Mass Effect 3 review thread

pakkit said:
There is no such thing as objective criticism, period. You're always taking one man's opinion. But thanks for coming into a review thread and reminding everyone that it is, in fact, a review thread.
Click to expand...

While that might not really hold true for something like films, objectivity can be applied to games. Art style and story surely aren't something you can do objectively, but things like sound and image quality (not composition or style) along with technical aspects of the game can be done so as well. UI's and other human computer interaction. Having the (A) button as shoot and R trigger as run in an F/TPS isn't good HCI design. It goes against the ergonomics of the human body. Lacking accessibility for people like the color blind can be objective as well. For example, TF2 changes hard to see effects into ones a colorblind person can notice. Typical flames on screen representing fire are hard to notice for the colorblind, but replacing those flames with a line going oblique across the screen can help make the experience easier for the user.

People can keep clamoring about how review CAN'T be objective, but that's just a bunch of bullshit. People aren't expecting full "objective" reviews, but a standard on what's good or not should be given.

E.g.
An Corvette ZR1 may not be a good looking car (subjective) it's brake horse power and top speeds are hardly rivaled (objective). The car offers enough luxury features to make most happy(subjective). The features it includes are...(objective).

See what I mean?

EatChildren said:
A good review balances an opinion with an objective, critical argument to back it up. The notion that video games, a source of entertainment, are not, as whole products, built on a very significant variable of subjective enjoyment, is ludicrous.

Dribbling reviews that pander to fanboy wetdreams, while effectively marketing the game. devoid of any insightful critical analysis are repulsive, and yes, we need to encourage change in this area. But trying to scientifically dismantle components of what are, ultimately, products aimed at entertainment, is foolish.

So yes, we need to call for more structured, analytical insight into video games from our reviewers. But we also need to stop treating every review like a thesis and realise that yes, for some people, a video game is a 10/10 worth of enjoyment and entertainment.
Click to expand...

Have my children.

I'm glad someone understands!
 
Ken Masters said:
Oscar worthy story, never forget, this is game "journalism" folks. Fanboys who have been salivating over hyped games and blow their load before even starting the game. There is no such thing as objective reviews in gaming reviews.
Click to expand...

that-word-inigo-montoya-word-think-means-princess-bride-mand-demotivational-poster-1260739585.jpg
Click to expand...

Faulting game reviews on being non-journalistic is a moot criticism.

Game reviewers are not meant to be journalist. They are just web editors giving a opinion on a product that should be valued due to they exposure and experience to other products of the same kind. The same applies to magazine editors. For some reason the line has blurred between this and journalism.

Wikipedia said:
Journalism is the way of investigation and reporting of events, issues and trends to a broad audience in a timely fashion. Though there are many variations of journalism, the ideal is to inform the intended audience. Along with covering organizations and institutions such as government and business, journalism also covers cultural aspects of society such as arts and entertainment. The field includes editing, photojournalism, and documentary.
Click to expand...
 
EatChildren said:
A good review balances an opinion with an objective, critical argument to back it up. The notion that video games, a source of entertainment, are not, as whole products, built on a very significant variable of subjective enjoyment, is ludicrous.

Dribbling reviews that pander to fanboy wetdreams, while effectively marketing the game. devoid of any insightful critical analysis are repulsive, and yes, we need to encourage change in this area. But trying to scientifically dismantle components of what are, ultimately, products aimed at entertainment, is foolish.

So yes, we need to call for more structured, analytical insight into video games from our reviewers. But we also need to stop treating every review like a thesis and realise that yes, for some people, a video game is a 10/10 worth of enjoyment and entertainment.
Click to expand...

Maybe we'll have better luck next gen...however, my optimism isn't very high.
 
PrinceOfApathy said:
This is the problem, they shouldn't give an opinion about fun because you cannot experience fun through words. You can only read, process and understand the mechanics laid before you in depth and you the user/purchaser must decide mentally or by purchase if the game is structured in such a way will it be enjoyable to you.
Click to expand...

Which is why, as I said, a good review weights an opinion with a critical argument. But no matter how objective that argument is, the opinion still stands.

I can say that Donkey Kong Country Returns has excellent, creative level design. I can weight this argument by stating the objective fact that nearly every, if not every, stage in the entire game introduces a new mechanic, and/or remixes an old one, in order to keep the stage design fresh and inventive throughout the experience.

The statement is factual, but my personal enjoyment is not. Someone may agree with the introduction of new mechanics with each stage, but for their own reasons not enjoy these mechanics specifically. It is then their job to back-up why they don't with critical analysis.

At the end of the day, neither of us is right or wrong. We both agreed on a point, but left with different experiences due to the wonder of subjectivity.

I don't even know why I'm defending the reviews, and I'm not really, because fanboy pandering hyperbolic reviews blow, and I try desperately to avoid such writing behaviour in my own.

