It hasn't even gone gold yet, how can they be reviewing it already?
I mean, I know it's going to get nines and tens pretty much across the board just because there's so much to do, but really.
A game this long, Bioware probably sent out review copies before going gold, just so reviews didn't come out two weeks after release. That's probably a damn good sign on how complete and debugged the game is.
I especially love how the review boils down to "great story, looks gorgeous, gameplay is kinda meh."
And that's a 9.75? Does their scale run from 8 to 10 or something?
I imagine you have to consider the intent here - BioWare's games are not about gameplay except in the most nominal sense, they are about the narrative. And the narrative can pull that weight.
Obviously a 10 isn't a "perfect" score, it's....
I don't know what it is. But it's not a perfect score.
God, number reviews are getting dumber the more I think about them.
I'm not entirely convinced that their intent is to have lackluster interaction wrapped up in a great story. Hell, if that was all I wanted I'd save four hundred bucks and buy a book.
I've no doubt it's an awesome game and I'll buy it on release day, but still. WTF, reviewers?
That's still pretty vague. I mean, KOTOR combat wasn't really all that exciting, but if that's as good as it gets in Mass Effect I would be happy, if the story is amazing.
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
edited October 2007
Well, there is stuff floating around on the entire. But basically what the reviewer said is that everything is great but the combat is hard to manage. See, I don't understand what he means by "hard to manage" so I would have to see for myself. Probably have to get the magazine for the exact words...maybe see if I can find a Wal-Mart or something...I really need a new subscription.
Dragkonias on
0
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
Well, there is stuff floating around on the entire. But basically what the reviewer said is that everything is great but the combat is hard to manage. See, I don't understand what he means by "hard to manage" so I would have to see for myself. Probably have to get the magazine for the exact words...maybe see if I can find a Wal-Mart or something...I really need a new subscription.
Well it very well could be, I suppose, depending on how much you're doing with combat. From the videos, combat in ME looked like it could range from extremely satisfying to a bit overwhelming (controlling all three characters specials while fighting off a few characters and such). That may have been what they meant, but like you said, we really need to see the text.
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
edited October 2007
Oh...I'm pretty much buying Mass Effect no matter what, really. Only thing that would stop me is if they said somehow buying the game would cause open a portal to hell and cause Armageddon...and even then I would have to think about it.
Not to mention I consider any review above 8 to be a good one so it isn't like this one is negative or anything.
I have no wish to derail, but I dunno how anyone can take *any* review these days seriously. I suppose if you do read a lot of reviews and know the reviewers and know what they in particular like and don't like in comparison to yourself, you can use that to guage the review better. But still, it's just one person's view, add to that, this person gets paid to do nothing but play and review games, which that alone adds a bias in my eyes. in addition, there's always that looming dread that a company might have paid a reviewer for a favorable review.
Read a couple of the highest ones and a couple of the lowest ones to get a good idea of what the good and bad points are and then figure out your own reaction. v:|v
Well, like Dragkonias, I'm pretty much sold on this game. I've heard enough to convince me that I'm going to buy this game. (no pre-ordering though, hate pre-ordering but that's another thread)
I still want to play a demo, but unless the demo is just horribly horribly bad, I'm still buying this. So I see this review, and the little conspiracy theorist in the back of my head is wondering if the review merely confirms that this game is going to be good, or did they really even play the game at all and are just getting the review out as fast as possible so they get points for being first, and giving it a high score merely because they're jumping on the bandwagon.
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
edited October 2007
Really...I believe thinking that a company paid for a review is just a case of simple internet paranoia and bashing. I've never really seen a case where a review site or mag...a respectable one at least, overrated a game(though I don't read reviews like crazy so I'm just going for the decent amount I do read.) If anything I've seen mags and games underrate games then come back later and change their opinion a few times.
There have been cases where people thought a game was overrated, Halo being a good example, but with games like those it's usually just as many if not more people saying that it deserved what it got. Thing is thatpeople forget that like anything else it is an opinion. And sure the people are paid by their company and given a bit or authority to influence the views of others, but in the end it's just an opinion like anything else. So, it'll be bias like anything and it may not be what you were expecting.
