Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Sifter3000, 26 Jan 2010.
Page 4 = do not like.
And you obviously pirated the game since it isn't out anywhere yet, right? Personally, to me, that means that you're part of the reason that (in your opinion) console games are hyped so much. They've become a more important part of the market because of pirates, like I'm presuming you are.
How long did it take to complete? I did find the first one a bit short compared to Knights of the Old Republic.
I didn't pirate ME2 and have put in about 5 hours which isn't much I admit. But I have no problems with people wanting to try out a game that has no demo before deciding to buy it.
My problem is that before the PS3 and Xbox 360 were launched the game reviews were alot more down to earth and 10's were rarely given. Now every game with sufficient enough hype will get one.
A) Then how did you get the game? If it's a legit source then why not share that with other fans of the game?
2) 10/10s and hype are hardly new. Exaggeration and awe are hardly innovations that were introduced by the PS3 and Xbox. It's purely that, with the market having boomed so much and gotten so large in recent years, there are now many more games out there and those games are more sophisticated. Good journalists adapts to that and provide scores irrespective of hype, like I like to think we do. There are plenty of really, really hyped games that we've slammed down in the past, from Section 8 to GTA IV PC to Gears of War.
There is of course a disconnect around the overall hype/personal expectation/viewed worth according to critic/personal opinion of reader. There's nothing to do about it though other than to try and choose your sources carefully and listen to people you believe have similar expectations and opinions but who are able to stay grounded, fair and measurably cynical in the face of PR spin and hype. It's a part of the business for both readers and writers and it's been that way for films, books, games and any other media you can think of long before the Xbox 360 and PS3 arrived on the scene.
Actually, if you read the score guide, BitTech has a vary clear definition of a"10" ranking. It's just a game they really really like and would recommend to everyone. I don't think that's unreasonable.
I guess games with big hype tend to have big budgets and if a company has spent that much, they've spent time making sure the game is good. The money had to go somewhere after all!
It does make you wonder what ranking they would give to a 'prefect' game though
Incidentally, I'm sooooo annoyed I have an exam in 2 weeks!!!! (which I am severely unprepared for)
No Mass Effect 2 to for me for now and I really want to play ME again as a biotic... Drat.
I just read through Arstechnica's entire review of ME2. Then I read the last few paragraphs of yours AND THE 1ST FEW STARTING THAT GAVE AWAY A MAJOR PLOT POINT IN THE 1ST OR THE 2ND. As I'm going through Mass Effect 1 for the very first time, YOU HAVE RUINED THE EXPERIENCE FOR ME!!!!!
I am extremely disappointed w/ this and will not be reading anymore reviews from this site and bumping it off my RSS feed as well. That was absolutely ridiculous...
1. Well it isn't exactly legit either as stores are not allowed to sell games before the release date. Let's just keep it at that.
2. The problem with giving these high grades is that once a good game comes around reviewers are more or less obligated to give it a 10. You know there is a scale of 10 numbers but recently it seems only 8, 9 and 10 are used with maybe an exception for a really bad game. 10s used be awarded maybe once or twice a year for that game that blew everyone away. And I know the grading policy of bittech and a 10 doesn't mean the game is perfect but the 10 kinda loses it's effect after so many games receive one.
Joe, did you have to start spoiling the story of the opening hours of ME2 on page 1 of your review? I had to stop halfway down and skip to page 2, but not before I'd learnt a few things I would have preferred to find out on my own while playing the game.
This has been a recent debate in the office. Personal opinion and one I adhere to is that even if there are no perfect games (because such a thing can't exist; there's always room for improvement and everyone has different tastes) then you still have to be willing to use the 10/10 score for exemplary games, otherwise why bother having it? If you're explicitly not going to use it because you don't believe games can be of that quality then you
a) shouldn't really be a critic because you obviously don't have faith in your media
2) should just abolish the 10/10 rating
III) should admit to your readers that you're actually scoring only in the 6-9 range.
Personally, I make sure to use the full 1-10 scale and use both extremes and everything in between when I see fit. Mass Effect 2 is not a perfect game. Such things do not exist objectively because the measurement of it is inherently subjective. But that doesn't mean it's not a 10/10 game.
Likewise (this is something lots of people confuse) a 10/10 doesn't mean that you will definitely like it. You might hate it. It might not be your style or genre. Emily gave Bayonetta a 9/10 recently, but I still know I'd hate that game. It's just not what I like. I know that because I read the whole review and didn't just obsess over the score, which is what all people should do. The scores aren't to be relied on; they are merely a summary and exist as much for political reasons as anything else. They aren't an objective marker of worth, they are a subjective and comparative indicator of quality. They don't say "Hey, just check the score and then buy the game because this is really good", they say "If you've read the review and like the sound of this then you'll want to take a look at the game because it's a polished representation of those ideas."
Personally I, like any journalist who has given the subject a lot of thought, would prefer to just abolish the /10 or % scoring system. I'd rather have a written summary or force people to read the whole thing - but it's not something we can realistically do for oh-so-many reasons. It's also not what a lot of people want.
Apologies on that - and it was something I worried about - but honestly, there's nothing in the review that isn't done with before the first hour is up. The review barely covers the synopsis and doesn't even stretch as far as the end of the tutorial section, not really. A lot of it was also revealed in the bombardment of trailers and previews. Rest assured that the 'good stuff' is still waiting. There's nothing on the first page that realistically isn't going to be summed up on the back of the box and we were under and adhered to very strict embargoes about the game that mean there's still a lot to discover.