And even though, based on your posts, I know you know this, you need to remember that all these arguments against you are sourced to your original post;

phosphor112 said:
I'm sorry, I can't help but think this is another overrated crap game. Yes, I said crap. Too many people buy into the hype of games and don't look at things objectively, even compared to the rest of the franchise.
Click to expand...

Which easily comes across as "this game is crap because I said so and if you like it you're not looking at it objectively and you're wrong", dismissing the obvious subjectivity of entertainment. And hey, 'crap' is no objective argument by any stretch of the imagination.

EDIT: And here I am getting two people mixed up. This folks, is what we call idiocy.

I think those spoilers have ruined me.
 
EatChildren said:
Which easily comes across as "this game is crap because I said so and if you like it you're not looking at it objectively and you're wrong", dismissing the obvious subjectivity of entertainment. And hey, 'crap' is no objective argument by any stretch of the imagination.
Click to expand...

I said it was my opinion. I like to see progress ESPECIALLY when it comes to a very large company like Bioware/EA. I've given my OBJECTIVE reasons earlier in the thread. ;)
 
bigdaddygamebot said:
Arthur and I are usually on the same page with games.

These scores though...it's possible that Bioware put their B squad on Dragon Age II and their A Squad on Mass Effect?
Click to expand...

Is this the first 10 this site has given out? I can't really put much stock in this reviewer's past scores since he gave Transformers 9/10 and also bragged about what a tough critic he was, so I'm more interested in how the site itself is scoring games.
 
Think I'll wait for opinions from gaf. I don't have it out for Bioware or anything, but I found me2 very mediocre so I want to know what it is about this game that will change my mind.
 
AngryMoth said:
Think I'll wait for opinions from gaf. I don't have it out for Bioware, but I found me2 very mediocre so I want to know what it is about this game that will change my mind.
Click to expand...

This is where I'm at. I wrapped the first ME twice, Renegade then Paragon. ME2 lasted me about five hours before I gave up on it. I was sincerely hoping to see people making more ME1 comparisons with 3, but that doesn't seem to be the case.
 
disappeared said:
This is where I'm at. I wrapped the first ME twice, Renegade then Paragon. ME2 lasted me about five hours before I gave up on it. I was sincerely hoping to see people making more ME1 comparisons with 3, but that doesn't seem to be the case.
Click to expand...


The game still plays way more like ME2 than ME1 so I am not sure you will like it. I am enjoying it about 4 hours in, but I loved ME2. Only things I liked about ME1 more was the music and story.

Maybe give it a shot when bomba prices hit.
 
inky said:
Sorry if I spoiled anything, but it was revealed a while ago by Bioware that Chobot was in the game, both in voice and likeness.
Click to expand...

And she previewed the game for G4. Objectivity is something game enthusiast news outlets are in extreme opposition to.
 
OP should be updated with EDGE score

8/10

EDGE review here

EDGE said:
It’s a third and final chapter, then, with all that implies. It’s off-putting to new players, too busy tying up loose ends to dangle any threads of its own, and fails to stand up as its own game in the same manner as its predecessors. But it’s also a spectacular, powerfully imagined and dramatically involving final act to one of gaming’s richest sci-fi sagas.
Click to expand...
 
JiveTurkey said:
Play the real game and then come to your own conclusion.

No sense in mocking reviews when you haven't even played the game.
Click to expand...

True, if it is anything like ME2 then pass. ME1 was a solid 8/10, but the story and RPG elements went to crap in ME2.

That being said every huge title like this gets the GTA4 effect; media darling, huge marketing budget and EA muscle.
 
Lord-Audie said:
I think you meant Conflict of Interest.
Click to expand...

No, I mean objectivity. Journalists should be objective and separate themselves from what they are covering. Employing a journalist who is also part of creating the product they are previewing is in extreme opposition to the journalistic principle of objectivity.
 
ScreenSplitter said:
"It’s off-putting to new players"

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Anybody who buys the third instalment of a heavily story based RPG that isn't Final Fantasy and expects to be accommodated for is a fucking moron.
Click to expand...

Like EA / Bioware adding a story-mode to the singleplayer just to overcome this precise problem?

More sales mean more newbies who need some handle on things, fast. Either the game can accommodate by some means or it fails miserably in the eyes of newbies.
Otherwise the franchise is dead and not worth pursuing by the publisher.

This is always a legitimate concern for developers and publishers, and I don't see why it would make the consumer "a fucking moron". The industry depends on new people getting involved, these "morons" being the very lifeblood of it.

Just try to imagine Super Metroid without the story intro. It would never have gotten to the place where it is held today without that intro.
 
