm:

Whats that? Different type of games? People actually have their own tastes?  Well how do critics know that? Are critics objective or biased on their reviews? Do they have their won personal opinions? Critics give different scores? Opinions differ???


Not playing a game simply because it got a 7 from review is foolish. Of course if you prefer everyone else make the decision for you its ok, I know some people find thinking for themselves too hard :innocent:

I'm not talking about following one review, when I need guidance i read a lot of reviews and compare them.
According to you, if you should follow Game Critics, ME 2 should be a perfect game for you then? I mean, 7,5 not low and not among the highest scores. But if you follow the average score, the game would not be for you, because it scores to high!

The WOW score is fair i think. I don't play it, because it's not my style. But i know it's a great game that many love playing, and the reviews are fair about it.

I understand now that you go for games that score about 7-8 and try to awoid games on 9 and higher.
And that's just the lamest thing i have ever heard. People don't make decisions for me concerning which games i should play, fact is that the best games i know, also scores best. I just agree with 90% reviewers where you agree with 10%.

tbh you fail to see my point about reviews and make some carzy assumptions about me.

kthxbye

[PT.Vohnsen]

Tamcia wrote...

Games rated high are crap, games rated low are good. 

I don't fail to see anything.

Maybe you would like to explain this better then?

You simply don't agree with the average reviewer like i do.

[Tamcia]

PT.Vohnsen wrote...

Tamcia wrote...

Games rated high are crap, games rated low are good. 

I don't fail to see anything.

Maybe you would like to explain this better then?

You simply don't agree with the average reviewer like i do.

It's an overstatement I made to illustrate the problem.

How many critics do you read? 4-5? Sites like Gamespot give high scores all the time. Sites like Euro-gamer give too low scores. Some sites range, because they have different people reviewing and they look at different stuff. Problem is that many of the reviews are done by people who pretend to be specialists - those reviews are often biased. How can I take someone seriously when he writes a game review on a completely single player game, while comparing it to an MMO in the same review and basing the score on some completely irrational factors?

Its not always true, but its a trend I see.

Its not that I don't look at critic scores, its that I do my own researcha about a game and usually get the game before the reviews come in. I noticed that with my own preference its hard to guess whehter I will like a game based on a critic - they seem to me as they ahve their own preferences, so how can they write an objective review?

I played majority of the high rated game,s not because I go to check "professional" opinion of those critics, but because I look at otehr sources, such as forums, friend opinions, watch over gameplay, looka t the company that developed (there are companies on my blacklist). Sometimes reviewrs get an early look at the game - I've been mainly tricked with MMOs, like Age of Conan, Star Trek Online, Warhammer and some more. Since I knew everything there was to know bout the games before they released, I trusted them and they said: awesome game, great potential, definetly hitting top when released.

Now I simply make my own choice and only go arguing when I believe a review gave a crappy score to a good game or a famous developing company attaches its name to a product and it get high score only because of that.

I play games that range in score between 10 and 6 (lower scores mean games IS crappy), I just dont agree with reviewer point alocation in 10-6 category, I make my own choice.

[Unit-Alpha]

Yeah, I don't trust them either. McAfee Site Advisor went red when I went to that link.

[Mondo47]

Ararara wrote...

http://www.gamecriti...effect-2-review


WTF Do people really want to have
sex with grotesque alien crewmates?

"And in the end is that not what man has dreamt of since first he looked up at the stars?"

Zapp Brannigan

[PT.Vohnsen]

Tamcia wrote...

PT.Vohnsen wrote...

Tamcia wrote...

Games rated high are crap, games rated low are good. 

I don't fail to see anything.

Maybe you would like to explain this better then?

You simply don't agree with the average reviewer like i do.

It's an overstatement I made to illustrate the problem.

How many critics do you read? 4-5? Sites like Gamespot give high scores all the time. Sites like Euro-gamer give too low scores. Some sites range, because they have different people reviewing and they look at different stuff. Problem is that many of the reviews are done by people who pretend to be specialists - those reviews are often biased. How can I take someone seriously when he writes a game review on a completely single player game, while comparing it to an MMO in the same review and basing the score on some completely irrational factors?

Its not always true, but its a trend I see.

Its not that I don't look at critic scores, its that I do my own researcha about a game and usually get the game before the reviews come in. I noticed that with my own preference its hard to guess whehter I will like a game based on a critic - they seem to me as they ahve their own preferences, so how can they write an objective review?

I played majority of the high rated game,s not because I go to check "professional" opinion of those critics, but because I look at otehr sources, such as forums, friend opinions, watch over gameplay, looka t the company that developed (there are companies on my blacklist). Sometimes reviewrs get an early look at the game - I've been mainly tricked with MMOs, like Age of Conan, Star Trek Online, Warhammer and some more. Since I knew everything there was to know bout the games before they released, I trusted them and they said: awesome game, great potential, definetly hitting top when released.

Now I simply make my own choice and only go arguing when I believe a review gave a crappy score to a good game or a famous developing company attaches its name to a product and it get high score only because of that.

I play games that range in score between 10 and 6 (lower scores mean games IS crappy), I just dont agree with reviewer point alocation in 10-6 category, I make my own choice.

Ok i get your point now.

