257 réponses à ce sujet

[hex23]

TJSolo wrote...

You might want to read more as Hudson contradicts Norman on this issue.
Or how about not trying to call upon devs, numbers, or other people to try and validate yourself.
There are people scratching their heads and wondering where Hudson gets his information from as mining in ME2 garnishes a wide spectrum of reactions, strangely addictive well is more of an obscure one not exactly frequently commented as such.

The latest info is Casey Hudson saying people don't mind it. So I'm going off the latest info. You're going off what she said simply because you agree with her.

To put it into perspective, the game is averaging 96% on Metacritic and you'd be hard pressed to find any reviews that nitpick the planet scanning. Some sites like Gametrailers called it "addictive", which is the same word he used.

Obviously you'll dismiss those reviews for some random reason though. They're all biased or paid off, huh?

And sorry but you do need some factual basis to "validate" claims. You could say most people hate it, I could say most people don't....what's the point exactly? Judging by the reviews it's not hated. Judging by Casey Hudson it's not hated. If you want to reference Christina Norman from the past, be my guest.

[SkullandBonesmember]

I think http://angryjoeshow.com/ had a great idea in his review with his suggestion of the clouds thing.

Modifié par SkullandBonesmember, 21 mars 2010 - 10:02 .

[TJSolo]

One doesn't need validation for opinions.

You are the one begging for validation for you statements and will demean anything that doesn't.

Anyone can see that by how you proclaim Hudsons statements but belittle Normans because they are older(lol@few weeks).



Also Hudson did not attach the emotion of hate or love to mining; that is your doing.

He only said he heard frequently that people called it strangely addictive.

[Tasker]

Surely you'd think the fact that they give you bonus resources when you start a new game plus, indicates that even the Bioware devs think the scannings crap?

[Daeion]

hex23 wrote...
If you want to reference Christina Norman from the past, be my guest.

It hasn't even been a full two weeks since Christina Norman's panel at GDC so it's not as if it's that far in the past that it should be ignored.

[Sanzee]

I totally read it... but I still can't say Mass Effect 2 was "RPG-y" enough for me.

[Weskerr]

But Casey, the emperor has no clothes!

[AngryFrozenWater]

slimgrin wrote...

I want a link of Hudsen saying this. Hardly believable. Does he really think that people are ok with the Chinese water torture of video games?

Have a look at page 5 of this thread.

[Mimaiselphenai]

I'm not fond of planet scanning, but I also stopped scanning planets that don't have anomalies on them. I still have an excess of minerals from just that with most of my weapon upgrades finished.

[contown]

You've gotta be kidding me. "Strangely addictive"? More like "yawn-inducing boring".

[SkullandBonesmember]

slimgrin wrote...

I want a link of Hudsen saying this. Hardly believable. Does he really think that people are ok with the Chinese water torture of video games?

I subscribe to GameInformer, I can confirm it.

[hex23]

TJSolo wrote...

One doesn't need validation for opinions.
You are the one begging for validation for you statements and will demean anything that doesn't.
Anyone can see that by how you proclaim Hudsons statements but belittle Normans because they are older(lol@few weeks).

Also Hudson did not attach the emotion of hate or love to mining; that is your doing.
He only said he heard frequently that people called it strangely addictive.

I didn't belittle anything. Stop being melodramatic. I didn't say anything about her opinion, at all. I said the most recent opinion is Casey's. You're bold faced lying implying otherwise. It's ridiculous you'd lie about something as trivial as what I said or meant, when my post is right at the top of the page for all to see.

You do need your opinions to be validated in some fashion if you're talking to someone who has a different opinion. Otherwise there is no conversation.

If you think "most people" hate the scanning, and I disagree, I can point to 50+ reviews that either praise it, or at the very least don't "hate" it. You call it "validation", I call it backing myself up with facts.

This is how real life works. How you don't know this, I have no idea.

Lastly stop being intentionally dense. You know damn well if he said most people think it's addictive, he obviously meant they liked it. This is especially obvious given Gametrailers used those exact same words and scored the game a 9.7.

Modifié par hex23, 22 mars 2010 - 12:36 .

[Si-Shen]

TJSolo wrote...

Si-Shen wrote...
 I find the ME2 method simplified, although not all the worlds are the same size, some are larger or smaller.

Not about shape.
No, pay attention. You can see a planet and read its description, there the sizes vary but when you actually scan all the planets are the same size every time.
But if you think the planet scanning is more unique then the worlds the mako drove on, that is you opinion.
I just find it completely laughable, in my opinion.

And how were the mako levels different?  A mountain ridge was 20' west of your starting point instead of 20' east?  They changed the ground colour and the atmopher a bit and it was "a new world".   There was no varriety and it made the mako levels boring, I might have changed my opinion if there had been some varriety between the planets but since there wasn't the simplified scanning method is prefered for me.

