Wonktonodi said:
|
Wat
That doesn't make any sense- dragon age is very much multiplatform
Time for hype
Wonktonodi said:
|
Wat
That doesn't make any sense- dragon age is very much multiplatform
Time for hype
Slimebeast said:
5? 4? Out of 5? Or out of 10? Or out of 100%? |
The OP is talking about the 10 point scale.
Tag(thx fkusumot) - "Yet again I completely fail to see your point..."
HD vs Wii, PC vs HD: http://www.vgchartz.com/forum/thread.php?id=93374
Why Regenerating Health is a crap game mechanic: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3986420
gamrReview's broken review scores: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4170835

leatherhat said:
Wat That doesn't make any sense- dragon age is very much multiplatform |
His point was to show that people do bad reviews when they have an agenda not just on the quality of the game. It doesn't only happen with the exclusives but it's more noticable. All that to point out that usein ocums razor to say it's bad instead of saying that early user reviews are flaming the game is a bad conclusion.
Wait until the game has been out for a year and see how the user reviews and critic reviews compair it won't be such a huge difference there.
it's crap like this that makes me wish Metacritic would just disable user scores; if people are going to throw tantrums like this they don't deserve to have their opinions heard
silicon said:
I don't think it should be considered dumbing down, however I'm not aware of 100% of the changes. |
Old mechanics aren't necessarily a barrier, almost always it only takes to improve the interface to make them more accessible. Removing deeper options because not everybody uses them changes the game's target and often it just piss the genre's fans off without really giving anything to more casual gamers. There are already tons of simplified RPGs available for those that don't like complications, and there are also good and deep RPGs that allow to learn them without excessive efforts, or at least with a gradual learning curve, ideal for those that after starting from the simpler ones want to get more challenges as they become more dedicated fans of the genre, but oversimplifying, dumbing down, deeper series to make them compete with the simpler ones is not the right thing to do, it will make the fans of the series mad and it won't make the casuals happier than playing games that were designed from the start to be simpler and appeal them. And let's not forget we are talking about RPGs: how many RPGs elements can be removed before the games aren't RPGs anymore? Trying to change RPGs so much that they aren't RPGs anymore to make those that aren't fans of the genre like them doesn't make much sense, and in fact up until now it never worked, or when it partially did, the result was so bland on every aspect that the new fans attracted were less than the old ones lost.
| RolStoppable said: It's probably still a better game than Sonic Chronicles. |
If it is half as good as Sonic Chronicles it will be a day one for me!
"Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth." -My good friend Mark Aurelius
Alby is right and for those saying we don't have the right to complain, that's just not true. I'm sure dragon age 2 is a good game, but were upset because it's not the game it was supposed to be. I've got plenty of action RPG's to play but what I don't have now is a strategy RPG, so I feel a little cheated.
And I'm also tired of this concept that console gamers need dumber down version's. Most console gamers, like me used to be PC gamers and switched for some simplicity in hardware and a little more comfort on the couch, we didn't switch cause we wanted games to be less complex. I was dissapointed that Dragon age origins didn't provide a top down view for the console, and for no reason other than the excuse that console gamers don't want that and it's really hard with analog sticks. Both reasons are retarded and insulting, and hopefully bioware will get the message.
| scat398 said: Alby is right and for those saying we don't have the right to complain, that's just not true. I'm sure dragon age 2 is a good game, but were upset because it's not the game it was supposed to be. I've got plenty of action RPG's to play but what I don't have now is a strategy RPG, so I feel a little cheated. And I'm also tired of this concept that console gamers need dumber down version's. Most console gamers, like me used to be PC gamers and switched for some simplicity in hardware and a little more comfort on the couch, we didn't switch cause we wanted games to be less complex. I was dissapointed that Dragon age origins didn't provide a top down view for the console, and for no reason other than the excuse that console gamers don't want that and it's really hard with analog sticks. Both reasons are retarded and insulting, and hopefully bioware will get the message. |
the top down view is gone from the pc version too.
Alby_da_Wolf said:
Old mechanics aren't necessarily a barrier, almost always it only takes to improve the interface to make them more accessible. Removing deeper options because not everybody uses them changes the game's target and often it just piss the genre's fans off without really giving anything to more casual gamers. There are already tons of simplified RPGs available for those that don't like complications, and there are also good and deep RPGs that allow to learn them without excessive efforts, or at least with a gradual learning curve, ideal for those that after starting from the simpler ones want to get more challenges as they become more dedicated fans of the genre, but oversimplifying, dumbing down, deeper series to make them compete with the simpler ones is not the right thing to do, it will make the fans of the series mad and it won't make the casuals happier than playing games that were designed from the start to be simpler and appeal them. And let's not forget we are talking about RPGs: how many RPGs elements can be removed before the games aren't RPGs anymore? Trying to change RPGs so much that they aren't RPGs anymore to make those that aren't fans of the genre like them doesn't make much sense, and in fact up until now it never worked, or when it partially did, the result was so bland on every aspect that the new fans attracted were less than the old ones lost. |
Change "RPG" to "adventure shooter", and you've described perfectly what a lot of us feel about Other M.
As for this game, the score is a bit too close for each version considering the disparity in the number of reviews.
There might be something here that apparently pleases reviewers, but turns off actual gamers (yeah, I'm basically claiming reviewers aren't actual gamers).
A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.
Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs
LordTheNightKnight said:
As for this game, the score is a bit too close for each version considering the disparity in the number of reviews. There might be something here that apparently pleases reviewers, but turns off actual gamers (yeah, I'm basically claiming reviewers aren't actual gamers). |
IDK elsewhere, but I noticed that at least in Italy, even the strictest reviewers, after initially ranting against dumbing down, are now like resigned to it (but the last issue of a gaming mag I read gave scores depressingly low, so it looks like they aren't willing yet to totally accept it). I guess publishers bring pressure on them through advertising, but they also use marketing to persuade as many people as possible that they chose the right way... Luckily we gamers aren't willing to accept it and we can vote with our money, but it leaves a bitter taste in the mouth knowing that most probably the additional marketing money spent to persuade inexperienced gamers to buy a dumbed down game could have been spent instead to develop it better and not crippled.