Page 6 of 30 First First ... 234567891016 ... Last

Thread: Fan/player reviews - reactions (Spoilerific)

Fan/player reviews - reactions (Spoilerific)

  1. #126
    Don't bother mate. If you actually liked the original games you are not missing anything.

  2. #127
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,186
    Originally Posted by Starac
    This game is so poorly designed, almost every element!

    I knew that they are gonna it up, but not this much!?

    Stephane Roy, dude, this job is not for you!
    I don't know. I always felt (might be wrong) that Roy could be the Wolf from Pulp Fiction. "I solve problems". It might have been even worse if he hadn't gotten involved.

  3. #128
    Originally Posted by auricgoldfinger
    I don't know. I always felt (might be wrong) that Roy could be the Wolf from Pulp Fiction. "I solve problems". It might have been even worse if he hadn't gotten involved.
    I don't know why Stephane gets so much hate. He seems to be a nice chap and seems passionate about the project even if he is not the biggest fan of the old Thief games.

  4. #129
    Originally Posted by Starac
    This game is so poorly designed, almost every element!

    I knew that they are gonna it up, but not this much!?

    Stephane Roy, dude, this job is not for you!
    Have you played the game or are you basing your opinion on streams and reviews? If you have (bought and played the game), could you write what you hated about the game and what you liked about it (if anything)? It'd be nice to hear the opinion of someone who played the game and thinks it's a terrible game. Negative opinions usually come in one or two sentences and with a "0/10" score without further elaboration and explaination. It'd be nice to hear your opinion.

  5. #130
    Originally Posted by GimmeDaGun
    Have you played the game or are you basing your opinion on streams and reviews?
    After hating on the game so much over the past year, the chances that he actually bought it at launch are very slim.

  6. #131
    Originally Posted by knox140
    After hating on the game so much over the past year, the chances that he actually bought it at launch are very slim.
    Yeah, that's why I'm asking. This is one of the many reasons why I hate Metacritic for instance. Most of the very negative "reviews" and scores (especially the "0"s) usually come from people who had decided to hate the game long before its release and never actually cared to buy it and play it. They only intend to prevent others buying it, so they give it a "0". People who give this game below 4,5-5 are very harsh on the game, people who give it 0-3 are plain haters. Giving it a 9-10 is a big exaggaration also, and I find 8 overenthusiastic too, but that's my own opinion.

  7. #132
    Originally Posted by GimmeDaGun
    Have you played the game or are you basing your opinion on streams and reviews? If you have (bought and played the game), could you write what you hated about the game and what you liked about it (if anything)? It'd be nice to hear the opinion of someone who played the game and thinks it's a terrible game. Negative opinions usually come in one or two sentences and with a "0/10" score without further elaboration and explaination. It'd be nice to hear your opinion.
    I have actually finished the game, just the main quest. I wanted to see was i right about how bad it will be. And i was right.
    People have already explained what is wrong with the game, and i really don't want to spend any time explaining.

  8. #133
    Originally Posted by Starac
    I have actually finished the game, just the main quest. I wanted to see was i right about how bad it will be. And i was right.
    People have already explained what is wrong with the game, and i really don't want to spend any time explaining.
    You still sound a bit vague about precisely why *you* think the game is bad. Do you have any examples of any significant howlers?

    I'm compiling a 'Good bits/bad bits' list as I go...

  9. #134
    Originally Posted by Starac
    I have actually finished the game, just the main quest. I wanted to see was i right about how bad it will be. And i was right.
    People have already explained what is wrong with the game, and i really don't want to spend any time explaining.
    Fair enough.

  10. #135
    Originally Posted by GimmeDaGun
    Yeah, that's why I'm asking. This is one of the many reasons why I hate Metacritic for instance. Most of the very negative "reviews" and scores (especially the "0"s) usually come from people who had decided to hate the game long before its release and never actually cared to buy it and play it. They only intend to prevent others buying it, so they give it a "0". People who give this game below 4,5-5 are very harsh on the game, people who give it 0-3 are plain haters. Giving it a 9-10 is a big exaggaration also, and I find 8 overenthusiastic too, but that's my own opinion.
    Metacritic is a mess. The user reviews are full of people who haven't played a game, and are rating is based on preconceived bias (which makes their opinions totally invalid, in my eyes). The critics reviews are pretty bad too. Every critic rates games differently. For some, a score of 5 is for an average game, for others, average games may get a 7.5. Metacritic takes about 20 of these scores from people it has decided are trustworthy, and takes a mean, and people use this as some kind of objective indicator of the game's quality. imo, reviews shouldn't contain scores in the first place. You're placing something that is incredibly subjective on an absolute scale.

    EDIT: and yeah, I agree about the scores the game is getting. SneakyBastards calling the game an "unmitigated disaster" or whatever seemed to be, while totally expected from them, just a release of the flak the game's been getting from the so-called die hard Thief fans since E3. Despite the problems, it isn't a disaster by any means. RPS's article was pretty weird too.

