Reviews

[Flouride]

I still can't wrap my head around the drastic difference in reception between F3 anf F:NV. Why was one praised for its mediocre writing, flat dialogs and nonexistant C&C while all of the game stopping bugs were nearly completely ignored and the other one had all of its great writing ignored and instead became a scapegoat for inherited bugs :/

 

I weep for the souls of modern gamers.

 

I still can't belive Fallout 3 won awards for it's writing.

 

Gaming companies have too much control over the media that's the biggest problem. Piss them off and you won't get exclusives, they won't send their review copies in time (or they might stop sending them completely), they might pull their ads from your site/magazine which are main source of funding for many. Because they can, there's so many other sites/magazines they can "sell" their exlusives to, have their ads on. Not to mention all the paid trips to different locations to preview/review the game. Is the effect huge? It wouldn't be if gamers/media wouldn't consider games that get less than a 8.5/9 as some sort of inferior product. Games that get scores starting with 7 are pretty much doomed (in sales) unless pre-orders were great.

[Flouride]

Maybe, you know... Dragon Age 2 was better than Dungeon Siege 3? I don't like the game myself very much ( Dragon Age 2 ), but I can't imagine Obsidian having much higher standards for failure.

 

It wasn't that good. Let's say some other company *cough* Obsidian* cough* recycled as much maps as BioWare did. I would imagine the blowback from media would be way way harsher than it was on BioWare. There would be endless whining how they they delivered an unfinished game. Now there's few odd remarks here and there about the situation, but the scores are still pretty high from some of the sites. (Not to mention all the other things that were bad with the game)

[C2B]

Behold glorius game journalist

 

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/v...ditors-Note-DIY

 

 

So one journalist has a silly rage, (even then he's still entitled to his opinion, even if you don't like it) and now game journalists have some vendetta against Obs? A best it's one guy blowing of steam, at worst it's one with an axe to grind.

 

No secret conspiracy to bring Obs down.

 

Buying Eidos doesn't have Edit: "much" to do with game reviews so I really don't know what you are stating here. (Eidos past history with gaming journalism can be ignored. Since, you know different managment and internal politics.)

 

Also, nicely ignored the first part of my post to make a point that is completly pointless. There are journalists that don't like Obsidian very much. There are also journalists that like other companies not very much. Its just pretty visible in Obsidians case.

Edited June 21, 2011 by C2B

[JabbaDaHutt30]

Golly, yes! How could a small and insignificant publisher like Square Enix possibly deal out enough bribe money in time to appease the boundless appetites of big, corporate video game journalists, surely obsessed with destroying what reputation Obsidian has left with their acrid, depreciative Dungeon Siege III reviews? You, to have unthreaded their dark scheme so skillfully, are a single bastion of light in a sea of infinite darkness.

 

I kneel in awe before you, sir.

 

Uhmmmm, Square Enix may be a well known publisher but you can't really suspect them of giving out bribe money. Their recent games aren't exactly known for scoring too high. Also, yes. There are journalists that have a personal feud against Obsidian as evidenced by a recent escapist article.

 

I'm not suspecting them of giving bribe money. I'm saying they probably have the means to, just like EA. I also don't automatically suspect EA of dealing out bribe money if their games happen to score a little higher. An 8.0 from Gamespot compared to the 9.5 Origins got from Kevin VanOrd is hardly flattering for Dragon Age 2.

 

What is this 'evidence'? Why would anyone 'have it out for Obsidian' in the first place? Sounds absolutely ridculous.

 

I didn't really say anything about EA............... Just defended Square.

 

Also about "some" (I'm not saying its the majority. Far from it)journalists having it out against Obsidian.

 

Behold glorius game journalist

 

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/v...ditors-Note-DIY

 

No, I know you didn't. That part was written with the original quote in mind.

 

I don't see the problem there. The article writer complains about the problems present in most, if not all of Obsidian's games; problems which can be off-putting for some people. Doesn't indicate that he won't give Obsidian's games a fair shot if he reviews them, or at least, if Obsidian gets its act together.