And really, I've never thought that a review should be taken down to it's most minute value. Most of the time a review isn't meant to get someone who wasn't interested in a game to buy a game(people who knew about it but didn't actually want to buy it). It's usually used as a marker for a. telling people who weren't sure if they wanted the game whether they are should reconsider or just keep on, b. make people who were going to get it rethink their purchase, or c. show the game to people who didn't know about it and maybe influence them on it.
A review score, like anything else, is pretty much an advertisement and I think it's a good thing. Because one it makes people more aware of something and two its generally makes some developer work harder to make sure their game at least doesn't fall into the 6 and under range(except for movie tie-ins which usually dont' care so much about scores as much as getting a product out while the hype from their movie is still going).
I don't think a review should so much be used as an end all be all, but I think if only taken as advice it is a great source of information. Besides, most of the time people who are going to get something have already made of their mind about it and the same for people who aren't interested. Like I said, they're more or less for the fencesitters who aren't sure.
Things are definitely better now, but, IMO, there was a time where there was a demo for virtually every game in existence. Then maybe, I dunno, 4-5 years ago, it seemed like demos stopped coming out as often. they'd either never make one or they'd make one months after the game was released. It was about that time, again IMO, that reviewer sites became more popular. To me, it seemed like reviewers were taking the place of demos, why go to the trouble of making demos when you can just get someone to review a game. And to me, it seemed like a disproportionate number of reviews were in the 8-9 range for scores.
I'll happily concede that maybe my perceptions are colored or off, and I'm glad to see more and more demos coming out these days. I just have a sort of innate distrust of reviews.
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
edited October 2007
Well...I think the reason we don't see demos a lot anymore...is probably just because they may take a lot more time to make, though I think Xbox Live and PSN have the right idea with them. But really...I'll say the only demos I ever played that changed my mind about a game was GRAW2 and Ghost Recon: Vegas. As far as other demos went the games were pretty much what I expected them to be.
So...I think demos are a good bonus and believe me I think a Mass Effect demo would be great, but I don't think they're necessary.
Really...I believe thinking that a company paid for a review is just a case of simple internet paranoia and bashing. I've never really seen a case where a review site or mag...a respectable one at least, overrated a game(though I don't read reviews like crazy so I'm just going for the decent amount I do read.) If anything I've seen mags and games underrate games then come back later and change their opinion a few times.
The earliest occasion I can remember where "false" review scores caused an outrage was with Driv3r. It received an 8 or 9 by Gamespot, but was subsequently changed to a 5 shortly after. The game was so blatantly bad that it could not have received a high score unless it had been paid off.
Cherrn on
All creature will die and all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai.
Really...I believe thinking that a company paid for a review is just a case of simple internet paranoia and bashing. I've never really seen a case where a review site or mag...a respectable one at least, overrated a game(though I don't read reviews like crazy so I'm just going for the decent amount I do read.) If anything I've seen mags and games underrate games then come back later and change their opinion a few times.
There have been cases where people thought a game was overrated, Halo being a good example, but with games like those it's usually just as many if not more people saying that it deserved what it got. Thing is thatpeople forget that like anything else it is an opinion. And sure the people are paid by their company and given a bit or authority to influence the views of others, but in the end it's just an opinion like anything else. So, it'll be bias like anything and it may not be what you were expecting.
And really, I've never thought that a review should be taken down to it's most minute value. Most of the time a review isn't meant to get someone who wasn't interested in a game to buy a game(people who knew about it but didn't actually want to buy it). It's usually used as a marker for a. telling people who weren't sure if they wanted the game whether they are should reconsider or just keep on, b. make people who were going to get it rethink their purchase, or c. show the game to people who didn't know about it and maybe influence them on it.
A review score, like anything else, is pretty much an advertisement and I think it's a good thing. Because one it makes people more aware of something and two its generally makes some developer work harder to make sure their game at least doesn't fall into the 6 and under range(except for movie tie-ins which usually dont' care so much about scores as much as getting a product out while the hype from their movie is still going).
I don't think a review should so much be used as an end all be all, but I think if only taken as advice it is a great source of information. Besides, most of the time people who are going to get something have already made of their mind about it and the same for people who aren't interested. Like I said, they're more or less for the fencesitters who aren't sure.
/end long post
Evidently you've never heard of Payola.
EDIT: Sorry. I'm being a little passive-aggressive.
