|
I'm beginning to see a pattern in game releases these days. A game will be intensely hyped up until it's release, and then when it actually IS released, a few days later, despite positive reviews in publication, it seems the internet's unanimnous opinion is that the game sucks, was a waste of money, and that the publishers and creators are vile people whom they'll never patronize again. And even when the companies make an effort to placate the fanbase, it's almost always "too little too late."
I saw this with Mass Effect 3, a game I thought was epic in scope and story. I personally thought the vagueness of its original ending was troubling, but that the free DLC that extended it alleviated most of my doubts, and I'm still super-excited for Dragon Age: Inquisition. And speaking of Dragon Age, before Mass Effect 3's ending, Dragon Age II being a lackluster and sucky game was the go-to complaint about BioWare, but I had a great deal of fun with the game, especially in terms of the interpersonal relationships between characters. But I've seen video review after video review stating that as a company, BioWare's dead to them, and that the majority of fans are STILL not satisfied by Mass Effect 3's ending, and insist that the Indoctrination theory should have been addressed by BioWare at least as a possibility, rather than summarily dismissed by the Extended cut.
More recently I've encountered this with the release of Rome II: Total War, a game I'd hotly anticipated for a long time. Almost immediately upon release the game was buggy, but I expected that, and figured things would right themselves with time. But there was more to it than bugs. Complaints were common that the game was nowhere near as awesome as the trailers made it out to be. The AI was bad, the turns took too long, balance was crappy, and basically that the game was unfinished upon release. They pointed to Shogun II and even the original Rome: Total War as superior games. Thing is, I hated Rome: Total War. I had fun when I started out, but I got frustrated by the inevitability of squalor rising and rioting in cities, and when I hit a certain point, the game would crash whenever I hit the end turn button, so I couldn't even play the damn game by that point. At least Rome II: Total War let me freakin' PLAY it!
This causing a giant sense of anxiety about purchasing games too. There's a lot of cool-looking games out there, but the people out there saying it sucks are scaring me away with claims of crappy mechanics and bugs and sucky stories and endings and stuff. Have I wasted my money? Am I about to waste my money and time if I go through with it and but the game anyway?
Sometimes I feel these complaints are definitely legitimate, the Xbox One's always online controversy for example and the question of used games and those sorts of things IS an important issue that needs to be challenged if things are to ever be in the consumer's favor. And what I'm wondering, basically, is if these games really DO suck, despite the fact that I don't think they're all that bad. It's coloring my enjoyment of the games because I'm constantly wondering if I'm just rationalizing or sugar-coating what truly is a flawed game, and if these publishers truly ARE lying to their customers and betraying them by releasing crappy games when they promised gold ones.
How much of this vitriol really is true? How much should I heed it? Am I aiding and abetting a lazy and deceptive industry by buying objectively crappy games and attempting to enjoy them out of a sense of loyalty to the brand?
Is something wrong with me? :(
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lol, I would never state enjoying a game is wrong. I understand your position. I also really enjoyed Mass Effect 3 up to the last five minutes. The original ending did not work for me, but I have read enough to understand that the journey is what is important. Btw, I thought Dragon Age 2 had a good story as well. The reused art assets and falling enemies (ala wave from the sky) did bother me thou. However, I still enjoyed the game. So you are not along in enjoying these games.
On the other hand, the bug filled games Bethesda produces tend to really, really annoy me so I simply do not buy their games until after a year. One year later, Bethesda games are patched and I can enjoy them without raging.
I will state very plainly that negative people are the the people who tend to post the most. Most video game forums are filled with some extremely bitter and unhappy people. I would highly recommend avoiding reading most boards otherwise you will not enjoy anything. For reviews, find a reviewer you like, have similiar tastes, and go with them. For myself, I like PCGamer.
|
|
Yeah, but the forums are where the most accurate strategy guides are! Otherwise I'll start flailing around in the game not knowing what to do. It's easy with games that have published strategy guides like Dragon Age or Skyrim, but Total War games don't have those.
Yeah, I do not play that many strategy games over than Xcom Enemy Unknown atm. IGN will usually have some sort of write up. The total war 2 write up is at http://www.ign.com/wikis/total-war-rome-ii/Walkthrough. Good luck, remember that playing games is suppose to be fun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nothing's wrong with you, no. And yes, there is a tide of popular/unpopular opinion that tends to go with whatever the first loud sentiment gets expressed.
I think geeks in general and gamers in particular fall into this fallacious way of thinking that we all must agree with each other because we are all gamers. When we are not only individuals who all like things according to our own unique tastes, but we are also deeply passionate about our hobbies and are going to be inclined therefore to be even MORE contentious over various issues rather than less.
