And even so, even using the "they just hate EA" excuse, how many fanboys are skewing the results with perfect 10s? Like I said before, the skewing goes both ways.
Because 9 and 10s are more accurate for a gmae like ME3 than a 1 or 0.
Except for the people who think ME3 is a 1 or a 0.
An old buddy of mine who wrote reviews for movies once told me, "You have every right to an opinion, that is until you write a review then you owe it to other people to be as objective as you can.".
Rating a game 0 1 or two on a scale of 1 to 10 means it is absolute shit, and unless you let you own personal dislikes of a certain publisher get in the way of Mass Effect 3 you'd see that its no 0-2.
Maybe I should stop expecting people to be fair and unbias when righting user reviews?
Myself and this mag are never far off, I think they nailed it. Definitly not what many here are sputting off, sorry you don't have the money to get it atm so your butt hurts, but doesn't mean it sucks because you can't. I have played and this review is pretty much right on, enjoying it very much so and I agree 100% with the spacebar comment, annoying as hell, hope it's fixed in a patch, my only gripe so far.
And even so, even using the "they just hate EA" excuse, how many fanboys are skewing the results with perfect 10s? Like I said before, the skewing goes both ways.
Because 9 and 10s are more accurate for a gmae like ME3 than a 1 or 0.
Why, because it's made by Bioware?
There's a term for people who think this way...
I think he means because a C is closer to a B or an A than a 0 ( or incomplete / not turning in work)
Which is true.
Yet that doesn't make a C an A.
Of course I am not implying that this game is a C, I am merely stating facts.
I ammended by post, and yes I agree.
But point systems are terribly easy to skew. Actually read the reviews, even the user ones. A user might rate a game a 0-2, which is far lower than it should be, but the good ones will also list off and explain reasons why. Reading those reviews will give a better perception of how one might rate the game themselves given the written feedback.
Which goes back to what I added to my post... a lot of the critic reviews are scored 10-15 percent higher than what the actual written review implies the game should be rated. It's almost like the editors just took whatever was written and inflated the final scores.
And even so, even using the "they just hate EA" excuse, how many fanboys are skewing the results with perfect 10s? Like I said before, the skewing goes both ways.
Because 9 and 10s are more accurate for a gmae like ME3 than a 1 or 0.
Except for the people who think ME3 is a 1 or a 0.
An old buddy of mine who wrote reviews for movies once told me, "You have every right to an opinion, that is until you write a review then you owe it to other people to be as objective as you can.".
Rating a game 0 1 or two on a scale of 1 to 10 means it is absolute shit, and unless you let you own personal dislikes of a certain publisher get in the way of Mass Effect 3 you'd see that its no 0-2.
Maybe I should stop expecting people to be fair and unbias when righting user reviews?
But point systems are terribly easy to skew. Actually read the reviews, even the user ones. A user might rate a game a 0-2, which is far lower than it should be, but the good ones will also list off and explain reasons why. Reading those reviews will give a better perception of how one might rate the game themselves given the written feedback.
Which goes back to what I added to my post... a lot of the critic reviews are scored 10-15 percent higher than what the actual written review implies the game should be rated. It's almost like the editors just took whatever was written and inflated the final scores.
I agree, the critic reviewers words do not match the numbers AT ALL.
I think thats why we should all judge reviews by their words not their numbers, numbers are far far too vauge. People have no idea how to score things it seems, and everyone has their own idea of how things should be rated.
IF you judge the game by the reviwers words, it seems like its a decent game, not too bad. If you judge it by the user reviews, its about the same.
The words tell the tale that the numbers do not.
Also reviewers need to start using MORE words... seriously some of them used one sentance or less...
And even so, even using the "they just hate EA" excuse, how many fanboys are skewing the results with perfect 10s? Like I said before, the skewing goes both ways.
Because 9 and 10s are more accurate for a gmae like ME3 than a 1 or 0.
Except for the people who think ME3 is a 1 or a 0.
An old buddy of mine who wrote reviews for movies once told me, "You have every right to an opinion, that is until you write a review then you owe it to other people to be as objective as you can.".
Rating a game 0 1 or two on a scale of 1 to 10 means it is absolute shit, and unless you let you own personal dislikes of a certain publisher get in the way of Mass Effect 3 you'd see that its no 0-2.
