The morons are at it again (ME3 review bombing)

[Zydrate]

Just like Skyrim. The Bethesda forums were bombarded with complaints within the first hours of release...
Do these people even play the damn games?

 

[Rowan Tritton]

I don't get the whole Day 0/1 DLC issue, I really don't... I'm one of those people who believe the "made/finished after the game went gold" line, and why shouldn't I?

It takes about two to three months on average for the game to go from gold to being in stores (excluding games who's gold had to be resubmitted with changes) and in that time the development team is sitting around doing nothing, why shouldn't they take the time to make DLC or finish things they didn't have time to put on the game before it was sent off?

I really love DLC and I've generally been happy to pay for it. Sure I've never been a fan of map-packs or simple reskins (as oppossed to completely new unique costumes like in the ME2 DLC), but that's because the community usually creates better ones which are free.

In Mass Effect's case there hasn't been a single DLC purchase I've regretted, and the two follow-up mission expansions "Lair of the Shadow Broker" and "The Arrival" both offered something memorable to my playing experience.

Sure I miss the days of expansion packs for games, but if you look at how long they used to take to be released, not to mention they used to cost half as much as the game, it's not too different, we just get DLC at a faster rate usually.

As an Aussie I'm more pissed that we have to wait two additional days for the game to be available to collect from the shops.

The same thing happened when DA2 was released, here's hoping more of the "less" biased reviews come out soon, be they good or bad.

Cheers
Rowan/LSWSjr
PS. I'm actually such a deeply troubled individual that I bought both the Collectors Edition ($120 AU) and the Omni-blade Edition ($90 AU) to maximise my DLC and physical promotional items. Also to those commenting the ME3 Collectors Edition costs more than the ME2 Collectors Edition, the extra DLC and multiple physical promotional items are the reason, you're getting more loot for your money

 

[Versuvius]

So, let me get this straight:

A single person will always be able to voice its likes and dislikes clearly. Applying that same logic to a fanbase numbering in the millions is another story. So BioWare goes "What do?" and takes the safest route - appealing to the lowest common denominator. Seems pretty decent to me so far, I'd even go so far as to call it a wise business strategy.

Throwing a monkey wrench in this factor, though, is the fact that Mass Effect started as an RPG with shooter elements. Catering to the Call of Duty crowd certainly will bring in a sizable demographic, but it'll alienate the core fanbase - the ones that stuck along for the story or characters, typical BioWare strong points. This looks like a hefty risk, but one that was obviously considered. Again, revenues are the core reason behind this.

Then there's the Jersey Shore-ification of the cast. Or, rather, this is how it's being called after the reveal of only two of the actors involved in the project out of... how many? One of the two isn't even an actress to begin with, and she plays a bit part? Excuse me, where's the freaking problem? Can't I ignore Jess Chobot if I want to? Can I reasonably assume I can stick Freddie Prinze Jr. in the cargo hold and leave him to stew there for the duration of my playthrough? Yes?

So where's the problem?

Aaaaand, multiplayer. Something that's completely optional, unless you're an achievement hunter who absolutely needs an -nth variation on a Kill Streak Gamerscore reward. It's optional, so who cares?

Insofar, all I'm seeing is the usual, normal case of a publisher assessing a product's worth, taking some risks and shying away from others; the sort of streamlining that happens when you have several millions worth of invested capital to recoup. You have to play it safe, or you're setting yourself up for a financial re-enactment of the Hindenberg disaster. It absolutely sucks as far as innovation goes, but what could you honestly do?

Considering all of the above, some people felt it necessary for them to go ahead and bomb Metacritic? That's honestly like some of my peers at the uni going "WE CAN'T HAVE NICE THINGS FOR FREE! STRIKE, MOTHERFUCKERS! QUEBEC'S A FASCIST STATE! BOO!"

In that, you know, it's not what I'd exactly call a mature or informed reaction. The best kind of reaction would have been a boycott of the game or simply personally abstaining to buy it. As is, I'm sure we'll see most of the raging, spiteful idiots who bombed ME3 shoot themselves in the foot with a closer inspection of their Xbox/PS3 tags and their activity...

The above example also applies literally when you consider the Day One DLC. All the rage being brewed about this is fairly annoying, largely because you just know a sizable chunk of the folks riding the Whaaaambulance is going to head straight for its favorite Torrent tracker to get that piece of software just hours after raging against it.

I would just like to say Multiplayer isn't optional it has a direct effect on gameplay and your endings (Unless you do -every- single side everything everywhere ever, then you CAN ignore it). See the review on the main page for evidence.

 

[Balobo]

I dunno, While the game certainly does not merit a zero, the underlying sentiments are not really all that off.