 

I see no reason to defend the practice of releasing unfinished games. Some critics might respond more harshly to it, while others may be more lenient. When I think of a critic "having it out for Obsidian" ( or any developer for that matter ), I think of some kind of heavily prejudiced dislike for the developer that's only very loosely related to the studio's talent as a group of video game designers -- which still kinda sounds.... silly.

Edited June 21, 2011 by JabbaDaHutt30

[Oner]

and the way it[KotOR II] didn't quite capture the spirit of the original.

Missed this line last time.

Wow... just wow. I'm sorry MCA didn't write enough ep 4-5-6 references in the game, screaming "Look I'm a huge fan too, I know these lines and stuff!" at the monitor, while patting himself on the back how witty he is.

Or did he mean the lack of glaring stupidity?

Maybe the art style? It's the same ctrl+c ctrl+v as in every other SW game so guess not.

[JabbaDaHutt30]

Behold glorius game journalist

 

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/v...ditors-Note-DIY

 

 

So one journalist has a silly rage, (even then he's still entitled to his opinion, even if you don't like it) and now game journalists have some vendetta against Obs? A best it's one guy blowing of steam, at worst it's one with an axe to grind.

 

No secret conspiracy to bring Obs down.

 

Buying Eidos doesn't have Edit: "much" to do with game reviews so I really don't know what you are stating here. (Eidos past history with gaming journalism can be ignored. Since, you know different managment and internal politics.)

 

Also, nicely ignored the first part of my post to make a point that is completly pointless. There are journalists that don't like Obsidian very much. There are also journalists that like other companies not very much. Its just pretty visible in Obsidians case.

 

So... I don't see the problem, even if that were the case. Critics definitely aren't under any obligation to like Obsidian if they don't think much of their games.

[Bos_hybrid]

Also, nicely ignored the first part of my post to make a point that is completly pointless. There are journalists that don't like Obsidian very much. There are also journalists that like other companies not very much. Its just pretty visible in Obsidians case.

 

One guy, that probably won't review another Obs game, and might have not done so before. You got no journalists, one guy. Really your just looking for a way disregard reviews you disagree with.

[WorstUsernameEver]

Russ Pitts actually gave a pretty high score to New Vegas. That editorial was badly written, but yeah.

[C2B]

Also, nicely ignored the first part of my post to make a point that is completly pointless. There are journalists that don't like Obsidian very much. There are also journalists that like other companies not very much. Its just pretty visible in Obsidians case.

 

One guy, that probably won't review another Obs game, and might have not done so before. You got no journalists, one guy. Really your just looking for a way disregard reviews you disagree with.

 

And I named him as one example.

 

Also, yes. He actually reviewed New Vegas. Was actually pretty positive about it too back then.

 

Edit: Ninja'd.

 

Edit2: Also, where did I say I disregard their reviews? Switching a lot of words around. Are ya? I only disregard reviews when they are badly written or completly wrong in parts. Which actually included some "positive" reviews for DSIII and other Obs Games too.

Edited June 21, 2011 by C2B

[Bos_hybrid]

Russ Pitts actually gave a pretty high score to New Vegas. That editorial was badly written, but yeah.

 

My mistake.

 

Also, where did I say I disregard their reviews? Switching a lot of words around. Are ya? I only disregard reviews when they are badly written or completly wrong in parts. Which actually included some "positive" reviews for DSIII and other Obs Games too.

 

Why bring it up then? I don't see another reason why you would bring it up, except to say this is why DS3 gets low score from some sites.

[C2B]

Why bring it up then? I don't see another reason why you would bring it up, except to say this is why DS3 gets low score from some sites.

 

It was regarding a "sarcastic" remark of JabbaDeHut. Just mentioning.

 

Random related Stuff: I've actually seen Journalists that normally dislike Obsidian games who received DSIII positive. Like RPS/Eurogamers Quintin Smith.

Edited June 21, 2011 by C2B

[Bos_hybrid]

Golly, yes! How could a small and insignificant publisher like Square Enix possibly deal out enough bribe money in time to appease the boundless appetites of big, corporate video game journalists, surely obsessed with destroying what reputation Obsidian has left with their acrid, depreciative Dungeon Siege III reviews? You, to have unthreaded their dark scheme so skillfully, are a single bastion of light in a sea of infinite darkness.

 

I kneel in awe before you, sir.

 

Uhmmmm, Square Enix may be a well known publisher but you can't really suspect them of giving out bribe money. Their recent games aren't exactly known for scoring too high. Also, yes. There are journalists that have a personal feud against Obsidian as evidenced by a recent escapist article.

 

It was regarding a "sarcastic" remark of JabbaDeHut. Just mentioning.

 

I still don't see why one journalist having a rage about FO:NV bugs equals journalists having a feud with Obsidian. Or why you said it. He was making a point the any publisher can bribe and how stupid it is to say that journalists have an agenda against Obs and that's why they are giving them low scores.

 

Either way, I apologise for assuming you were just having a fanboy cry about low scores.

[Alpha]

Just read the Gamespot review and i think the score they gave to DS 3 was unfair IMO.

[MonkeyLungs]

Just read the Gamespot review and i think the score they gave to DS 3 was unfair IMO.

 

That review was right about where I would rate it. 6 = Fair, so it's a little bit better than mediocre. Sounds right to me. Gimped multiplayer alone makes this game unable to rate above 6 for me.

[Alpha]

Was okay if the online MP wasn't old news .

[MonkeyLungs]

Too Human is one of my favorite action RPG's. Id rate it a 6.5. It has a gang of problems but I still really like it. I couldn't give it a higher score though unless I wanted to lie. For many pepe that game probably rate lower because tons of gamers hated the controls, whereas I thought the controls were one of the coolest parts of the game. Too Human had gimped MP too, only letting 2 peole play online together at once and it was supposed to have 4. It got slammed for that and rightly so.

 

DS3 has the most gimped MP and gimped character save system and gimped lack of endgame/continued gameplay I've seen in an ARPG since ever since.

[sorophx]

DS3 has the most gimped MP and gimped character save system and gimped lack of endgame/continued gameplay I've seen in an ARPG since ever since.

you poor thing, you want a hug?

[MonkeyLungs]

You probably need to save those hugs for the crew that worked on this game. I think they need a hug.

[Tel Aviv]

I think we could all do with a hug.

[blueboykc]

I think we could all do with a hug.

none of yall are touchin me...

 

i like how some of yall really seem stung by the negative reviews an/or the negative feedback..you had to know this was coming..you had to know the reviews would be negative about the mp..how could you not see it coming?

[Pidesco]

Except a lot of reviews haven't been negative about the mp.

[hopfrog16]

Except a lot of reviews haven't been negative about the mp.

 

Eh... The ones that didn't have anything negative to say about the MP though didn't even mention much about MP at all outside of local co-op (other than it features 4 playr co-op online). This makes me think they didn't even try it to begin with...

 

Edit: Sorry, I erased something that I think was unnecessary that I probably shouldn't have posted to begin with. Apologies.

Edited June 21, 2011 by hopfrog16

[Pidesco]

I haven't. I don't know whether it's actually good or not. However, by going on what people say the only bad thing about multiplayer seems to be the camera's distance to the ground. Everything else appears to work well.

 

Edit: I read it! Hah!

[hopfrog16]

I haven't. I don't know whether it's actually good or not. However, by going on what people say the only bad thing about multiplayer seems to be the camera's distance to the ground. Everything else appears to work well.

 

I've heard that the camera freaks out when there are more than 3+ players... I haven't actually tried it myself yet, but all the forums seem to be full of people saying this... Thankfully this problem can be patched, I feel.

[Flouride]

Except a lot of reviews haven't been negative about the mp.

 

I think most of the early review copies didn't have the online mp active. Then again even the couch co-op pretty much shows how the multiplayer works (with the exception of how camera will work with 3 or 4 players).