Anyhow, to say that no company has ever paid off a reviewer, or used some kind of other bribe to induce a high score is a bit short-sighted. I'm not saying that this happens every day, every month, or even every year, but it does happen.
Not saying ME isn't going to be good (I'm really looking forward to it).
Despite what the review says, I bet I can get more than 18 to 30 hours out of this.
Every RPG time estimate seems short these days.
Rogue Galaxy and FF12, both "40 hour RPGs" took my favorite JRPG lover over 100 hours to complete.
I've got a hunch that this is another game where you get out of it what you put in.
I doubt the reviewer bothered with many side-quests, and that time was probably for the story. You could probably spend 18 to 30 hours just exploring every planet or space debris. They put in hundreds of locations for you to explore, after all. I know I'll be the kind of gamer who tries to explore every single one, so it's going to take me a very long time to beat. And then I'm going to have to do it all over again as the opposite gender and see how that changes the story, and try different things. I can see myself playing the game multiple times.
Dashui on
Xbox Live, PSN & Origin: Vacorsis 3DS: 2638-0037-166
0
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
edited October 2007
KotOR was like that. you could beat it fast or... not. I hope this has that flexibility. ups replay value when there is stuff you can do or can skip, ya know, like what 90% of this type of game is full of.
it's also what I bought the 360 for and what's been calming me every time I look at it and realize I didn't really need to buy it yet. then I say wait, mass effect.
I hope it's good because nothing is worse than that sinking feeling you get when a game you are psyched for fails you.
KotOR was like that. you could beat it fast or... not. I hope this has that flexibility. ups replay value when there is stuff you can do or can skip, ya know, like what 90% of this type of game is full of.
it's also what I bought the 360 for and what's been calming me every time I look at it and realize I didn't really need to buy it yet. then I say wait, mass effect.
I hope it's good because nothing is worse than that sinking feeling you get when a game you are psyched for fails you.
Bioware hasn't let us, or at least me, down yet, and I think 9.75 qualifies as good so far.
Dashui on
Xbox Live, PSN & Origin: Vacorsis 3DS: 2638-0037-166
I hope it's good because nothing is worse than that sinking feeling you get when a game you are psyched for fails you.
Yeah, that sucks.
The issues he mentioned with combat...
I'll try to be optimistic for us here...
Teammate AI occasionally being retarded is something I'm really used to in games.
After playing Earth Defense Force, there's a chance it could be almost endearing. So long as they're shouting something very gung-ho and excitedly stupid while acting like it.
There's a good chance the majority of us will be better at the game than the reviewer (take THAT reviewers everywhere! I think you all can be shitty gamers sometimes!) and we'll do a better job using the team commands to keep our buddies' in line.
Enemies hitting me off radar? I'll do my best to pretend "I've been ambushed!" and try to take it in stride.
If it was an enormously bad problem, it would have been complained about more than it was.
RPG elements being a little thin? It's still got shooter mechanics in it, and quite frankly I don't think I would mind a complete lack of level up systems so long as the weapons are nice and the storyline is killer stuff.
I find it hard to be... positive. Someone pat me on my e-back!
I hope it's good because nothing is worse than that sinking feeling you get when a game you are psyched for fails you.
Yeah, that sucks.
The issues he mentioned with combat...
I'll try to be optimistic for us here...
Teammate AI occasionally being retarded is something I'm really used to in games.
After playing Earth Defense Force, there's a chance it could be almost endearing. So long as they're shouting something very gung-ho and excitedly stupid while acting like it.
There's a good chance the majority of us will be better at the game than the reviewer (take THAT reviewers everywhere! I think you all can be shitty gamers sometimes!) and we'll do a better job using the team commands to keep our buddies' in line.
Enemies hitting me off radar? I'll do my best to pretend "I've been ambushed!" and try to take it in stride.
If it was an enormously bad problem, it would have been complained about more than it was.
RPG elements being a little thin? It's still got shooter mechanics in it, and quite frankly I don't think I would mind a complete lack of level up systems so long as the weapons are nice and the storyline is killer stuff.
I find it hard to be... positive. Someone pat me on my e-back!
I'm just going to be frank, if the RPG elements are that thin coming from Bioware I'm going to be pissed off.
I hope it's good because nothing is worse than that sinking feeling you get when a game you are psyched for fails you.
Yeah, that sucks.
