Bioware Employee caught reviewing Dragon Age 2

Recommended Videos

Wolfram23

New member
Mar 23, 2004
4,095
0
0
My opinion: Big fuckin deal. I would do the exact same thing if I released a game - and why not? If I'm proud of it and think it's amazing, then that's my opinion. And what else is a review? I'd try to promote my product through any and all avenues. It's a business afterall.

Also, DA2 is quite good but if you need proof you can watch some Let's Play videos, LIKE MINE [http://www.youtube.com/user/TheWolfram23?feature=mhum]
 

Yeager942

New member
Oct 31, 2008
1,097
0
0
I can understand why this one employee would stoop to make that fake review. After months of hard as sin development, their game gets trashed by PC elitists and trolls. I think he was just lashing out. I've been a loyal bioware customer since kotor, and I really dont think DA2 deserves all the shit its getting. Yes, it's disappointing to see day 1 dlc, no mod support, and "streamlined" dialogue (though the voices are well done), but overall, I've been thoroughly satisfied with DA2. I guess I'm in the minority. :/
 

Denamic

New member
Aug 19, 2009
3,804
0
0
I doubt even EA would try something like this.
It's probably just a disgruntled employee who doesn't like seeing their work being trashed unfairly.
 

Slycne

Tank Ninja
Feb 19, 2006
3,422
0
0
deth2munkies said:
or because it's not set up to give an accurate barometer (5/5 is way too restrictive) of how the game actually performs.
When you can point out what the quantifiable mechanic or feature that makes a game a 93 instead of a 92 then maybe we would consider using a different scale.

Our 5 point scale is intended to be broad because we feel it's a better way to recommend games. Are Baldur's Gate, Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time and Half Life all 10's, or maybe just 9's, or are they just simply great games that everyone should at least try once? Moving away from 100 and 10 point scales means we don't get buried in the minutia and are more free to review games as gamers interact with them, as a total experience.

Is there some weirdness when aggregate sites interpret say a 5/5 to be 100/100, sure, but I'd rather deal with that than the previously mentioned problems.

deth2munkies said:
*I noticed The Escapist was the poster child for DA2 positive "Critic Reviews" on Metacritic a few days ago. It has since been removed entirely from the critic's list. I don't know why, and refuse to speculate, but it is an oddity considering I did call him out for glossing over the flaws and giving the game a perfect score that didn't seem to jive with what everyone else on the planet was saying.
I think you might have just hit the page for another system, our review is still in that same spot for the Xbox360.
 

Duffy13

New member
May 18, 2009
65
0
0
I never finished DA:O, but I'm addicted to DA2. Already looking forward to another play thru as I think the companion interaction and choices through the story may be way more complicated then in DA:O. And that's what I find interesting.
 

snagli

New member
Jan 21, 2011
412
0
0
meh. bioware can do what they want for all i care, as long as they keep making mass effect and dragon age games (without messing it up too much, obviously)
 

Prof. Monkeypox

New member
Mar 17, 2010
1,014
0
0
Xzi said:
Nurb said:
THERE IS NO BIOWARE. ONLY EA.



Bioware is just a name now, they died the moment EA bought them. Supporting them means you support EA and all their bullshit.
Not buying anything published by EA or Activision would leave you with roughly two games per year, unfortunately.
But would they be good games? If so, I don't mind. I only have enough money for, like, two games a year anyway.
 

Kaanyr Vhok

New member
Mar 8, 2011
209
0
0
Hannibal942 said:
I can understand why this one employee would stoop to make that fake review. After months of hard as sin development, their game gets trashed by PC elitists and trolls. I think he was just lashing out. I've been a loyal bioware customer since kotor, and I really dont think DA2 deserves all the shit its getting. Yes, it's disappointing to see day 1 dlc, no mod support, and "streamlined" dialogue (though the voices are well done), but overall, I've been thoroughly satisfied with DA2. I guess I'm in the minority. :/
If you just started following Bioware since KOTOR then let me explain why PC gamers or console/PC gamers are "trolling"

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/141/index/6492905
Lets take a look at what Bioware removed from BG to their first console RPG KOTOR.

KOTOR had a party size of three. They went from six to three. We could no longer attack civilians, inventories were now unified, areas were smaller, there were less NPCs in the areas, Party members could not die, you could no longer solo the game with the same vigor as you would in BG, soloing in BG was a cause to replay. You could solo with your character after you beat the game, Day/Night cycles were all but removed, point and click or point and press controls were removed so you couldn?t move party members while paused thus you could not flee or set up ambushes. Party customization was removed. With the infinity engine you could create a party of Luke, Lea, Han, Chewie, R2, and C-3PO and gave them custom voices.

That was KOTOR?