Maybe I should stop expecting people to be fair and unbias when righting user reviews?
Conversely, giving a game a rating of 9 is almost perfect, and 10 is perfect.
Yet in reading a number of the reviews that gave 90+%, the text does not match the final score.
And yes you should stop being so hard on user reviews. Yes there's a lot of fanboys and haters alike both sckewing the numbers. But do not read the user scores, read the actual user reviews. You're right, scores and rating are subjective to the person giving them, but a number of user reviews will list off what they felt was good and bad about the game, which you can then formulate your own opinion as to if that's something you would like or dislike.
Loved the first Mass Effect, aside from the Mako driving which handled like a drunken ill bug. Mass Effect 2 started off decently but started to drag on and the planet scanning was incredibly boring and a pathetic change up from the Mako/planet EXPLORING. Mass Effect 2 seemed to lessen the feeling of exploring the galaxy and felt more like chasing a plot line arond the galaxy. The ending of Mass Effect 2 was even a letdown with the whole "look they made a giant Terminator". The humoid Reaper thingee didn't even seem menacing or creepy, just felt cheesy.
I felt no attachment to ME2 like I did with ME; I felt no excitement or enthusiasm when ME3 was announced. As soon as I played the demo and the PC demo had the too tight FOV I was turned off. Guess I'll rent this for the PS3 for a few days and finish up the series to be done with it.
The ending to this series sounds like it is cheesy stupid and one step away from "it was all a dream".
But hey, ME3 has that oh-so necessary multiplayer tacked onto it, because that is definitely what the series needed to improve itself.../sarcasmoff
For instance, currently writting a GW1 review, opinion wise I thought it was a pretty bad game. Objectivly its a polished game with a lot to offer those that are into PvP with a little PvE thrown in.
Myself and this mag are never far off, I think they nailed it. Definitly not what many here are sputting off, sorry you don't have the money to get it atm so your butt hurts, but doesn't mean it sucks because you can't. I have played and this review is pretty much right on, enjoying it very much so and I agree 100% with the spacebar comment, annoying as hell, hope it's fixed in a patch, my only gripe so far.
Sorry but that review does not equal 93 for me, 93 is almost a perfect score.
Well i just started, ( a few hours in) and so far at this point I would give it an 89, so in reflection to the review as with most games they review it's pretty much right on with what I think it should be. I always look at scoring for them with a 10 point margin of error compairing my taste to theirs, so far for 10 years it has worked.
"The monster created isn't by the company that makes the game, it's by the fans that make it something it never was"
For instance, currently writting a GW1 review, opinion wise I thought it was a pretty bad game. Objectivly its a polished game with a lot to offer those that are into PvP with a little PvE thrown in.
opinions by nature cannot be objective, they are opinions.
For instance, currently writting a GW1 review, opinion wise I thought it was a pretty bad game. Objectivly its a polished game with a lot to offer those that are into PvP with a little PvE thrown in.
And even so, even using the "they just hate EA" excuse, how many fanboys are skewing the results with perfect 10s? Like I said before, the skewing goes both ways.
Because 9 and 10s are more accurate for a gmae like ME3 than a 1 or 0.
Except for the people who think ME3 is a 1 or a 0.
An old buddy of mine who wrote reviews for movies once told me, "You have every right to an opinion, that is until you write a review then you owe it to other people to be as objective as you can.".
Rating a game 0 1 or two on a scale of 1 to 10 means it is absolute shit, and unless you let you own personal dislikes of a certain publisher get in the way of Mass Effect 3 you'd see that its no 0-2.
Maybe I should stop expecting people to be fair and unbias when righting user reviews?
Conversely, giving a game a rating of 9 is almost perfect, and 10 is perfect.
Yet in reading a number of the reviews that gave 90+%, the text does not match the final score.
And yes you should stop being so hard on user reviews. Yes there's a lot of fanboys and haters alike both sckewing the numbers. But do not read the user scores, read the actual user reviews. You're right, scores and rating are subjective to the person giving them, but a number of user reviews will list off what they felt was good and bad about the game, which you can then formulate your own opinion as to if that's something you would like or dislike.
loved ME1, and even mildly enjoyed ME2. This game is made for Xbox COD Kiddies. AVOID!. Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down
And even so, even using the "they just hate EA" excuse, how many fanboys are skewing the results with perfect 10s? Like I said before, the skewing goes both ways.