Bad way to end the trilogy
Lack luster writing
Pandering to make it more accessible
Pandering to niche demographics
Not remaining true to the prior installments
Excessively dark gamma filters
Problems with the PC release

All of these things any critic worth their salt would ding a game for. Which invariably means that there is just as much damage done by people registering a zero as everyone registering a 10 because the game clearly is NOT perfect, yet if you look at the user reviews theres clearly an equal number of baseless 10s being given out as there are baseless zeros.

Pretty much this, and the stolen art shit.

But the scores really shouldn't be this low. There are far worse movies than this one.

 

[Saegrim]

The only bullshit involved here is applying context that is not there. Is it bullshit if you had to construct it out of thin air?

The point of my post was to explain that the game cannot merit a zero, the game certainly will not merit a 10. The list was a list of common complaints from metacritic much like I said in my last post. Regardless of the scores the players give the game the list of repetitive complaints illustrates that the people giving the game a 10 is even more irrational than giving the game a 0

Now please, I ask to stop trying to stir up an argument with me based on picking and choosing out of what I wrote and reading entirely too much into it for your own personal context. Youve got other discussions going in this thread, go focus on that. Or are you really that determined to be in violation of the code of conduct?

I generally agree with what you're saying here, though it would depend on the context. In reviews, games should never warrant 10s unless they are absolutely perfect in every single facet. For personal taste, it's possible that, to a certain person, a game could warrant a 10 in their books, despite its flaws.

I'd also just like to point out that the flaws being named by the negative Metacritic reviewers could possibly be bull. Or have you personally experienced the flaws named?

 

[razer17]

People don't like the game, or the way it's being handled. This is a way to do that. Studios do take meta critic scores seriously, apparently, so why not?

 

[zinho73]

I will approach this review thing from a different perspective. I guess people have an unhealthy fixation with scores and often do not read or watch the review fully(be that a user or professional review).

I saw the zero reviews form the DLC and reading their text it became clear to me it was a protest of some kind. I have no problem with that. The user is expressing their reasons and motives behind the score and I can form an opinion about what he is saying, even if its a pure emotional or ideological statement.

I do have problems with people that curse, lie and distort facts - and there was a bunch of reviews like that too. This is childish, desperate and quite frankly, sad.

That said, some professional reviewers have been doing a lousy work recently, failing to talk about the shortcomings of a game and sometimes overexcited like a fanboy. The best review I saw of ME3 was from gametrailers - they gave a high score to the game, but were very clear pointing out things like the ending might be disappointing, technical problems and that the dialogue can be kind dorky sometimes. The reviewrs just thought that those shortcomings weren't enough to mar the experience. Fair.

In short - I really don't care about the note anyone gives to a game, as long as they clearly express their reasons behind the score - even if it is some kind of protest. From professionals, I expect a more in-depth analysis and actual knowledge about the game, but I wouldn't be too attached to the score either.

 

[scorptatious]

Tsk tsk. Those people are missing out.

Just got Mass Effect 3 today and while it started out kinda slow, things really picked up later on. Can't wait to play more!

 

[Goofguy]

All this really proves to me is that I won't really rely on Metacritic user reviews anymore. The majority of these reviews are either 10s or 0s and it's not unreasonable for me to state that 80% of them come from users who have only the ME3 review to their name.

It's kind of like watching a battle of good vs evil only you want some giant meteor to come down and eradicate everyone on both sides.

 

[braincore02]

I'm sure the game is better than a 0, and was considering dropping my boycott on EA to play it. But since my boycott is largely based on their parasitic dlc practices, I think it's still on. I'll probably compromise and wait to buy the game at less than full price.
I must say the review bombing was responsible for bringing the dlc to my attention, as I don't follow gaming news like I used to. So for that I actually have to thank it for reminding me of my desire to vote with my dollars. I do not like the direction the industry is heading and EA is among the worst offenders. I'm sad they are Bioware's publisher.

 

[Ilikemilkshake]

EY YOU LOT.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.353336-Bioware-does-it-again

This may grind some gears.

If you aren't afraid of big bad mean ol' 4chan, go to their videogames board (/v/) for by-the-minute coverage of the shitstorm.

Just don't post.

Fuck sake man, you could have warned about the major spoilers there...

 

[SadisticBrownie]

This is just really sad. To vote down a game because it has optional content that you are in no way forced to take part in is pathetic and juvenile.
I've seen the scene with Cortez and it seemed fine, but even if you think it was a shit portrayal of a homosexual relationship (as some of them claim), it's ridiculous to give it 0/10. If BW messed up the romances I actually care about then sure, I'd be pissed and it might mar my enjoyment of the game a little, but not to such an outrageous extent.
Things like this are why I generally despise the gaming community. It's understandable why so many view us the way they do.