Then we get DA:O. Supposedly it?s the predecessor to BG. Its supposed to restore some of this stuff right? What did we get? An extra party member. Good start but why not six? Then we lose the ability to bash chest, we get auto healing, level scaling that is much worse than KOTOR?s, less exploration, worthless ranged weapons, a ridiculous hit point driven stat system that makes D&D seem logical, senseless stat requirements, and you still cant move characters while paused in the console version.
If the game had decent encounter design I could have put up with it. With all of that gameplay removed Bioware used filler combat to fill the void.

Earlier today I checked the speedrun records of some notable RPGs. DA:O is the slowest of them all. Its slower than Oblivion, Morrowind and Baldurs Gate put together.

So DA 2 comes out and...

we lose friendly fire on normal and hard, we lose the iso cam, we lose auto attack, and some inventory management but we gain fast Power Rangers animation.
For what??? How streamlined does it need to be before its shallow? I?m reminded of what George Carlin would say about when we changed the term "Shell Shocked" to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Maybe the soldiers would receive better treatment if they were still Shell Shocked. Maybe we shouldn?t get rid of the term Dumbed Down. Maybe it fits. If "Press a button and something awesome happens" is the slogan for DA 2 I have one for DA 3. Smarten up!!
Instead of spamming metric sites Bioware needs to focus on the substance or lack of substance in their games.
 

Kaanyr Vhok

New member
Mar 8, 2011
209
0
0
fealubryne said:
This entire comment is pretty much exactly how I feel. I'm not a fan of the direction they went with Dragon Age II, but at the same time I understand why they did it. It appealed to a niche group, and let's face it, the changes they made appeal to a lot more people now.

That said, it's even worse that this happened... it discredits the fact that the game honestly seems to be doing pretty well on its own.
I'm no fan of DA:O but 3.5 million is not a niche group. I bet anything DA 2 wont reach those numbers.
 

Assassin Xaero

New member
Jul 23, 2008
5,392
0
0
jthwilliams said:
So I read the Story and I got to say. So What?

No really.

1 Employee from EA which employs 8000-10000 people wrote a favoriable review. Maybe was tied to the project and a bit of his ego was in the review, maybe he identifies with his employer and has pride with their products, perhaps he just really likes the game.

In any case there doesn't appear to be evidence of anything other than 1 person expresing a personal opinion on a site that express purpose if for people to express personal opinions. Now, if you found 50,000 reviews written by 1,000 employess using 500 throw away e-mails to move the score up, then there would be a story.
Did you read it closely? He works for BioWare, the people who made the game, not just EA. The point is that it is a biased review, and reviews are made to help potential buyers. If I made a game and told you that it was the greatest thing ever, would I be a reliable source? No, because I made the game. He just did it to boost ratings and sales.
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
Um, before we grab the torches and pitchforks, it's good to remember that one engineer posting a positive review, however unsavory, is not a sign of company-level malfeasance by either EA or Bioware. Employees get defensive about their work, too, and if anything the fact that this was done by an engineer and not someone in the marketing department suggests he was acting alone. Seriously, that troll from Fox News who claimed Bulletstorm was raising the rate of sexual assault has more people boosting her book than that.
 

Trako

New member
Jul 23, 2008
60
0
0
This is not the BioWare I know. "EA" in front of anything means it has been purged of all dissidents against EA and is worthy of being a part of the core EA philosophy. At least I like to think so, anyway. Up next, the EA dildo and butt plug, your choice, both spiky and otherwise unpleasant. Which will you choose?

See the post from Extra Credits about EA's marketing campaigns, it's all them, and BioWare is just a name now. RIP every developer that was bought and summarily vivisected by EA.
 

Someone Depressing

New member
Jan 16, 2011
2,417
0
0
I thought Dragon Age was terrible.
But an employee having to make a peice of shit look like a chip of diamond, is just going too far..
 

Zhukov

The Laughing Arsehole
Dec 29, 2009
13,769
5
43
Huh.

Funny thing, I remember reading that particular review. I thought it was just a fanboy.
 

Macrobstar

New member
Apr 28, 2010
896
0
0
I still enjoy there games (especially DA2), but bioware means nothing to me anymore, they sold there souls
 

Macrobstar

New member
Apr 28, 2010
896
0
0
Assassin Xaero said:
jthwilliams said:
So I read the Story and I got to say. So What?

No really.

1 Employee from EA which employs 8000-10000 people wrote a favoriable review. Maybe was tied to the project and a bit of his ego was in the review, maybe he identifies with his employer and has pride with their products, perhaps he just really likes the game.

In any case there doesn't appear to be evidence of anything other than 1 person expresing a personal opinion on a site that express purpose if for people to express personal opinions. Now, if you found 50,000 reviews written by 1,000 employess using 500 throw away e-mails to move the score up, then there would be a story.
Did you read it closely? He works for BioWare, the people who made the game, not just EA. The point is that it is a biased review, and reviews are made to help potential buyers. If I made a game and told you that it was the greatest thing ever, would I be a reliable source? No, because I made the game. He just did it to boost ratings and sales.
I think any reviewer on metacritic abandoned being unbiased the moment 100 people rated it 0