Because 9 and 10s are more accurate for a gmae like ME3 than a 1 or 0.
Except for the people who think ME3 is a 1 or a 0.
An old buddy of mine who wrote reviews for movies once told me, "You have every right to an opinion, that is until you write a review then you owe it to other people to be as objective as you can.".
Rating a game 0 1 or two on a scale of 1 to 10 means it is absolute shit, and unless you let you own personal dislikes of a certain publisher get in the way of Mass Effect 3 you'd see that its no 0-2.
Maybe I should stop expecting people to be fair and unbias when righting user reviews?
Conversely, giving a game a rating of 9 is almost perfect, and 10 is perfect.
Yet in reading a number of the reviews that gave 90+%, the text does not match the final score.
And yes you should stop being so hard on user reviews. Yes there's a lot of fanboys and haters alike both sckewing the numbers. But do not read the user scores, read the actual user reviews. You're right, scores and rating are subjective to the person giving them, but a number of user reviews will list off what they felt was good and bad about the game, which you can then formulate your own opinion as to if that's something you would like or dislike.
loved ME1, and even mildly enjoyed ME2. This game is made for Xbox COD Kiddies. AVOID!. Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down
0 Mass Effect began as a deep, player-choice-oriented franchise. Now, it's been gutted by BioWare & EA to appeal to a brainless shooter crowd. No matter what you did in ME1 & 2, all the endings in 3 are pretty similar. They did make some welcome improvements to combat, but pointlessly removed other features--for example, why on Earth would you remove the ability to holster your weapon? Variety in dialogue has been stripped out, and even in so-called "Full Dialogue" mode, the dialogue wheel comes up less than half as often as in previous installments. This was their chance to make a fantastic end to the trilogy, but they chose "BUTTON AWESOME!" as a design philosophy. If this is the Superbowl, then it's gotta be the 2011 Superbowl, because it's off-putting and uninteresting. After this and DA:2, BioWare's dead, and they took Shepherd down with them
aRandomGnome Mar 6, 2012 1 Dead of the days of awaiting a new well made story driven game by Bioware. This game is dumbed down just like the likes of Dragon Age 2. The Dialogue is disappointing at best. I used to enjoy this series, but this just killed the whole thing for me. Not to mention the day 1 Dlc, or the lack of a skybox. The lack of innovation is disgusting, sadly the biodrones will continue to support this game and destroy video games as a whole.
Rediculous. This tille is so bad it should not be associated with ME1. I don't know why bioware thought this woud be good. Horrible ending as well. I am disgusted.
And even so, even using the "they just hate EA" excuse, how many fanboys are skewing the results with perfect 10s? Like I said before, the skewing goes both ways.
Because 9 and 10s are more accurate for a gmae like ME3 than a 1 or 0.
Except for the people who think ME3 is a 1 or a 0.
An old buddy of mine who wrote reviews for movies once told me, "You have every right to an opinion, that is until you write a review then you owe it to other people to be as objective as you can.".
Rating a game 0 1 or two on a scale of 1 to 10 means it is absolute shit, and unless you let you own personal dislikes of a certain publisher get in the way of Mass Effect 3 you'd see that its no 0-2.
Maybe I should stop expecting people to be fair and unbias when righting user reviews?
Conversely, giving a game a rating of 9 is almost perfect, and 10 is perfect.
Yet in reading a number of the reviews that gave 90+%, the text does not match the final score.
And yes you should stop being so hard on user reviews. Yes there's a lot of fanboys and haters alike both sckewing the numbers. But do not read the user scores, read the actual user reviews. You're right, scores and rating are subjective to the person giving them, but a number of user reviews will list off what they felt was good and bad about the game, which you can then formulate your own opinion as to if that's something you would like or dislike.
loved ME1, and even mildly enjoyed ME2. This game is made for Xbox COD Kiddies. AVOID!. Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down
I agree with this! Mass Effect 3 was made to cash in on the call of duty fanbase, EA don't give a damn about their fanbase they never have.
This thread just taught me how to beat every game in 3 easy , record breaking steps :
1) Buy Game
2) Place unopened game on shelf.
3) Game Beaten!!!
except people have been through 5 of the 8 endings already... I mean thats pretty beaten?
Or should we demand every square inch every stone turned over and seen. Is THAT beaten?