The issues he mentioned with combat...
I'll try to be optimistic for us here...
Teammate AI occasionally being retarded is something I'm really used to in games.
After playing Earth Defense Force, there's a chance it could be almost endearing. So long as they're shouting something very gung-ho and excitedly stupid while acting like it.
There's a good chance the majority of us will be better at the game than the reviewer (take THAT reviewers everywhere! I think you all can be shitty gamers sometimes!) and we'll do a better job using the team commands to keep our buddies' in line.
Enemies hitting me off radar? I'll do my best to pretend "I've been ambushed!" and try to take it in stride.
If it was an enormously bad problem, it would have been complained about more than it was.
RPG elements being a little thin? It's still got shooter mechanics in it, and quite frankly I don't think I would mind a complete lack of level up systems so long as the weapons are nice and the storyline is killer stuff.
I find it hard to be... positive. Someone pat me on my e-back!
I'm just going to be frank, if the RPG elements are that thin coming from Bioware I'm going to be pissed off.
If it's going to be thinner than KOTOR's RPG elements, then I'm worried. Hopefully that won't be the case.
Posts
A game this long, Bioware probably sent out review copies before going gold, just so reviews didn't come out two weeks after release. That's probably a damn good sign on how complete and debugged the game is.
Im probably going to give it an A minus point 5
Meh, that makes you a tool. Me, I'm going to use symbols you know like what the artist formerly known as Prince does.
Mass Effect: :arrow: out of :!:
Dude, that's a pretty generous review. I think you were blinded by your fanboyism for the game. You should be more critical in your reviews.
Battle.net: Fireflash#1425
Steam Friend code: 45386507
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Generic raaaage
And that's a 9.75? Does their scale run from 8 to 10 or something?
I imagine you have to consider the intent here - BioWare's games are not about gameplay except in the most nominal sense, they are about the narrative. And the narrative can pull that weight.
Obviously a 10 isn't a "perfect" score, it's....
I don't know what it is. But it's not a perfect score.
God, number reviews are getting dumber the more I think about them.
I've no doubt it's an awesome game and I'll buy it on release day, but still. WTF, reviewers?
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Everybody should do like Yahtzee -- only less hilarious.
I mean it.
Wait, did you already get the magazine? I'd only seen the score, not the review itself.
Well it very well could be, I suppose, depending on how much you're doing with combat. From the videos, combat in ME looked like it could range from extremely satisfying to a bit overwhelming (controlling all three characters specials while fighting off a few characters and such). That may have been what they meant, but like you said, we really need to see the text.
Or we can just play the game and enjoy it. :P
Not to mention I consider any review above 8 to be a good one so it isn't like this one is negative or anything.
Gimme a demo bitches!
Enlist in Star Citizen! Citizenship must be earned!
Read a couple of the highest ones and a couple of the lowest ones to get a good idea of what the good and bad points are and then figure out your own reaction. v:|v
I still want to play a demo, but unless the demo is just horribly horribly bad, I'm still buying this. So I see this review, and the little conspiracy theorist in the back of my head is wondering if the review merely confirms that this game is going to be good, or did they really even play the game at all and are just getting the review out as fast as possible so they get points for being first, and giving it a high score merely because they're jumping on the bandwagon.
Enlist in Star Citizen! Citizenship must be earned!
There have been cases where people thought a game was overrated, Halo being a good example, but with games like those it's usually just as many if not more people saying that it deserved what it got. Thing is thatpeople forget that like anything else it is an opinion. And sure the people are paid by their company and given a bit or authority to influence the views of others, but in the end it's just an opinion like anything else. So, it'll be bias like anything and it may not be what you were expecting.
And really, I've never thought that a review should be taken down to it's most minute value. Most of the time a review isn't meant to get someone who wasn't interested in a game to buy a game(people who knew about it but didn't actually want to buy it). It's usually used as a marker for a. telling people who weren't sure if they wanted the game whether they are should reconsider or just keep on, b. make people who were going to get it rethink their purchase, or c. show the game to people who didn't know about it and maybe influence them on it.
A review score, like anything else, is pretty much an advertisement and I think it's a good thing. Because one it makes people more aware of something and two its generally makes some developer work harder to make sure their game at least doesn't fall into the 6 and under range(except for movie tie-ins which usually dont' care so much about scores as much as getting a product out while the hype from their movie is still going).
