I leave in Edmonton and I know the Dr.'s and many of the employees. The Dr's have extremely open employment opportunities. I wouldn't blame Bioware, just an over-eager employee. And, I still wouldn't blame the employee. Also, Bioware does run autonomously from EA. I'm not defending the game in any matter, I rather dislike those kind of games. The employees and owner's though I will defend. Is it bad, yes it is, should Avanost get get flack no. Should EA get flack sure, they can always use some. Undecided about the employment strategies of Bioware though.
Bioware Employee caught reviewing Dragon Age 2
- Thread starter IamSofaKingRaw
- Start date
Recommended Videos
There is some sort of scandal going on.
First you have abnormally high reviews from the "official" sources such as gaming magazines and websites (like this one)*.
Second, you have a flood of one sentence reviews on metacritic of 0 that are artificially deflating the user score, the general user score seems to be in the 5-7 region.
Third, you have us, the players caught in the middle.
I don't believe this corruption is as widespread as this article and the facts may lead you to believe, so I will offer a few alternative explanations for the discrepancy:
1) The reviewers are more objective than the players and can disassociate DA2 from DA:O. A lot of the negativity is "X feature is different/worse than DA:O", and to be fair, there is a bit that is objectively worse (some graphical issues, the removal of an intricate dialog system and multiple choices in favor of stricter controls and 3 flavored response wheel), but compared to games coming out BETWEEN Origins and 2, it has quite a bit of depth.
2) The reviewers in question are BioWare fanboys who were raised on DnD and Baldur's Gate and look more favorably on games that continue the tradition. Gaming sites/mags/whatever often send people who are interested in X type of game to review X type of game. Dragon Age is polarizing because the first was almost a spiritual successor to the much lauded Baldur's Gate line of games, and giving its sequel leniency might be well within their comfort zone.
3) Their rating system is flawed. Either because they use it improperly (i.e. giving a game that has very few (but still a few) flaws a 10/10, 100%, 5/5, etc.), or because it's not set up to give an accurate barometer (5/5 is way too restrictive) of how the game actually performs.
4) The reviewers are looking at different aspects than the players at large. The players tend to be focused on the few negatives, and how much they weigh into the whole thing. Reviewers can often look at the bigger picture, but this sometimes leads to over-minimizing the flaws in the game.
And lastly, the one nobody wants:
B: There IS corruption in the system.
It exists, don't let anyone here or elsewhere tell you otherwise. This game is the only one that has gotten people up in arms because if there is corruption and it's not a misunderstanding caused by one of the 4 issues above, it is more widespread than anyone could think. Everyone that has given this game a 100/100, 10/10, 5/5 needs to have their integrity looked at and their priorities re-evaluated. It is good, but it shipped with plain flaws that can't be overlooked. How much weight these flaws carry is debatable, that they exist is not, thus the game CANNOT be perfect. Whether it was EA/BioWare employees in disguise, promised first looks/exclusivity for ME3 and other BioWare games, or extra ad revenue, there is definitely something fishy in the promotion of this game.
*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.
First you have abnormally high reviews from the "official" sources such as gaming magazines and websites (like this one)*.
Second, you have a flood of one sentence reviews on metacritic of 0 that are artificially deflating the user score, the general user score seems to be in the 5-7 region.
Third, you have us, the players caught in the middle.
I don't believe this corruption is as widespread as this article and the facts may lead you to believe, so I will offer a few alternative explanations for the discrepancy:
1) The reviewers are more objective than the players and can disassociate DA2 from DA:O. A lot of the negativity is "X feature is different/worse than DA:O", and to be fair, there is a bit that is objectively worse (some graphical issues, the removal of an intricate dialog system and multiple choices in favor of stricter controls and 3 flavored response wheel), but compared to games coming out BETWEEN Origins and 2, it has quite a bit of depth.
2) The reviewers in question are BioWare fanboys who were raised on DnD and Baldur's Gate and look more favorably on games that continue the tradition. Gaming sites/mags/whatever often send people who are interested in X type of game to review X type of game. Dragon Age is polarizing because the first was almost a spiritual successor to the much lauded Baldur's Gate line of games, and giving its sequel leniency might be well within their comfort zone.
3) Their rating system is flawed. Either because they use it improperly (i.e. giving a game that has very few (but still a few) flaws a 10/10, 100%, 5/5, etc.), or because it's not set up to give an accurate barometer (5/5 is way too restrictive) of how the game actually performs.
4) The reviewers are looking at different aspects than the players at large. The players tend to be focused on the few negatives, and how much they weigh into the whole thing. Reviewers can often look at the bigger picture, but this sometimes leads to over-minimizing the flaws in the game.
And lastly, the one nobody wants:
B: There IS corruption in the system.
It exists, don't let anyone here or elsewhere tell you otherwise. This game is the only one that has gotten people up in arms because if there is corruption and it's not a misunderstanding caused by one of the 4 issues above, it is more widespread than anyone could think. Everyone that has given this game a 100/100, 10/10, 5/5 needs to have their integrity looked at and their priorities re-evaluated. It is good, but it shipped with plain flaws that can't be overlooked. How much weight these flaws carry is debatable, that they exist is not, thus the game CANNOT be perfect. Whether it was EA/BioWare employees in disguise, promised first looks/exclusivity for ME3 and other BioWare games, or extra ad revenue, there is definitely something fishy in the promotion of this game.
*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.
/v/ is the only gaming board I read that is NOT very interested in DA2. I mean, DA2 is soooo last week and they are over it.Taxman1 said:
And, personally, I never saw anything on /v/ saying to bomb metacritic, the only mention of 4chan and DA2 came from Gaider, so I, personally, do not believe they were behind the bad reviews.
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.
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.
Out of curiosity, have you beaten this game? I don't mind the streamlined combat or simplified inventory at all. I actually loved the majority of the game.theComposer said:
It's not until endgame do you realize just how much of a rushed mess this game is. The story is weak as s***, character motivations completely break down into nonesense, and there isn't a single faction at the end game that you can side with that feels at all reasonable.
I don't want to give too much away, but this game doesn't deserve the 85 it's gotten on metacritic. 60 is alot more in line.
What's so bad about that? He's reviewing the game as a fan of it and not as a BioWare employee. Holy hell people are nitpicking about anything. There's no rule saying that a person who happens to work for a developer who releases a game he likes can't submit a review for that game on Metacritic. If I worked at BioWare, I'd probably do the same thing.
Maybe some sort of incipent panic over SWTOR? I really hope its going to be good, but going into that market is enough to make anyone nervous. Maybe BioWARE were hoping for very strong DA2 reviews to justify themselves in case SWTOR ends up tanking.sumanoskae said:
Either way, the treatment that DA2 is getting is shameful. I love the way the story is told, and I like how it focuses on the tale on the struggles of one family rather than presenting another version of LOTOR. I actually think its a step up from DA:O, though I'm willing to admit I might be biased because I played DA:O on the X-Box and DA2 on the PC.
Why should anyone care? It was one dude. If Bioware had every employee give the game a great review score then i;'d be suspect. But is it really so hard to believe that someone who works at Bioware could legitimately like the game?
I personally love it. I'm not a fan of the copy/paste dungeons but I got over it very quickly.
I personally love it. I'm not a fan of the copy/paste dungeons but I got over it very quickly.
A ridiculous number of people like the game. Stop pretending like your opinion is universal. This whole DA2 thing, as with most "they changed it, now it sucks" situations, is already pretty infantile without you trying to drum up your argument by inventing unanimity.IamSofaKingRaw said:
I can think of a few...but they've each only made one game so that's not really fair...Johnnyallstar said: