The Gamespot review

[Monte Carlo]

 

Wait... is 8 a bad score?

 

If you took tests at school/university, based on a scale of 1-10, and your score was 8, would you really find it bad? Really?

Eh, I know personally of someone who cried because he didn't get a 10 in a test in high school.

 

 

Millennials gonna millennial.

[Faerunner]

Eh, game reviews are opinion-based. 

 

Different people play different games for different reasons, so you gotta take the game reviewer's tastes into consideration when you decide whether you find it valid or not. If the reason they like the game is not the reason you like it, or things they dislike about the game are things you like, file it under "different tastes" and move on.

Edited April 7, 2015 by Faerunner

[Hebruixe]

Obviously the reviewers didn't get a big enough bribe this time. lol

[AncientToaster]

Just - wow. I can't believe the score Kevin van Ord gives PoE. 8/10, when he gave Dragon Age : Inquisition 9/10. AND Divinity Original Sin?!! Is he for real?

 

PoE is not perfect, but 8/10?

 

Something is definitely up here. Did the devs p*ss Van Ord off??

 

How can he say D:OS is a 'glimpse of the future' but PoE is treading the fine line between clone and homage? I lost interest in D:OS pretty quickly, the world is just too fairytale and garish, and everything is covered in either slime, fire or ice!!

 

I'm shocked by this review. Genuinely shocked.

 

8/10 is a valid score. He overrated DA:I but it's all an opinion. He preferred the banal Single Player MMO over the isometric IE style game, but Pillars is not perfect. 

[archangel979]

 

 

 

 

Someone actually feels that the user review on Metacritic are worthwhile? Are you serious? 40% of the user review are made by people who rate it 10/10 to "counter the negative reviews" or just because they looooove the game and deliberately ignore its flaws (and as much as I love PoE, it's not worth a 10 at this stage). Another 35% are nutjobs and trolls who rate games a 0/10 because they don't like the publisher, don't like the genre or have issues with how their mothers potty-trained them. And there in the middle, being completely drowned out by the noise from both camps, are a few people who give a reasoned, thorough review of a game's pros and cons. Not at all worth wading through the sludge, if you ask me.

How do you explain the sharp difference between the users score and the official critics'one of DA:I? Personally i learned to don't trust official critics since when RTW 2 was relesead in a very obscene condition (more than one year of patching to fix it), despite the high scoring received by the most popular game critics.

Anyway for me 8/10 reflects the current bugged/beta-like status of the game that partly ruins the combat experience, so i think is roughly right.

 

I explain that by realizing that:

1) There's an enormous number of people out there who will rate any EA-published game a 0/10 just because they hate EA. Don't get me wrong, EA is a poster-child for bad corporate behavious, but that has nothing to do with the quality of games published under their logo.

 

2) Very many people have very strong feelings about BioWare in general and the Dragon Age franchise in particular. If these people see anything that deviates the slightest little bit from the game they imagined in their heads prior to release compared to the game they actually got, they'll spew their bile on Metacritic and post a 0/10.

 

That is just not true. http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect this has a good score. Why? because it is a good game.

People rate bad EA/Bioware game the score they deserve.

 

People still trusted Bioware and felt they could "Do no wrong" when that game came out, and EA was disliked but not as reviled as they came to be shortly after.

 

With Mass Effect 2, Bioware did fairly well, though many core fans didn't like the new approach, especially how they made it more of a cover shooter than a "true rpg".

 

It wasn't until Dragon Age 2 that people lost faith in Bioware altogether, that's where their bad reputation comes from, that game in particular, and the trend leading up to it. Mass Effect 3 cemented it in the eyes of gamers and many are still boycotting it to this day.

 

At this point there is so much bad blood between the gamers and EA/Bioware, that nothing they do at this point can get away from heavy trolling and score abuse by random people. They are still trying to salvage their reputation, and I think they did a rather good job with Inquisition.

 

That's why it is the way it is, told to you from someone who witnessed it all unfold over the years firsthand.

 

Seriously, you EA apologists are like roaches.

Maybe you missed my other post where ME2 also got a good score while Bioware was already a EA drone.

As I said, bad games got bad reviews and good games got good user reviews. It is not about EA

Edited April 7, 2015 by archangel979

[kozzy]

It is just one persons opinions, not a huge deal to me (8 is still a great score!)