I had all but given up on this game after playing the demo and reading some of the spoilers; but the scores are pretty consistently high. So conflicted. Can anyone whose read some of these reviews point to any that focuses on why or why not they felt satisfied with the story? I've already been spoiled so it doesn't matter how detailed they are.
 
remist said:
I had all but given up on this game after playing the demo and reading some of the spoilers; but the scores are pretty consistently high. So conflicted. Can anyone whose read some of these reviews point to any that focuses on why or why not they felt satisfied with the story? I've already been spoiled so it doesn't matter how detailed they are.
Click to expand...

He's played the demo, didn't like the game, but high review scores are making him rethink his stance on the game and is willing to be persuaded to change his mind


Folks, this is the power of video game review scores and why publishers make sure they secure those 9's
 
Ken Masters said:
He's played the demo, didn't like the game, but high review scores are making him rethink his stance on the game and is willing to be persuaded to change his mind


Folks, this is the power of video game review scores and why publishers make sure they secure those 9's
Click to expand...

Or it could be because the demo was shit and showed one of the worst sequence in the entire game?


Just sayin'
 
Is the demo the start of the campaign? If so it is indeed a hump most will have to get over. Gets much better once you have access to your ship. The start can drag on for a bit.

If you're going to play on Insanity I'd recommend, uh, not starting off on Insanity. The starting enemies will become a grind unless you're coming into it with a level 30 import.
 
x-Lundz-x said:
Typical EDGE, lets be different so people will talk about us.


Average = 95%
EDGE = 80%.

Typical EDGE bullshit with every game review.
Click to expand...

I -think- Edge uses the whole 10 points. So an average from them is right in the middle, at 5/10, whereas an average from someone else will be higher, around 7 or 8. 8 from Edge is a pretty high score. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.
 
93 gamerankings

94 metacritic

not too shabby for a game with a pretty damn shitty single player demo (mp is pretty fun though) and arguably the worst run and walk animations of a game averaging over 90 on review aggregate sites.
 
spirity said:
I -think- Edge uses the whole 10 points. So an average from them is right in the middle, at 5/10, whereas an average from someone else will be higher, around 7 or 8. 8 from Edge is a pretty high score. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

An 8 from Edge is great. In fact, it's "No-one-will-think-you're-crazy-if-you-tell-them-this-is-your-favorite-game" great
 
spirity said:
I -think- Edge uses the whole 10 points. So an average from them is right in the middle, at 5/10, whereas an average from someone else will be higher, around 7 or 8. 8 from Edge is a pretty high score. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

I have to say that Flatout 3 getting a 1 is the first one I've seen in years though. 3 seemed to be the lowest (LAIR and a few others), but I did see a 2 somewhere a while ago.
So yeah, they do use the full scale, making EDGE the only valid data source for review scores in a statistical sense.
Any 8 from EDGE should be a game well worth playing. However, reliability is still low, since there is no fixed method or reviewer.

@Other posters: Gerstmann went with 4 out of 5 stars as well. Does this mean Giant bomb is full of shit too?
 
Oh man, despite me not liking IGN, the graphics and decoration they made for the review is really awesome.
 
Didn't EDGE give 10 to Zelda SS? Don't get me wrong, i like that Zelda game and im a Zelda fan, but its not a 10.

I don't see why people hold EDGE in such high regards, they're not perfect.
 
x-Lundz-x said:
Typical EDGE, lets be different so people will talk about us.


Average = 95%
EDGE = 80%.

Typical EDGE bullshit with every game review.
Click to expand...
Bisnic said:
Didn't EDGE give 10 to Zelda SS? Don't get me wrong, i like that Zelda game and im a Zelda fan, but its not a 10.

I don't see why people hold EDGE in such high regards, they're not perfect.
Click to expand...

IT BEGINS


EDIT:
ScreenSplitter said:
Not sure if it's so much that people hold them in "regard", but they usually make a point about being different, giving games other reviewers 9s and 8s a 6.

To me, they just seem overtly pretentious, trying to turn games into a broadsheet newspaper... kind of rips the fun out of it.
Click to expand...

YESSSSSSSSSSSS
 
Bisnic said:
Didn't EDGE give 10 to Zelda SS? Don't get me wrong, i like that Zelda game and im a Zelda fan, but its not a 10.

I don't see why people hold EDGE in such high regards, they're not perfect.
Click to expand...

Not sure if it's so much that people hold them in "regard", but they usually make a point about being different, giving games other reviewers 9s and 8s a 6.

To me, they just seem overtly pretentious, trying to turn games into a broadsheet newspaper... kind of rips the fun out of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

FBC: Firebreak | Review Thread
Review 
49
314
lughnasadh123 replied
Dune: Awakening - Review Thread
Analysis Review  2
65
940
Luipadre replied
  • Poll
Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 | Review Thread
Analysis Review  5 6 7 8 9
420
4K
Itchy Tickles replied
Mario Kart World Review thread
Business Analysis Review  2
87
1K
Bridges replied
  • Poll
Death Stranding 2: On The Beach | Review Thread
Analysis Review  7 8 9 10 11
543
544
TheRedRiders replied
Top Bottom