I don't think a review should so much be used as an end all be all, but I think if only taken as advice it is a great source of information. Besides, most of the time people who are going to get something have already made of their mind about it and the same for people who aren't interested. Like I said, they're more or less for the fencesitters who aren't sure.
/end long post
Things are definitely better now, but, IMO, there was a time where there was a demo for virtually every game in existence. Then maybe, I dunno, 4-5 years ago, it seemed like demos stopped coming out as often. they'd either never make one or they'd make one months after the game was released. It was about that time, again IMO, that reviewer sites became more popular. To me, it seemed like reviewers were taking the place of demos, why go to the trouble of making demos when you can just get someone to review a game. And to me, it seemed like a disproportionate number of reviews were in the 8-9 range for scores.
I'll happily concede that maybe my perceptions are colored or off, and I'm glad to see more and more demos coming out these days. I just have a sort of innate distrust of reviews.
Enlist in Star Citizen! Citizenship must be earned!
So...I think demos are a good bonus and believe me I think a Mass Effect demo would be great, but I don't think they're necessary.
The earliest occasion I can remember where "false" review scores caused an outrage was with Driv3r. It received an 8 or 9 by Gamespot, but was subsequently changed to a 5 shortly after. The game was so blatantly bad that it could not have received a high score unless it had been paid off.
http://www.n4g.com/xbox360/News-74430.aspx
enjoy.
skate, halo 3
Evidently you've never heard of Payola.
EDIT: Sorry. I'm being a little passive-aggressive.
Anyhow, to say that no company has ever paid off a reviewer, or used some kind of other bribe to induce a high score is a bit short-sighted. I'm not saying that this happens every day, every month, or even every year, but it does happen.
Not saying ME isn't going to be good (I'm really looking forward to it).
Anyhow, enough of the de-railing.
Terrible game.
Not like Halo, which only managed a ქ, but we're not looking at The Orange Box, either.
I love this post (from page one).
I don't know what to think....
"This game is so fucking good that your teammates will shoot at walls two feet in front of them while you get hit by enemies off your radar! WOO"
"This RPG is so deep, you'll have seen it all in just a few hours!"
How about this one.
"This review is so well written you won't even know what the game is like!"
The review did not really seem to have much information in it.
skate, halo 3
Every RPG time estimate seems short these days.
Rogue Galaxy and FF12, both "40 hour RPGs" took my favorite JRPG lover over 100 hours to complete.
I've got a hunch that this is another game where you get out of it what you put in.
I doubt the reviewer bothered with many side-quests, and that time was probably for the story. You could probably spend 18 to 30 hours just exploring every planet or space debris. They put in hundreds of locations for you to explore, after all. I know I'll be the kind of gamer who tries to explore every single one, so it's going to take me a very long time to beat. And then I'm going to have to do it all over again as the opposite gender and see how that changes the story, and try different things. I can see myself playing the game multiple times.
it's also what I bought the 360 for and what's been calming me every time I look at it and realize I didn't really need to buy it yet. then I say wait, mass effect.
I hope it's good because nothing is worse than that sinking feeling you get when a game you are psyched for fails you.
Bioware hasn't let us, or at least me, down yet, and I think 9.75 qualifies as good so far.
Yeah, that sucks.
The issues he mentioned with combat...
I'll try to be optimistic for us here...
Teammate AI occasionally being retarded is something I'm really used to in games.
After playing Earth Defense Force, there's a chance it could be almost endearing. So long as they're shouting something very gung-ho and excitedly stupid while acting like it.
There's a good chance the majority of us will be better at the game than the reviewer (take THAT reviewers everywhere! I think you all can be shitty gamers sometimes!) and we'll do a better job using the team commands to keep our buddies' in line.
Enemies hitting me off radar? I'll do my best to pretend "I've been ambushed!" and try to take it in stride.
If it was an enormously bad problem, it would have been complained about more than it was.
RPG elements being a little thin? It's still got shooter mechanics in it, and quite frankly I don't think I would mind a complete lack of level up systems so long as the weapons are nice and the storyline is killer stuff.
I find it hard to be... positive. Someone pat me on my e-back!
I'm just going to be frank, if the RPG elements are that thin coming from Bioware I'm going to be pissed off.