 

I like Kevin's writing style and check out most of his reviews, but..... I rarely agree with him on scores or opinion on  games. Still i respect his writing style and how he gets his opinion across. At the end of the day it is just one person's opinion, sure I don't agree with it (especially about the comments about dialogue/writing) but I respect his opinion and enjoyed reading the review.

 

Everyone will have difference of opinion on games! He liked Dragon Age 2 (same score as Pillars) and I hated it. He hated Alpha Protocol, I liked it. He loves the Dark Souls games, I find them slightly overrated and very lacklusting in writing, Gamespot gave Mask Of The Betrayor 7.7 back in the day but for me its a top 10 rpg of all time, He likes Inquisition more than Pillars, etc...  You can go on and on about differences of opinions in games, even amongst friends, nevermind game reviewers.

 

For me Pillars is the best of the resurgence of crpgs, but I won't be mad if someone enjoyed Divinity, Shadowrun Dragonfall or Wasteland 2 more than Pillars, I had a blast on those games.

Edited April 7, 2015 by kozzy

[Redwulf]

This is outrageous!  I demand satisfaction!!

[k1rage]

It is just one persons opinions, not a huge deal to me (8 is still a great score!)

 

I like Kevin's writing style and check out most of his reviews, but..... I rarely agree with him on scores or opinion on  games. Still i respect his writing style and how he gets his opinion across. At the end of the day it is just one person's opinion, sure I don't agree with it (especially about the comments about dialogue/writing) but I respect his opinion and enjoyed reading the review.

 

Everyone will have difference of opinion on games! He liked Dragon Age 2 (same score as Pillars) and I hated it. He hated Alpha Protocol, I liked it. He loves the Dark Souls games, I find them slightly overrated and very lacklusting in writing, Gamespot gave Mask Of The Betrayor 7.7 back in the day but for me its a top 10 rpg of all time, He likes Inquisition more than Pillars, etc...  You can go on and on about differences of opinions in games, even amongst friends, nevermind game reviewers.

 

For me Pillars is the best of the resurgence of crpgs, but I won't be mad if someone enjoyed Divinity, Shadowrun Dragonfall or Wasteland 2 more than Pillars, I had a blast on those games.

OMG the gave mask of the betrayer 7.7? thats crazy lol Its like the pinnacle  of dnd 3.5 gaming

[PIP-Clownboy]

As for D:OS being 'a glimpse of the future'....IDK. Considering how well it does its turn-base combat and how fundamentally vital to gameplay it makes its environment interaction, and its semi-classless hybrid system, I'd say that D:OS might indeed be a glimpse of the future.... of turn based RPGs, and how RPGs will do their class systems going forward. Here's hoping.

 

 

Also a very good example on how not to do loot. Or plot for that matter. 

 

The game fell off a cliff after Cyseal. 

[KingNee]

Divinity is a really good game, so it's not really going to be surprising if some reviewers think it's a better game than PoEt. I'm not sure which I prefer right now myself. But D:OS was probably my favourite game last year, along with Age of Wonders 3.

 

I haven't played Inquisition, but my feeling is that it's sufficiently far from either PoEt or D:OS that comparing their scores isn't very meaningful.

 

D:OS is indeed a great game, the mechanics are much more interesting when it comes to crafting / item stats. I feel that a combination of their mechanics (and YES, turn based combat) with Obsidians writing prowess and quest design could potentially create a black hole of RPG goodness that would consume the earth.

 

So it's probably a good thing that they're separate games, warts and all. 8/10 feels right for POE. 

[Althernai]

First, there is a well-known conflict of interest involving the bigger review sites and big publishers: the revenue of the review sites comes mainly from the advertisement of games... and the people most likely to pay serious money for such advertisement are the big publishers. Thus, if you want to know why Mediocre AAA Game X got 9/10, well, this is by far the most likely reason (despite the very loud protestations to the contrary). If you really want a mainstream opinion on a big-budget game, you are much better off with a mainstream magazine. For example, the best published analysis of Mass Effect 3 that I've seen came from, surprisingly enough, Forbes.