Likewise, there's some main plot spoilers here for people playing the first game (it IS two years old and this IS a review of the sequel, what did you expect? ESPECIALLY when you're explicitly warned about it in the opening paragraph?!) but the first game still offers a lot of content. The article does little more than reveal the Reapers and doesn't talk all that much about the journey. It doesn't mention for instance:
the real function of the citadel
the Kaiden/Ashley choicel
the Wrex choice
the fate of any of the main characters
or any of the wider story to do with CEREBUS. Personally, while I can understand the upset and the perception that much has been spoiled, the reality is that there's actually an awful lot left for you to uncover.
Looks great, just one problem for me....
I cant stand RPG's.......they bore me to tears.
I've tried to find the love for them...oblivion, fallout 3, System Shock 2, etc etc, but the whole play style of these games is soooo boring to me...
Its the same for RTS and MMO's......
I can understand your point, and i have to admit that rpg gameplay is somewhat an acquired taste. But rps have a depth to them that is just not comparable to most games.
The stories, depth of characters (leading you to get soooo attached to them), and just completeness of it all is really worth looking past the sometimes slow combat and amount of dialogue. Some leave you stunned at the ending and complexity of the plot.
But if you can't stand them i respect that. Its just a pity tis all..
It goes up to 11
Why CEREBUS? Why all capital letters and why is it misspelled?
Nice review, but I'm going to wait for a steam sale or something.
Bloody hell, I think I need to get rid of any life I have. I have bought and still have the following to finish:
The Witcher-only on Chapter 2 and a bit bored actually so probably won't finish
CoD MW2-need to finish getting all the spec ops stars
Assassins Creed 2-got that last week and just on DNA sequence 5
Batman Arkham Asylum-saw it for Â£18 on play, must get it at that price
GTA IV: TBOGT-started this just before Christmas and got sidetracked by other games
and now Mass Effect 2, add on the likes of Napoleon: Total War, Dragon Age Return to Ostagar and The Awakening and I think I'm gamed out for the forseeable future.
I get the feeling ME2 is one of those rare cases where 'streamlining' has actually worked in the game's favour instead of just dumbing it down.
I enjoyed ME1, but I felt that it was trying way too hard to be an action game with RPG stats and dialogue, and that it didn't really deliver on the RPG stats or the action, but got the dialogue and plot just right.
In fact, I found the RPG-lite gameplay and action of ME1 so unsatisfying that it actually feels a bit like a chore to replay it for ME2!
From what I've seen in reviews, ME2 seems to have achieved a much better balance here and though it pains me to say it, I get the feeling it's all the better for having less in the way of RPG-stats, inventory-management, etc, since ME1 wasn't particularly good at those elements anyway.
I'll have to see what ME2 is like for myself when I get my hands on it, but I find it much easier to stomach the RPG-lite gameplay when the game is presented more as an action game the way ME2 is, as shallow as that may sound.
It's a matter of expectations, seemingly.
On the matter of the spoilers in the review.. I can accept spoilers that cover the first few minutes of the game, up to 20 minutes or so... but covering the first hour of revelations?
I do think there was a bit too much covered in the spoilers here, and like others, I'd prefer to have played through those plot revelations myself so it's a little disappointing.
Completed ME1 three times, and the third time only about a month ago. So I am sooo ready for ME2. I've ordered it from Play, no idea when it will come but the sooner the better!!!
As for the review, nicely done as always Joe!
EDIT: Oops.... I forgot that there were multiple pages of comments when posting from the article (and to look at people's location). I suppose you can disregard my first comment Joe, as it seems to have been resolved.
Didn't the game release today (I assume midnight last night) here in the US? I admit that I haven't been following the release date closely because I'm only halfway through my replay of the game on PC (and I'm waiting a couple of more weeks to pick up ME2), but I saw ME2 pop up on NewEgg today for purchase.
Just a thought.
Oh, and thanks for the review Joe. Any idea if it is more graphically demanding than the first game? My system runs the first one well, but I'm curious if I'll have to turn settings down.
Well, firstly I'm not responsible for the output of other sites, so if they do that it's not something I can control. The number of 10s we give out is incredibly low though. I can think of only four games I've given a 10 to in almost as many years, off the top of my head.
The matter of us giving 8s and 9s though is due to the fact that the quality and sophistication of games has risen along with their number, combined with the fact that I'm the only games reviewer here - so I end up having to prioritise these bigger, better titles. As I've discussed before, I can balance the argument by reviewing more awful games likes Conspiracy Island 2, but it's not a goo way to spend my time. People don't care about it, so why write about it? At the same time, we can't adjust our scoring metric because we need to keep the comparisons universal. Compared to all the other 10's I've given Mass Effect 2 would be a 7 - which is to say that it's just as good as them, with it's own merits, but it's mostly only average if you ONLY compare it to other totally awesome games. Obviously that's a flawed way of judging the worth of the game though, if only because there are lots of other games out there which Mass Effect 2 is better than. We have to judge against the whole, rather than few, even if we only actually have the chance to see the few most of the time.
I agree, it's a flawed system, but it's the best one we've got and it's not (for BT at least) in the least due to the rise of Xbox and PS.
Separate names with a comma.