I already commented asking if ME3 was truly that short. If it is then that sucks. My last few comments pertain more to a statement that someone had "beaten" Skyrim in 3hrs. My point is ignoring most of the content whether it is directly affecting the story or not is hardly "beating" the game..imo.
If you're telling me now that only a few stones were unturned and the story was still this short in ME3 then that does...in fact...blow. However...if one ran past everything and just hit key story points to finish in record time then how is that the games fault? Admittedly hard to judge because no one ever seems to say exactly how they played the game.
It also just seems many posts show up with games beaten in ridiculous times as if people try to rush through only to discredit a game on the forum of choice. Who knows....I play it and find out. I'm still playing ME1 . I have commitment issues . lol.
loved ME1, and even mildly enjoyed ME2. This game is made for Xbox COD Kiddies. AVOID!. Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down
Yep and by reading his review I can tell that my review of his review
is he cannot make a good review...
Repeating the same words again and again make me think to myself hmmm don't listen to this guy, but it doesn't say to me "all user reviews are crap" it says to me "read the next guys opinion and see what he thought and see what he wrote and if it makes any sense at all."
loved ME1, and even mildly enjoyed ME2. This game is made for Xbox COD Kiddies. AVOID!. Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down
Yep and by reading his review I can tell that my review of his review
is he cannot make a good review...
Repeating the same words again and again make me think to myself hmmm don't listen to this guy, but it doesn't say to me "all user reviews are crap" it says to me "read the next guys opinion and see what he thought and see what he wrote and if it makes any sense at all."
And even so, even using the "they just hate EA" excuse, how many fanboys are skewing the results with perfect 10s? Like I said before, the skewing goes both ways.
Because 9 and 10s are more accurate for a gmae like ME3 than a 1 or 0.
Except for the people who think ME3 is a 1 or a 0.
An old buddy of mine who wrote reviews for movies once told me, "You have every right to an opinion, that is until you write a review then you owe it to other people to be as objective as you can.".
Rating a game 0 1 or two on a scale of 1 to 10 means it is absolute shit, and unless you let you own personal dislikes of a certain publisher get in the way of Mass Effect 3 you'd see that its no 0-2.
Maybe I should stop expecting people to be fair and unbias when righting user reviews?
Well since you've spent the day on these forums throwing a big old screaming wobbler because some people don't share your high opinion of this game, how about you yourself actually learn to take your friends advice, and then get back to us.
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
loved ME1, and even mildly enjoyed ME2. This game is made for Xbox COD Kiddies. AVOID!. Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down
Yep and by reading his review I can tell that my review of his review
is he cannot make a good review...
Repeating the same words again and again make me think to myself hmmm don't listen to this guy, but it doesn't say to me "all user reviews are crap" it says to me "read the next guys opinion and see what he thought and see what he wrote and if it makes any sense at all."
There is no getting through to people like you. Ignorance is bliss though so maybe you are better off.
By do this you mean post a user review that you don't like?
Sure and I bet I can post the converse of it, whats the point?
Clearly they've made a lot of big mistakes and angered their fan base, be it by the content of their game, or the business choices they've made recently, perhaps a combination of both.
Also i'd like for you to post the Critic's reviews, and their scores next to them, and then tell us how validated they seem?
loved ME1, and even mildly enjoyed ME2. This game is made for Xbox COD Kiddies. AVOID!. Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down
What's your point?
I said the a number of the user reviews explain what they liked or disliked, not that all of them do.
Even so, from this review and having played ME1 and ME2, I take from it that they dumbed down some of the RPG elements and focused more on the FPS elements...Which is something repeated more eloquently by other reviewers.
And even so, even using the "they just hate EA" excuse, how many fanboys are skewing the results with perfect 10s? Like I said before, the skewing goes both ways.
Because 9 and 10s are more accurate for a gmae like ME3 than a 1 or 0.
Except for the people who think ME3 is a 1 or a 0.
An old buddy of mine who wrote reviews for movies once told me, "You have every right to an opinion, that is until you write a review then you owe it to other people to be as objective as you can.".
Rating a game 0 1 or two on a scale of 1 to 10 means it is absolute shit, and unless you let you own personal dislikes of a certain publisher get in the way of Mass Effect 3 you'd see that its no 0-2.
Maybe I should stop expecting people to be fair and unbias when righting user reviews?