 

Second, the PoE review on Gamespot is actually pretty reasonable. In fact, if you think about it, the surprising thing is that PoE did so well among reviewers that this 8/10 is on the lower side of the spectrum because the game deliberately did without or downplayed many things that the reviewers usually focus on. You won't find the latest 3D graphics here. The voice acting is sporadic and the amount of text to read is truly massive. The combat requires micromanagement, pausing and understanding a fairly complex rule system (one that doesn't revolve around "aggro"). It's basically the antithesis of everything that has become the norm in the past decade. "Homage" is actually a kind way to put it, I would have have gone with "throwback" or "atavism". Of course, we (the backers) explicitly asked for these things and we more or less got what we wanted, but it's rather weird (in a good way) that most of the media is so pleased with it.

[scrotiemcb]

I reviewed D:OS (http://www.larian.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=536853) and intend to do so with this game after beating it on PotD, without ever having tried lower difficulties.

 

That said, I can already tell that, if I was using any numeric rating scale, D:OS would score higher. Period. It is not a perfect game by any means but it is simply gorgeous. It's basically this game, without loading screens, with added area transitions, and a better soundtrack, at least from what I've seen in my first several perfectionist rerolls.

 

D:OS did drop off quite a bit lategame, however, so my final review might have the two fairly close. But inevitably D:OS will be the more recommended experience, because 10 hours of epic (followed by 10 hours of thoroughly optional mediocre) is always going to trump 20 hours of pretty darn good in my book.

Edited April 7, 2015 by scrotiemcb

[dirigible]

D:OS is indeed a great game, the mechanics are much more interesting when it comes to crafting / item stats. I feel that a combination of their mechanics (and YES, turn based combat) with Obsidians writing prowess and quest design could potentially create a black hole of RPG goodness that would consume the earth.

 

So it's probably a good thing that they're separate games, warts and all. 8/10 feels right for POE. 

Rather than whine about review scores, I'm gonna second this comment.

 

Larian handling the combat/game mechanics and Obsidian handling the plot/writing would create a god-tier game. Only problem, I think their sensibilities might be too different.

[kozzy]

 

Divinity is a really good game, so it's not really going to be surprising if some reviewers think it's a better game than PoEt. I'm not sure which I prefer right now myself. But D:OS was probably my favourite game last year, along with Age of Wonders 3.

 

I haven't played Inquisition, but my feeling is that it's sufficiently far from either PoEt or D:OS that comparing their scores isn't very meaningful.

 

D:OS is indeed a great game, the mechanics are much more interesting when it comes to crafting / item stats. I feel that a combination of their mechanics (and YES, turn based combat) with Obsidians writing prowess and quest design could potentially create a black hole of RPG goodness that would consume the earth.

 

So it's probably a good thing that they're separate games, warts and all. 8/10 feels right for POE. 

 

I loved Divinity, great combat, awesome coop and a nice gameworld but man.. the writing compared to Pillars was very very poor. Divinity I skipped a little of the dialogue while I beat it, Pillars though I honestly havn't skipped anything, enjoying it all.

 

My dream would be all the things Pillars Of Eternity does really well (Dialogue, story, characters, Art Design, etc..) but with Divinity Original Sin's Coop and Humor

 

As for the combat I personally like them both about even (Both better than the combat in the last modern rpgs I have played: Wasteland 2, Risen 3, Dark Souls 2, Shadowrun: Dragonfall and Inquisition)

Edited April 7, 2015 by kozzy

[Dongom]

80% is "Great" according to GS..... and it's 90%+ at MetaCritic.

 

Whats with all the negativity. 

[Mortal]

don't think 8/10 is unfair for PoE. it's a beatiful work of art, a well written story and (unfortunately) a pretty basic and slightly boring combat system with some balance issues. i like the story, the setting and especially the artwork, but combat is an important part of the game, so IMO it doesn't deserve more than an 8/10.  

 

on the other hand, i also played D:OS. i liked it a lot when i played it. combat was very fun (though i have to admit i liked it much better than POE because it's turn based. never liked RTwP systems). overall the game world felt less polished in DO:S and a lot of the praised crafting system was totally redundant while on the other hand some aspects (crafted weapons) made the game too easy (crafted weapons were a lot  better than 99% of the loot you got from killing stuff). overall 8/10, just like POE.

 

since DA:I was also mentioned. call me crazy but out of those 3 games, i enjoyed DA:I the most. the combat mechanics are fairly shallow, but i never even viewed it as a tactical game. DA:I combat is easy, but action packed and fun. the story is a bit cheesy at times (it's a bioware game, after all), but it had some epic moments that touched me on an emotional level. essentially it's 100 hours of popcorn cinema. not exactly the same category as D:OS or POE in my opinion, so it's a bit unfair and not very useful to compare the three games, but if i had to recommend one of the 3, i'd go with DA:I.