As for a previous poster that quoted my comment about it being addictive and "wearing off" I never said it wore off, I simply did the bare minimum... I ran out of credits my first play through somehow so I kept my scanning to just what I needed.

[Weskerr]

hex23 wrote...



If you think "most people" hate the scanning, and I disagree, I can point to 50+ reviews that either praise it, or at the very least don't "hate" it. You call it "validation", I call it backing myself up with facts.

The problem with citing reviews in support of the planet scanning system is that they were made immediately after, if not before, the game was released. This means that the reviewers were not exposed to the game for more than one playthrough before publishing their reviews. It seems to me that people on these forums had little problem with planet scanning at first. but after replaying the game it became tedious, boring, and monotonous. I had no problem with the planet scanning system my first playthrough either. It was during my subsequent playthroughs in which I wanted to avoid planet scanning as much as possible.

Modifié par Weskerr, 22 mars 2010 - 12:50 .

[Ecael]

Weskerr wrote...

The problem with citing reviews in support of the planet scanning system is that they were made immediately after, if not before, the game was released. This means that the reviewers were not exposed to the game for more than one playthrough before publishing their reviews. It seems to me that people on these forums had little problem with planet scanning at first. but after replaying the game it became tedious, boring, and monotonous. I had no problem with the planet scanning system my first playthrough either. It was during my subsequent playthroughs in which I wanted to avoid planet scanning as much as possible.

Planet scanning isn't required, really. That's why it's valid to judge it after only one playthrough.

I'm also assuming the critics scanned a little between missions rather than one large chunk. That might make it a little more bearable.

It would be bad if critics judged Mass Effect 2 after a third playthrough saying "The Mass Effect series is terrible, I pick different options and get the same importable endings"

[AngryFrozenWater]

mrfoo1 wrote...

@AngryFrozenWater
What quote specifically.

DoNotResistHate wrote...

Casey hudson quote "We had lots of feed back on the orbital minigame, and a frequent comment is that it's 'strangely addictive'"

DoNotResistHate wrote...

Oh yea the quote is in game informer 204, On page 24. It has Portal 2 on the cover. Yes there are these things called magazines that exist outside of cyberspace believe it or not. I don't even know if Game Informer publishes the articles from the magazine online.

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

I want a link of Hudsen saying this. Hardly believable. Does he really think that people are ok with the Chinese water torture of video games?

I subscribe to GameInformer, I can confirm it.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 22 mars 2010 - 01:12 .

[Weskerr]

Ecael wrote...

Weskerr wrote...

The problem with citing reviews in support of the planet scanning system is that they were made immediately after, if not before, the game was released. This means that the reviewers were not exposed to the game for more than one playthrough before publishing their reviews. It seems to me that people on these forums had little problem with planet scanning at first. but after replaying the game it became tedious, boring, and monotonous. I had no problem with the planet scanning system my first playthrough either. It was during my subsequent playthroughs in which I wanted to avoid planet scanning as much as possible.

Planet scanning isn't required, really. That's why it's valid to judge it after only one playthrough.

I'm also assuming the critics scanned a little between missions rather than one large chunk. That might make it a little more bearable.

It would be bad if critics judged Mass Effect 2 after a third playthrough saying "The Mass Effect series is terrible, I pick different options and get the same importable endings"

It certainly is vaild for reviewers to give valued judgements about planet scanning after one playthrough. After all, it's their job to judge and evaluate the quality of any game as they are released to the public. However, considering the high replayability of Mass Effect 2, looking to reviews for appraisals of certain aspects of the game - such as planet scanning - is not the best way for one to determine whether or not those aspects are good. So, if you're a player who plans on replaying ME2 after beating it once, then relying on reviews can sometimes be misleading in regards to evaluating the quality of some parts of the game.

[TJSolo]

hex23 wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

One doesn't need validation for opinions.
You are the one begging for validation for you statements and will demean anything that doesn't.
Anyone can see that by how you proclaim Hudsons statements but belittle Normans because they are older(lol@few weeks).

Also Hudson did not attach the emotion of hate or love to mining; that is your doing.
He only said he heard frequently that people called it strangely addictive.

I didn't belittle anything. Stop being melodramatic. I didn't say anything about her opinion, at all. I said the most recent opinion is Casey's. You're bold faced lying implying otherwise. It's ridiculous you'd lie about something as trivial as what I said or meant, when my post is right at the top of the page for all to see.

You do need your opinions to be validated in some fashion if you're talking to someone who has a different opinion. Otherwise there is no conversation.

If you think "most people" hate the scanning, and I disagree, I can point to 50+ reviews that either praise it, or at the very least don't "hate" it. You call it "validation", I call it backing myself up with facts.

This is how real life works. How you don't know this, I have no idea.