It's just that when you write "Games rated high are crap, games rated low are good", you need to explain that.
I don't get games because they are rated high, i get them because they are good and i like them. I have played games since 1990, and i know what a good game is. The game is not good because i say so, but i simply agree with the majorities of people writing reviews and setting a standard score for games. Not my invention, but simply a system recogniced by gamers world wide.

And that's why games rated high usually are the best games, otherwise the popular sites writing reviews would be useless, which i do not believe they are.

[DeeKay17]

don't pay attention to Game Critics, they have always been out of this world. probably they are the results of some failed experiments in area 51.

[Dinkamus_Littlelog]

Best review of ME2 Ive seen so far. Right on the spot, and this crap needs to be said over the arse kissing 10/10s that gloss over glaring faults that must be improved on for ME3.

[Fatal34Frame]

HOW DARE THEY, LET'S LAUNCH AN ANGRY MOB OF ME:2 FANS AT THEM

/sarcasm off

Seriously, I could care less what some magazine thinks of this game, this doesn't deprive me of the fun I had with it ;-) also it should be noted that ME:2 was accepted well by game critics (overall)

[HelterSkelter89]

a good rating but for the wrong reasons. the right reasons for this game only being a 7.5 is that there is no overheat anymore just crappy ammo, the game uses a cover system, the main character went from being strong in the first game to dying from a few bullets in this one along with many other reasons most of which are things that were in me1.

[binaryemperor]

ComTrav wrote...

http://www.metacriti...360/masseffect2

Try to find games with higher metascore.

In my random searches of games I KNOW have high score, I only found Super Mario Galaxy, at 97. That's right, it takes MARIO, the most famous and iconic character in all of gaming, to top Mass Effect.

Half Life 2 and bioshock both have a rating of 96. if I recall on their STEAM pages, which uses metacritic.

[binaryemperor]

HelterSkelter89 wrote...

a good rating but for the wrong reasons. the right reasons for this game only being a 7.5 is that there is no overheat anymore just crappy ammo, the game uses a cover system

ME1 had a cover system, too. it was better because some of the crates people hid behind could be tipped over on top of them with a sniper rifle. It was also simper, and not entirely necessary for survival.

Modifié par binaryemperor, 14 février 2010 - 07:51 .

[Agamo45]

Never heard of them. Looking at all the perfect and near perfect scores, their opinion is obviously in the vast minority.

[Seraosha]

This Thread wrote...

A 7.5 rating? Mass Effect 2 merely a steaming pile of fairly good? How atrocious! We can't have that - someone hang the reviewer! If reviewers don't idol worship my latest fave game in each review, they're doing something wrong. Mass Effect 2 ought to have an aggregate review score of OVER 9000 on metacritic by now, surely?!

To borrow  a response Edge Magazine gave to some other tedious moaners about some of their scores over the last year, most notably a DA:O 5/10, 'If, in offering an appraisal of anything, your most important objective is to reach agreement with everyone else, you're doing it wrong.'

Good response I thought. As it really isn't about making sure everyone in the universe gives your favourite game a 9. It's about an individual, a reviewer, offering their opinions on a new game and helping you decide whether it's worth a go. Now you can either take their perspective as gospel, or you can get the game yourself and form your own blooming opinion. Why whine about it?

As far as I'm concerned, Age of Empires II is the best videogame ever made, but I don't camp on forums grumbling about how genericgameswebsite gave it a 7.5 when it oh so blatantly deserved at least a 9. People are allowed their own opinions about games, even reviewers, and a cursory glance at these forums will turn up evidence enough that not everybody thinks Mass Effect 2 is one of the best games of all time.

Tyranny of the majority is an ugly thing all round. I really wish gamers weren't so quick to get their knickers in a twist every time they see a review that dares differ from anyone elses ¬_¬

[Doug84]

Adon 9 wrote...

Dave the Seagull wrote...

Oh you'll probably hate the Zero Punctuation review, if 7.5 annoys you

You kind of have to take any Zero Punctuation review with a heaping dose of salt, though... it's pretty much built on being negative.

Of course - the ZP review WILL be negative. And heaping doses of salt are usually necessary with Yahtzee. Though he does occasionally say he likes a game. Like the Batman one. Or the Assassins Creed 2 one.

[Doug84]

Seraosha wrote...

This Thread wrote...

A 7.5 rating? Mass Effect 2 merely a steaming pile of fairly good? How atrocious! We can't have that - someone hang the reviewer! If reviewers don't idol worship my latest fave game in each review, they're doing something wrong. Mass Effect 2 ought to have an aggregate review score of OVER 9000 on metacritic by now, surely?!

To borrow  a response Edge Magazine gave to some other tedious moaners about some of their scores over the last year, most notably a DA:O 5/10, 'If, in offering an appraisal of anything, your most important objective is to reach agreement with everyone else, you're doing it wrong.'

Woah, they gave DA:O 5/10 !? Well...I suppose there do exist people who don't like it. I thought it was but a myth.

[ComTrav]

Dave the Seagull wrote...

Oh you'll probably hate the Zero Punctuation review, if 7.5 annoys you

But Yahtze will be funny about it!

Besides, as he often says, no one listens to him to talk about games how much he likes a game. (Although his Duke Nukem 3D review shows how appropriately moved even such a hard-bitten cynic as he can be moved by such a transcendent masterpiece of human creative thought.)