The issue is, as with all matters of consumerism, to be an informed buyer and look up not just opinions but also facts about the games you're interested in, and buy them or not based on these facts you unearth, not simply because they are or are not unpopular. Popular opinion shouldn't affect how much you enjoy a game.
Yes, it is frustrating when you love something and can't find someone to share that joy with, or when you hate something and everyone else just doesn't understand your ire and therefore you feel like you can't safely vent. But these things aren't required for game enjoyment first of all, and second of all, precisely because gamers ARE so diverse, you probably will find someone who agrees with you and you can share your thoughts with each other.
I LOVE Fallout: New Vegas, a game often maligned by others (I just knew, it being a product of Bethesda and Obsidian, in advance just to wait until some patches came out before buying it), but to me is one of THE top RPGs I have ever played in my entire life.
But I thought Dragon Age: Origins was kind of meh, when according to many others it is the pinnacle of achievement in RPGs.
Maybe I don't know games, but I know what I like.
You can also find yourself agreeing with the popular opinion and that's okay too--just have real reasons for it rather than because it's what everyone else thinks. Lots of people hate EA and that's the trendy thing to do these days; I don't buy EA products because I have had some specific difficulties with their games and customer service that turned me off enough to avoid their products since. That doesn't make me a hater any more than does it make someone into a mindless fanboy just because they like EA games because they've had legit fun playing them.
Alceste808 also has a major point that unhappy people are far more likely to speak up than happy ones. Unhappy people feel a need to vent. Happy people are too busy enjoying whatever it is they're enjoying to talk about it. :)
|
Well, yeah, internet forums are echo chambers, and they are best attuned to negative things. So usually a game is declared as bad because of it's flaws even when there are actually enough good things about it to make it really fun.
The DA 2 game is an excellent example. It is a *deeply* flawed game that didn't manage to do many of the things it tried to do. For example, the game's excuse for having such limited environments (there are like, 7 maps in total that entire game, which is practically zero compared to DA: origins)was that the game focuses on a journey through time, rather than space. But for a game that focuses on 10 years from the POVs life, DA 2 is very bad about showing us the passage of time. Often, NOTHING changes when you jump forward a few years. No character gets older, the same merchants say the same thing at stores that sell the same items. The city LOOKS exactly the same.
Add on top of that a directionless story and some really stupid quests (like that one where you kill 200 bandits to ensure your friend can have a successful date with her lover in the beach)that are just examples of poor game design... and you get probably the most flawed game from Biowere, ever, and a disappointment after DA: Origins.
I had a blast playing DA 2.
What can I say? the characters are intriguing, the combat system a load of fun, and long sections of the game are simply great. Unlike DA:O I'm not going to replay this, I think, but it was a good game. A game CAN have numerous weak spots and still be fun. People in the internet don't much abide to this notion.
This video has quite a lot to do about the subject matter, and discusses it through the internet and it's reception to DA 2. A recommended listening.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Most of the games I bought in the past were basically because I'd enjoyed previous material from the game makers. I bought Mass Effect and Dragon Age because I like Knights of the Old Republic and Neverwinter Nights, and then bought their respective sequels because I liked the story being told and wanted to see more.
But playing games feels very mechanical to me now. I've got a backlog of games I want to complete so I don't feel like I wasted my money, and I'm not as concerned with enjoying the journey so much as getting to the destination, making a tick on my mental checklist and moving on until I've played through each game I own at least once on my new computer so I can say to my family, "See! I enjoyed these games because I finished them! I haven't wasted that money at all!"
Deadpool is the last game I enjoyed, most reviews give it 6/10. Before that Dead Space 3.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Most of the games I bought in the past were basically because I'd enjoyed previous material from the game makers. I bought Mass Effect and Dragon Age because I like Knights of the Old Republic and Neverwinter Nights, and then bought their respective sequels because I liked the story being told and wanted to see more.
But playing games feels very mechanical to me now. I've got a backlog of games I want to complete so I don't feel like I wasted my money, and I'm not as concerned with enjoying the journey so much as getting to the destination, making a tick on my mental checklist and moving on until I've played through each game I own at least once on my new computer so I can say to my family, "See! I enjoyed these games because I finished them! I haven't wasted that money at all!"
I've learned a long time ago not to buy a game until I know I am going to play it. I realize that doesn't always help the developers in the best way because they may not get my buy in the first quarter, but you know, buying on release isn't often convenient for me, and I believe in spending money on luxury items, including video games, at my convenience and enjoyment, as that's kind of the point of luxuries--to enjoy them at your own leisure.
It is tempting, especially with things like Steam and GOG sales, to want to buy piles of games all at once. But then there's the following feeling of overwhelm (and wallet guilt) and those aren't fun to me, so I do my best not to succumb to those sales tactics.