  11. #136
    Originally Posted by knox140
    Metacritic is a mess. The user reviews are full of people who haven't played a game, and are rating is based on preconceived bias (which makes their opinions totally invalid, in my eyes). The critics reviews are pretty bad too. Every critic rates games differently. For some, a score of 5 is for an average game, for others, average games may get a 7.5. Metacritic takes about 20 of these scores from people it has decided are trustworthy, and takes a mean, and people use this as some kind of objective indicator of the game's quality. imo, reviews shouldn't contain scores in the first place. You're placing something that is incredibly subjective on an absolute scale.
    I absolutely agree.

  12. #137
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,186
    Originally Posted by knox140
    Metacritic is a mess. The user reviews are full of people who haven't played a game, and are rating is based on preconceived bias
    How do you know? Isn't this also a preconceived bias?

  13. #138
    Originally Posted by auricgoldfinger
    How do you know? Isn't this also a preconceived bias?
    Well, from my part, it's mostly experience. For instance Mass Effect 3 got 0 ratings from many enraged fans due to their hatred for its ending while it is an excellent game. The game's gamer score was low as hell. One of my favourite games The Witcher 2 recieved many negative scores by TES fans. Etc. etc.. Thief is a special case, since it was anticipated by the old fan base either in a positive or negative way. When the game was released people automatically started to bomb the game with neagtive scores (which outbalanced the positive or avrage scores). I highly doubt that these people preordered the game and played it in one day, so they could give it a 0-3 score. Plus most of the negative reviews were about: "it's not Thief" "it should not be called Thief, this is garbage" etc. etc.

  14. #139
    Garrett chewing poppies to concentrate better reminds me of the Puzzle Agent games where the main character finds frozen, used gum stuck everywhere and chews on them during puzzles to concentrate better, giving hints to the player.
    The whole thing cracks me up. Garrett chewing on leaves to gain slowmo and X-ray vision is just too trippy. I would actually have preferred the old theory of how he simply got high on opium. That would at least have fit into the depravity of the world in general.

    As for Stephane Roy, I follow the golden rule that you should always blame the publisher first, the devs second -even when the latter publicly claim responsibility. These devs would not have changed so much around for so little reason if they were artists pursuing a vision, rather than factory-workers assembling some Frankenstein's monstrosity from money-chasing, trend-riding blueprints given them by publisher suits. The devs are just easier to blame because they are the face of the production.
    "The chief problem is that once you take the name of a beloved franchise, you're assuming responsibility for upholding its legacy". -AusGamers Thief review

  15. #140
    Originally Posted by auricgoldfinger
    How do you know? Isn't this also a preconceived bias?
    Not really. You can tell people rate games that they haven't played because of the disparity between Metacritic ratings and ratings on things like the App Store or Steam, where you can only rate a game if you have bought it. People vote games like Deus Ex: The Fall down because it's an iOS game, not because it's a BAD game. People vote Call of Duty down but not Battlefield, even though they're pretty much the same, just because Call of Duty is Call of Duty. Dungeon Keeper on iOS currently has a Metacritic user rating of 0.3, because people heard from various Youtubers about its microtransactions, NOT because they've played it and formed their own opinions.

    Originally Posted by IHaveReturned
    As for Stephane Roy, I follow the golden rule that you should always blame the publisher first, the devs second -even when the latter publicly claim responsibility. These devs would not have changed so much around for so little reason if they were artists pursuing a vision, rather than factory-workers assembling some Frankenstein's monstrosity from money-chasing, trend-riding blueprints given them by publisher suits. The devs are just easier to blame because they are the face of the production.
    Yes, but only for some things... we can blame SE for making EM make Thief as a reboot instead of a sequel, making it more accessible to today's gamers, dumbing it down etc., because that's what makes more money, but things like the linear levels and bad storyline is still the devs' fault. A game doesn't have to have a bad story to be accessible.

  16. #141
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,186
    Originally Posted by knox140
    Not really. You can tell people rate games that they haven't played because of the disparity between Metacritic ratings and ratings on things like the App Store or Steam, where you can only rate a game if you have bought it.
    So a moment ago you were saying the scores are worthless, whereas now you're saying you can judge things by the scores?

    People vote games like Deus Ex: The Fall down because it's an iOS game, not because it's a BAD game. People vote Call of Duty down but not Battlefield, even though they're pretty much the same, just because Call of Duty is Call of Duty. Dungeon Keeper on iOS currently has a Metacritic user rating of 0.3, because people heard from various Youtubers about its microtransactions, NOT because they've played it and formed their own opinions.
    None of this explains how you know that that's why they're doing that.

  17. #142
    Originally Posted by auricgoldfinger
    So a moment ago you were saying the scores are worthless, whereas now you're saying you can judge things by the scores?
    No... I'm saying that the fact there is a difference in scores between the two ratings systems shows that people are rating games that they haven't bought. The only difference between Steam and the App Store's rating system and Metacritic is that for the first two, you can only rate a game that you have downloaded. On Metacritic, you can rate a game whether you have played it or not.