Well since you've spent the day on these forums throwing a big old screaming wobbler because some people don't share your high opinion of this game, how about you yourself actually learn to take your friends advice, and then get back to us.
Funny thing is, I give this game about an 8.5 maybe 9.0 if the multiplayer turns out to be anygood.
You pretty much nailed it! Exactly why I hold more value onto the user score than the so called "professional" review scores. Simply because the users (gamers) actually bought and played the game.
Comments
An old buddy of mine who wrote reviews for movies once told me, "You have every right to an opinion, that is until you write a review then you owe it to other people to be as objective as you can.".
Rating a game 0 1 or two on a scale of 1 to 10 means it is absolute shit, and unless you let you own personal dislikes of a certain publisher get in the way of Mass Effect 3 you'd see that its no 0-2.
Maybe I should stop expecting people to be fair and unbias when righting user reviews?
Sorry but that review does not equal 93 for me, 93 is almost a perfect score.
I ammended by post, and yes I agree.
But point systems are terribly easy to skew. Actually read the reviews, even the user ones. A user might rate a game a 0-2, which is far lower than it should be, but the good ones will also list off and explain reasons why. Reading those reviews will give a better perception of how one might rate the game themselves given the written feedback.
Which goes back to what I added to my post... a lot of the critic reviews are scored 10-15 percent higher than what the actual written review implies the game should be rated. It's almost like the editors just took whatever was written and inflated the final scores.
how can an opinion be unbiased?
I agree, the critic reviewers words do not match the numbers AT ALL.
I think thats why we should all judge reviews by their words not their numbers, numbers are far far too vauge. People have no idea how to score things it seems, and everyone has their own idea of how things should be rated.
IF you judge the game by the reviwers words, it seems like its a decent game, not too bad. If you judge it by the user reviews, its about the same.
The words tell the tale that the numbers do not.
Also reviewers need to start using MORE words... seriously some of them used one sentance or less...
Conversely, giving a game a rating of 9 is almost perfect, and 10 is perfect.
Yet in reading a number of the reviews that gave 90+%, the text does not match the final score.
And yes you should stop being so hard on user reviews. Yes there's a lot of fanboys and haters alike both sckewing the numbers. But do not read the user scores, read the actual user reviews. You're right, scores and rating are subjective to the person giving them, but a number of user reviews will list off what they felt was good and bad about the game, which you can then formulate your own opinion as to if that's something you would like or dislike.
Loved the first Mass Effect, aside from the Mako driving which handled like a drunken ill bug. Mass Effect 2 started off decently but started to drag on and the planet scanning was incredibly boring and a pathetic change up from the Mako/planet EXPLORING. Mass Effect 2 seemed to lessen the feeling of exploring the galaxy and felt more like chasing a plot line arond the galaxy. The ending of Mass Effect 2 was even a letdown with the whole "look they made a giant Terminator". The humoid Reaper thingee didn't even seem menacing or creepy, just felt cheesy.
I felt no attachment to ME2 like I did with ME; I felt no excitement or enthusiasm when ME3 was announced. As soon as I played the demo and the PC demo had the too tight FOV I was turned off. Guess I'll rent this for the PS3 for a few days and finish up the series to be done with it.
The ending to this series sounds like it is cheesy stupid and one step away from "it was all a dream".
But hey, ME3 has that oh-so necessary multiplayer tacked onto it, because that is definitely what the series needed to improve itself.../sarcasmoff
By being objective.
For instance, currently writting a GW1 review, opinion wise I thought it was a pretty bad game. Objectivly its a polished game with a lot to offer those that are into PvP with a little PvE thrown in.
Well i just started, ( a few hours in) and so far at this point I would give it an 89, so in reflection to the review as with most games they review it's pretty much right on with what I think it should be. I always look at scoring for them with a 10 point margin of error compairing my taste to theirs, so far for 10 years it has worked.