 

[Aurgelmir]

Well their "let's hustle them for money like never before" business model might have something to do with it, or everyone just missed their coffee.

I am sorry, but what part of it is a hustle?

They havn't been doing any false promises.
Correct they are using the high demand for their product to get more profits, but how is that a crime?

It was never a gift to the people... it was always just another product.

Problem is that it is so obvious that they are doing it to squeeze more money out of the consumer. And from what I hear of the day one DLC it sounds rather "important" for the game, which leads a lot of people to feel they are being sold an unfinished product unless they buy the DLC. And that is indeed a hustle to me.

 

[A Weakgeek]

I like how "dissapointing" equals to 0/10. That score should be reserved for games that simply dont work, ones that fail at every aspect. Mass effect contains tits, that should bump it to atleast 2/10

 

[Madman123456]

Oh Metacritic, you wonderful thing.
Really, Metacritic is a reliable Source for some Information. Sure, most of the reviews are utter Garbage.
But all in all, if you see a Product being reviewbombed you know that this Product has something in it that makes People lash out. In a rather stupid way, but nevertheless, the Product has something that angers People. And true enough, Mass Effect 3 has something to be not too happy about, like the bundled origin Software. Regardless of how you feel about that, you will have to note that this is pretty much forced upon you is not a good thing.
Those who feel very generous about the Origin Software may argue that this will not infringe on your Privacy any more then the "Steam" Software does, where as i'd have to say that EA leave themselves the Option to do just that wide open.
Nevertheless, if one thinks that origin is just as bad as Steam, one will have to note that having yet another Program that spies on your Data around isn't exactly a good thing.

Another thing that angers People would be the Day one DLC. One may feel that this is just another Squadmate and that this can be skipped and you can enjoy the Rest of the Game without it just fine.
But you'll have to note that Bioware is trying to lure us with this rather big Piece of Lore.
Wether you find this shady or not, you don't have to be a Fortuneteller to see that this will make some People angry.

Yet another thing is the Gay Shepard. There's nothing wrong with being Gay, the Gays don't chose to be Gay and therefore no one can fault them for making a wrong Choice.

Yet the Gay Shepard irks me since this is a bit shoehorned. So male gay Shep was so deep in the Closet in the first two Games that he was having Adventures in Narnia? Why? If he was scared about People's Opinions that would paint a rather dark Picture of Humanity in this Future.

No, Bioware made the gay Shep because there is Controversy to be had in that in a perfectly clean Way.
Some People may complain about gayshep in some comments and forums and be bashed by a million others and ME3 gets free Advertisement.

Regardless of how you feel about Gays, Gayshepard or Biowares Decision to make it possible to make Shepard come out of the Closet.
You will have to note that this will make some People angry.




The more People reviewbomb Products, the more Controversy is attached to it.
More Reviewbombing means more Stuff you might want to check out before you make a Decision wether or not to buy the Game.
Reviewbombing is more reliable then most of the gaming Press.

You can be certain that if something gets reviewbombed, it has something in it that may or may not influence your Decision to buy the Product.

 

[jezcentral]

We insist on doing this to hammer it into EA's thick fucking skull, they won't learn to not do this exclusive shit if we shit all over their game.

I think you lost track of your double-negatives, there.

 

[boag]

It got more expensive? No. Gaming is not getting more expensive, it is getting cheaper.

The game isnt out here in the UK yet so i can't comment on the quality but the price is certainly higher. The collectors edition costs £55 on PC (it was an exclusive at Game for £70 which is absolutly ridiculous...until they stopped stocking it) The CE for ME2 was £35 two years ago.

The standard edition for ME3 is £35 whereas every Bioware RPG since ME1 has been £25.

So price is definatly an issue. The rest of the points aren't really valid right now until it's been out for a while.

The review bombing is very petty though...

The price of Final Fantasy 1 when it was released back in the 90s was around 80 dollars. equivalent to about 120-130 dollars with inflation give or take. That was for a single regular edition game. Not a special edition like you get now for about 100. the regular one. so yeah gaming is getting cheaper. the only problem is that pay isnt keeping up with inflation which is keeping quite a good number of people in poverty or close to it and forcing them to work 2 or 3 jobs to make ends meet.

New technology is always more expensive when it's first commercially released, so comparing games to prices of 30 years ago serves no purpose. The fact is games have increased in price by 25% over the past few years... that's a fact.

A new PS3 with a game will cost me about £225. I payed £400 for mine 5 years ago. If today Sony put the price up to £325 im not going to say PS3s are getting cheaper because i decide to compare it to a time that isn't relevent anymore am i?