Lastly stop being intentionally dense. You know damn well if he said most people think it's addictive, he obviously meant they liked it. This is especially obvious given Gametrailers used those exact same words and scored the game a 9.7.

Belittle -
–verb (used with object),-tled, -tling. to regard or portray as less impressive or important than appearances indicate; depreciate; disparage. (dictionary.com)
By attempting to make Normans statements seem less by implying that they are old and that Hudsons are more prevalent because the statement it is the most recent.
That is belittling by definition.
You seem really myopic in your veiw on things like there can be only one right opinion. Hudson and Norman expressed their opinions on scanning. The opinions are different, neither of them are applying the emotions hate and love.

No you do not need opinions to be validated to have a conversation. When a person confuses opinions with facts then supporting evidence would be needed to prove the fact.
Real life, I know the difference between a fact and an opinion.

I am not and have not in this thread commented that many, a lot, all or any number of people hate scanning.
I have just commented on the topic that calling it strangely addictive is not something I have commonly heard.
Again stop trying to associate hate/love, addiction can be either, neither, or both.

Nobody on this issue needs reviews inorder to validate their opinion on planet scanning, except you.
If someone says they don't like, well that is that. You can talk to them ask for elaboration , point out things you like, maybe even make fun of them but at no point can you call your opinion right and their wrong.
Reviews, again? You can not validate or invalidate anyones opinion on planet scanning because you find a review which is also based on opinion.

I am not being dense nor am I putting words in Hudsons mouth that were not said. He said "strangely addictive" no more no less on the situation. My reply was to what he said I didn't even try to read anything else into the words.


@Si-Shen
I see your point but like I said. It is funny that you claim the mako worlds have no variety when planet scanning worlds are just as devoid of variety.

Modifié par TJSolo, 22 mars 2010 - 02:03 .

[DoNotResistHate]

hex23 wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

One doesn't need validation for opinions.
You are the one begging for validation for you statements and will demean anything that doesn't.
Anyone can see that by how you proclaim Hudsons statements but belittle Normans because they are older(lol@few weeks).

Also Hudson did not attach the emotion of hate or love to mining; that is your doing.
He only said he heard frequently that people called it strangely addictive.

I didn't belittle anything. Stop being melodramatic. I didn't say anything about her opinion, at all. I said the most recent opinion is Casey's. You're bold faced lying implying otherwise. It's ridiculous you'd lie about something as trivial as what I said or meant, when my post is right at the top of the page for all to see.

You do need your opinions to be validated in some fashion if you're talking to someone who has a different opinion. Otherwise there is no conversation.

If you think "most people" hate the scanning, and I disagree, I can point to 50+ reviews that either praise it, or at the very least don't "hate" it. You call it "validation", I call it backing myself up with facts.

This is how real life works. How you don't know this, I have no idea.

Lastly stop being intentionally dense. You know damn well if he said most people think it's addictive, he obviously meant they liked it. This is especially obvious given Gametrailers used those exact same words and scored the game a 9.7.

Two things first of all like someone already said the reviewers probably don't have time for multiple play throughs. They get the game have to play through it and take notes then they have to write the article before their deadline. So they likely didn't have time to do 2 or 3 play throughs.   Not to mention the fact that I don't really give a **** what some critic thinks about the game.  They don't even come close to making up the majority of biowares audience.  If only the reviewers purchased the game BW would be out of business fast.   I have seen plenty of games get good reviews and then have horrible sales.

Second of all many people here(at least the ones posting in this thread) obviously do not agree with you so your continued attempts at convincing us about how awesome planet scanning is, is probably going to fall on deaf ears.   I can accept that you love your planet scanning you love clenching your fingers and spinning a sphere for several minutes at a time. I can accept that but I think it sucks and so do a lot of other people.   It seems like you are having problems accepting that.   

[sarcasm]But but  but..... according  to the reviewers you guys are supposed to love planet scanning. [/sarcasm]   


Unfortunately there is a disconnect between what reviewers say and what the fans actually think.  

[DoNotResistHate]

Honestly I wouldn't say I hate it just that I strongly dislike it.  I consider it to be about as fun watching grass grow, staring at a wall, waiting at an extremely long stop light, or sitting in traffic.

Modifié par DoNotResistHate, 22 mars 2010 - 02:55 .

[Vaeliorin]

slimgrin wrote...
Seriously, can anyone think of a good mini game?

The Galaga-esque minigame in Jade Empire and the snowboarding game in FF7.

[masterthehero]

Mini-games I liked:



Racing in Knights of the Old Republic

FF7 Motorcycle, submarine, snowboarding, roller coaster, basketball, and fighting mini games.

Street Fighter and Final Fight: Destroy the car as fast as you can.



There have been plenty of great mini games over the years, planet scanning would not be one of them. It's only fun if you have to do it once in a while, it's not as fun when you have to do it all the time.