[PIP-Clownboy]

D:OS combat actually became very repetitive after the forest. I sure wouldn't call it 10 hours of epic, more like 3-5 hours. Then you realize how garbage the music/loot/writing/warcrafty graphics with ! everywhere and there is no real payoff. 

 

Turn based is objectively superior to rtwp, but Pillars was never going to be turn based. I'll take a Tim Cain/Sawyer led TB game over anything Larian any day of the week though.

[Stun]

The game fell off a cliff after Cyseal.

Oh I wouldn't say that. Hiberheim was amazing. The Phantam forest had spikes of brilliance. The Luculla forest has more to do in it than Cyseal.

 

Also, unlike a lot of people, my mind can't get itself to separate Cyseal from the rest of the game, since there's nothing stopping the player from making it.... an ever-present part of a playthrough? That is to say, there's no law that says: "you must complete Cyseal before moving on!". In fact, In my last play-through, I only did about half of the quests/storyline in the city before deciding to see what happens if I Forget about the whole Braccus Rex thing for a while and go kill some Orcs and Immaculates in Luculla. It was a Blast. Combat was brutal, for a while, but that's how I like it.

 

PS: "repetitive" becomes a positive term when what is being repeated is pure awesomeness. Combat in D:OS is Great with a capital G. I don't mind when a game repeatedly floods me with the same Great over and over again.

Edited April 7, 2015 by Stun

[Varana]

Combat in D:OS is great, and world and graphics are quite good, as well.

The story, however, I don't know. I stopped somewhere in Hunter's Edge because I lost interest. I had actually lost interest in why I did anything quite a while ago. Shorty after Hiberheim, I think. I found the story quite incoherent; it wobbled between being really predictable at times, and erratic at others.

And the inventory is simply horrible.

 

That said, D:OS definitely is more forward-looking than PoE. Which isn't surprising, as vintage was what PoE advertised. How you weigh these aspects in a review, depends on personal preference.

[Jojobobo]

It's still rocking a 90 on metacritic, which as far as I'm aware is the bench people use for a very good game (hell for FO:NV Bethesda only wanted 85 to provide Obsidian Royalties, so even if it dips below it's now a bad thing).

[Emerwyn]

Pillars getting 8/10 isn't so bad. I'd give it something like 8.5 probably. The problem is when games like DA:I get 9/10.

[Stun]

It's still rocking a 90 on metacritic, which as far as I'm aware is the bench people use for a very good game (hell for FO:NV Bethesda only wanted 85 to provide Obsidian Royalties, so even if it dips below it's now a bad thing).

Yep, and that doesn't surprise me. PoE IS the best game Obsidian's ever made. It deserves a better score than FO:NV, Mask of the Betrayer, Stick of Truth, etc. Edited April 7, 2015 by Stun

[FalloutBoy]

This game is a 10/10 for me. Not to say it is perfect, but there is nothing about it I would change other than to ask for more. Also, I am totally fine with anyone else who wants to score it an 8.

[Volourn]

"Dragon age II - 82

Dragon age Inquisition - 85"

\

Irrelevant.  That doesn't prove a game's success or failure. FO:NV was rated just under 85 (costing Obsidian millions LOL) yet it sold more than any BIO, Obsidian, or BIS game ever. LMAO

 

Also, just because YOU personally dislike a game doesn't make it a failure either. I loathe ES series but the series was a success.

 

Plus, those DA2/DA3 scores are  largely about backlash to EA/BIO fatigue.

 

\I'd rate DA2 around 82 and DA3 probably 75ish (maybe lower dunno). PE not done with it so won't rate but definitely higher than DA3 and maybe eventually higher than DS2.

 

 

Doesn't make either of those games a failure though.

[dirigible]

Here's how to find the actual score for a game:

 

Was the game a sequel to a major franchise? Subtract 1 point from the reviewer score.

Did the game have a huge marketing campaign? Subtract 1 point from the reviewer score.

Was the game the final installment of a major series (eg mass effect 3)? Subtract 1 point from the reviewer score.

Was the game 'artsy' at the expense of gameplay? Subtract 1 point from the reviewer score.

Was the game a niche genre, or made by an unknown company? Add 1 point to the reviewer score.

 

Now you have a more accurate score for the game.

Edited April 7, 2015 by dirigible