So its only fair to compare previous prices when it fits your argument, ok gotcha.

What? Did you read my post? I explained that comparing outdated prices doesn't make sense.
I compared Mass Effect 2 to Mass Effect 3, The person i was quoting was comparing Mass Effect 3 to Final Fantasy 1... There is a difference.

Yes, the difference is that Videogames where a hell of a lot more expensive in the previous console Generations, something that you dont want to admit because it breaks apart your little theory that games are getting more expensive, Regardless even your little comparison falls apart when you realize that Between ME 1 and 3 there has been no Price hike at all.

http://videogames.pricecharting.com/game/xbox-360/mass-effect
http://videogames.pricecharting.com/game/xbox-360/mass-effect-2


both games retailed at 60 dollars on their respective release dates, so yeah no, games havent been getting more expensive

Yes. In previous console generations... As in not this one.. So prices from previous generations aren't relevant.
Im not sure what point you're trying to make with those price charting links, for me they're showing used prices... but if you read my post you'd know i was talking about the PC version and UK pricing. I paid £25 for ME1 on release, £35 for ME2 Collectors edition on release (the regular was £25) and now for ME3 im paying £55 on release for the Collectors edition (with the regular being £35)

If you're telling me the price has not increased then you're either being deliberatly obtuse or you're a bit dull. The same goes if you don't understand that comparing today prices with games from 25 years ago doesnt make sense either.

Look, the question resides downright to "Is gaming getting more expensive?" The Anwser is no.
I gave you price charts as the only available Guideline I could find, since i havent been able to find the original retail price for the games new in their release dates.

The charts I posted can be used to infer their original pricing structure, because Im pretty sure the standard pricing has not changed and there is no way in hell the marketplace would set a higher price for a used object during its original run.

As for your "Obtuse" statements, perhaps its time to look in a mirror, because not taking into account the previous cycles is a near sighted way to frame the argument. Technology has been getting cheaper and it has been reflected in prices, the Game Standard prior to the move to Disks, was in the range of 70-80 dollars. the price range todays is between 50-60 USD.

now this may be different in EU, I will admit I am fairly ignorant in that pricing structure, perhaps the whole difference in POVs is strictly Geographical. Its not the first time ive heard people in other countries getting screwed over in the pricing structure.

But from what i can attest to see in this side of the Hemisphere, prices dropped and have been stable for over 10 years, and that is an Gargantuan feat in any industry.

Not remaining true to the prior installments

Can you elaborate on this, because its a pretty vague terminology you are using.

Nope.

One, if you read what I said you would understand that list of complaints is representative of the list of complaints on review boards, specifically in this case metacritic.

Two, I am not going to perpetuate goading. And by the look of this thread it seems youve already got your hands full with other arguments.

so you arent going to elaborate because you are just band wagoning what all the critics say, and cant think of a criticism yourself?

I can see where the rest of your criticisms come from, but BEING TRUE, is as vague as vague can get, which is why I asked you to elaborate.

i have my own set of problems with the Game, but I love calling bullshit when I see it.

The only bullshit involved here is applying context that is not there. Is it bullshit if you had to construct it out of thin air?

The point of my post was to explain that the game cannot merit a zero, the game certainly will not merit a 10.
I agree

The list was a list of common complaints from metacritic much like I said in my last post. Regardless of the scores the players give the game the list of repetitive complaints illustrates that the people giving the game a 10 is even more irrational than giving the game a 0

well pardon me for asking what the hell "remains true" means, its a vague statement.[color]


Now please, I ask to stop trying to stir up an argument with me based on picking and choosing out of what I wrote and reading entirely too much into it for your own personal context. Youve got other discussions going in this thread, go focus on that. Or are you really that determined to be in violation of the code of conduct?

hilarious, look if you dont want to participate in the conversation you are always free to ignore replies, just dont ask people not to reply to your post just because you dont want think up of something to say.

 

[Leole]

I.. I hope you guys realize that the game got leaked earlier and plenty of people downloaded it illegally.

Not all those reviews are for the explicit purpose of bombing.

Maybe one or two then?

It's a large concerted effort by unhappy fanboys and haters that had no intention of doing anything other than this well before any of them even played the game if they did at all. Don't defend that which isn't worth defending.

Actually, 30,000 people.

Just look at the leechers and seeders.

Right now, there's 28k Leechers, and 4k seeders. And that's just today, imagine how many peers stopped seeding when it finished downloading? And that's just ONE leaked version, I'm assuming there's a couple more.

Don't just dismiss my argument. Plenty of people played the leaked version and didn't like the game.

I am not justifying their actions, though, I'm pretty sure the game doesn't deserve a 0.