"The monster created isn't by the company that makes the game, it's by the fans that make it something it never was"
opinions by nature cannot be objective, they are opinions.
yeah of course if you're being paid for it.
treguard87
1
loved ME1, and even mildly enjoyed ME2. This game is made for Xbox COD Kiddies. AVOID!. Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down, Let Down
0 Mass Effect began as a deep, player-choice-oriented franchise. Now, it's been gutted by BioWare & EA to appeal to a brainless shooter crowd. No matter what you did in ME1 & 2, all the endings in 3 are pretty similar. They did make some welcome improvements to combat, but pointlessly removed other features--for example, why on Earth would you remove the ability to holster your weapon? Variety in dialogue has been stripped out, and even in so-called "Full Dialogue" mode, the dialogue wheel comes up less than half as often as in previous installments. This was their chance to make a fantastic end to the trilogy, but they chose "BUTTON AWESOME!" as a design philosophy. If this is the Superbowl, then it's gotta be the 2011 Superbowl, because it's off-putting and uninteresting. After this and DA:2, BioWare's dead, and they took Shepherd down with them
aRandomGnome Mar 6, 2012 1 Dead of the days of awaiting a new well made story driven game by Bioware. This game is dumbed down just like the likes of Dragon Age 2. The Dialogue is disappointing at best. I used to enjoy this series, but this just killed the whole thing for me. Not to mention the day 1 Dlc, or the lack of a skybox. The lack of innovation is disgusting, sadly the biodrones will continue to support this game and destroy video games as a whole.
Gave it a 0
drlupin3
Mar 6, 2012
0
Rediculous. This tille is so bad it should not be associated with ME1. I don't know why bioware thought this woud be good. Horrible ending as well. I am disgusted.
I agree with this! Mass Effect 3 was made to cash in on the call of duty fanbase, EA don't give a damn about their fanbase they never have.
I already commented asking if ME3 was truly that short. If it is then that sucks. My last few comments pertain more to a statement that someone had "beaten" Skyrim in 3hrs. My point is ignoring most of the content whether it is directly affecting the story or not is hardly "beating" the game..imo.
If you're telling me now that only a few stones were unturned and the story was still this short in ME3 then that does...in fact...blow. However...if one ran past everything and just hit key story points to finish in record time then how is that the games fault? Admittedly hard to judge because no one ever seems to say exactly how they played the game.
It also just seems many posts show up with games beaten in ridiculous times as if people try to rush through only to discredit a game on the forum of choice. Who knows....I play it and find out. I'm still playing ME1 . I have commitment issues . lol.
Just for comparing...
Mass Effect (Original all PC versions)
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect-2
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/mass-effect-3
Dragon Age 2 (XBox360)
http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/dragon-age-ii
SWTOR
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/star-wars-the-old-republic
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/Yep and by reading his review I can tell that my review of his review
is he cannot make a good review...
Repeating the same words again and again make me think to myself hmmm don't listen to this guy, but it doesn't say to me "all user reviews are crap" it says to me "read the next guys opinion and see what he thought and see what he wrote and if it makes any sense at all."
I could really do this all day.
People being butt hurt over EA=/= a bad game
Well since you've spent the day on these forums throwing a big old screaming wobbler because some people don't share your high opinion of this game, how about you yourself actually learn to take your friends advice, and then get back to us.
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
There is no getting through to people like you. Ignorance is bliss though so maybe you are better off.
By do this you mean post a user review that you don't like?
Sure and I bet I can post the converse of it, whats the point?
Clearly they've made a lot of big mistakes and angered their fan base, be it by the content of their game, or the business choices they've made recently, perhaps a combination of both.
Also i'd like for you to post the Critic's reviews, and their scores next to them, and then tell us how validated they seem?
LOL indeed Laughing Man, I agree, if thats a review ,... here is my review of all the negative posts in this thread....
TrOlLsTrOlLsTrOlLsTrOlLsTrOlLsTrOlLs TrOlLs TrOlLsTrOlLsTrOlLsTrOlLsTrOlLsTrOlLsTrOlLsTrOlLs
TrOlLsTrOlLsTrOlLsTrOlLsTrOlLsTrOlLs TrOlLs TrOlLs
"The monster created isn't by the company that makes the game, it's by the fans that make it something it never was"
What's your point?
I said the a number of the user reviews explain what they liked or disliked, not that all of them do.
Even so, from this review and having played ME1 and ME2, I take from it that they dumbed down some of the RPG elements and focused more on the FPS elements...Which is something repeated more eloquently by other reviewers.
Funny thing is, I give this game about an 8.5 maybe 9.0 if the multiplayer turns out to be anygood.
You pretty much nailed it! Exactly why I hold more value onto the user score than the so called "professional" review scores. Simply because the users (gamers) actually bought and played the game.