Buying something when I have the time and energy and money to play something makes getting a new game feel exciting. Something is wrong if gaming feels like a chore, like something you have to do just to get your money's worth.
I like reading reviews on www.gamespot.com, nothing else.
I find they are extremely accurate with their reviews. I think that any game that has a rating of 7+ is worthwhile, especially if you love the genre. But that's the key, loving the genre.
I've seen hate for games (and I agree about some of it), but as long as you're enjoying the game, that's all that matters. If it bothers you, I would stop reading the forums, mostly it's a waste of time anyway.
I usually Redbox a game for a weekend and trying it out before buying it anymore. Saves a lot of disappointment and cash.
I enjoyed the hell out of Dragon age 2 and played it through at least 3 times. The last play through with mods galore.
But in the last two weeks I have been playing DA Origins once again and DA 2 just suffers only in comparison. This only because Origins is THAT good. I enjoy the scale and epicness of the first game it's just a tough one to beat. But some things just can't be topped but don't let that stop Bioware from trying.
Dragon age 2 got a lot of great things going for it. A gripping finale with a combat system that was a blast particularly as a rogue. And Aveline might just be the best character I've ever seen in a game. She was just awesome.
Fans and critics just tore that game up. I don't get it
-MD
|
I enjoyed the hell out of Dragon age 2 and played it through at least 3 times. The last play through with mods galore.
But in the last two weeks I have been playing DA Origins once again and DA 2 just suffers only in comparison. This only because Origins is THAT good. I enjoy the scale and epicness of the first game it's just a tough one to beat. But some things just can't be topped but don't let that stop Bioware from trying.
Dragon age 2 got a lot of great things going for it. A gripping finale with a combat system that was a blast particularly as a rogue. And Aveline might just be the best character I've ever seen in a game. She was just awesome.
Fans and critics just tore that game up. I don't get it
-MD
I loved that game. It brought so much emotional WTF to the board it was crazy. I still remember getting to the finale and calling my cousin who was a few weeks behind me in play and telling him "OH MY GOD! Anders is completely batcrap!" It was one of the most stirring and gripping moments I had experienced in a video game.
I think a lot of the negativity toward games comes from the everyone's an a-hole rule of the internet. Also, most folks tend to think grade school grading when looking at reviews, when suddenly a 7 on a game is somehow "average" and a 5 must be a "failure" or "suck". Its a 10-scale. Just like with the rating scale of the opposite sex, a 5 is an average, a 7 is kinda hot (a pretty good game), and a 10 is a rare and awe-inspiring occurrence (a game universally likeable and fun and not too hard but not too easy with the perfect soundtrack, etc.). But its the internet, so everybody emphasizes the negatives.
Your opinion--but not mine.
All the bad-mouthing of DA2 that goes on here makes me really want to play it. I just could never get into DA:O. I did finish it once, and I enjoyed some of the characters; but I didn't enjoy the gameplay or character advancement very much, and the constant and blatant LotR ripoffs didn't help matters.
I enjoyed the hell out of Dragon age 2 and played it through at least 3 times. The last play through with mods galore.
But in the last two weeks I have been playing DA Origins once again and DA 2 just suffers only in comparison. This only because Origins is THAT good. I enjoy the scale and epicness of the first game it's just a tough one to beat. But some things just can't be topped but don't let that stop Bioware from trying.
Dragon age 2 got a lot of great things going for it. A gripping finale with a combat system that was a blast particularly as a rogue. And Aveline might just be the best character I've ever seen in a game. She was just awesome.
Fans and critics just tore that game up. I don't get it
-MD
I'll give you the short version.
DA2 was an okay game.
I DESPISE it as a sequel to DA:O.
If it were a standalone game, part of a new franchise or whatever? I'd probably love it.
But DA:O is in my Top 5 games of all time, both for the story/setting AND the gameplay.
DA2's story was okay. However, it made little use of the setting as a whole for a massive chunk of the game, and its environments got stale REALLY quickly. It doesn't help that I've never been a big fan of Dynasty Warriors, and therefore did not like the revamped combat system.
All the bad-mouthing of DA2 that goes on here makes me really want to play it. I just could never get into DA:O. I did finish it once, and I enjoyed some of the characters; but I didn't enjoy the gameplay or character advancement very much, and the constant and blatant LotR ripoffs didn't help matters.
The strength of this game is role playing, to be sure.
I played DA2 through once. As a mage. By the end of the game I was was pissed at every other mage in the game.
Overlooking how obnoxious and infuriating that was, yeah it was a good game. Not good enough, though.
As far as the rest of it, you can usually tell when someone is just hating on a game (like me). Just wait before you buy the game, then ask about it.