    EDIT: I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say in "where you can only rate a game if you have bought it." I wasn't saying that you are eligible to give a score to a game if you have played it, I was talking about the fact that the App Store and Steam only ALLOW you to rate games you have bought.

    None of this explains how you know that that's why they're doing that.
    See above.

  18. #143
    Originally Posted by Hellion


    Also, this game only has 3 colors. Such a fail.

  19. #144
    Originally Posted by GimmeDaGun
    Fair enough.
    I've played it (not to completion, I have to stop every half hour so I don't neck myself) and I think it's a bad game. There are many, many reasons why I think this is the case, but I think it's a justifiable opinion by only mentioning a few of them:

    Firstly, the environments are so claustrophobic and densely populated that they're a chore to move through unless they're unchallenging. It's kind of like BioShock: Infinite in that way — you're never having fun and being challenged at the same time — it's either one or the other. It's subtle, but it's also possibly the biggest reduction of player agency because to avoid getting caught it's necessary that you limit yourself to small, calculated movements like a strategic swoop into the shadows. In good stealth games (Thief II, Blood Money) you have a lot of space to explore, but in bad stealth games you do a lot of sitting around and watching because it's dangerous to do anything else. Open combat is less also of an option than it has ever been in the series, which is kind of funny, but running away isn't a good alternative in such tiny levels because you often don't have enough space to distance yourself adequately.

    Secondly, it's really badly written. I don't like any of the characters, it's cliché, the dialogue is often cheesy and everyone is abrasive and unpleasant. This goes double for the world. Why does everyone have to be so juvenile, grotesque and humorless? It's surreal. It's also an issue that everything looks the same and your dingy, colorless surroundings blur together very quick. I think this is bad even for a triple-A game.

    Thirdly, navigation isn't balanced well. You either turn on your interface or you suffer through unintuitive design. Choose now. One is unsatisfying, the other is frustrating.

    Fourthly, the all-important contextual prompts are woefully inconsistent. You can lean here, you can't lean here. You can jump on this, you can't jump on this. Why does it have this pointlessly inferior system? It has worse animation than Outlast and that didn't use contextual prompts, so I don't see what advantage it has.

    Fifthly, the sound. We all know the issues with this, I don't need to go through them. It's obnoxious and buggy.

    That's a few reasons, there are many, many more but these are what come to mind when I think about Thief.

  20. #145
    I don't care about the scores because I have played it and know what's wrong as does everyone else that has played it. All I hope is that they listen to us this time and fix what we are telling them is wrong. Stand outside Perry's pawnshop for example ad see how many times they talk about the hooker. I'm up to the Asylum now and it looks awesome so far, but before I do I want the music gone! It plays over everything too loud and destroys the immersion.

  21. #146
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,186
    Originally Posted by knox140
    No... I'm saying that the fact there is a difference in scores between the two ratings systems shows that people are rating games that they haven't bought. The only difference between Steam and the App Store's rating system and Metacritic is that for the first two, you can only rate a game that you have downloaded. On Metacritic, you can rate a game whether you have played it or not.

    EDIT: I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say in "where you can only rate a game if you have bought it." I wasn't saying that you are eligible to give a score to a game if you have played it, I was talking about the fact that the App Store and Steam only ALLOW you to rate games you have bought.



    See above.
    This doesn't constitute proof. It could be that store reviews are moderated, despite claims to impartiality. Also steam's rating system is binary so it's not like you can see a discrepancy between the scores there.

  22. #147
    Originally Posted by slayerking
    I don't care about the scores because I have played it and know what's wrong as does everyone else that has played it. All I hope is that they listen to us this time and fix what we are telling them is wrong. Stand outside Perry's pawnshop for example ad see how many times they talk about the hooker. I'm up to the Asylum now and it looks awesome so far, but before I do I want the music gone! It plays over everything too loud and destroys the immersion.
    I turned the music off as soon as I began playing...

  23. #148
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,186
    Is there a 'good music' slider and a 'bad music' slider?

    Or at least one to remove the 'about to be seen'/'alerted' music?

  24. #149
    Originally Posted by auricgoldfinger
    This doesn't constitute proof. It could be that store reviews are moderated, despite claims to impartiality. Also steam's rating system is binary so it's not like you can see a discrepancy between the scores there.
    No, it doesn't, but I don't exactly expect anyone to take my word as gospel on here. It is just an assumption on my part, my bad for not making that more clear earlier I suppose. But even then, it just seems pretty obvious to me that people would do it. People know that most developers will check the Metacritic score for their own game, and they know that they are free to rate a game 0 if they don't like it for some reason, whether that's because it's on iOS when it should be on PC, whether it's a Call of Duty game, or whether the developers got rid of a voice actor they really liked. Are you really saying that out of the millions upon millions of gamers out there, there aren't people who would take advantage of Metacritic's rating system to convey their distaste with a game even if they haven't played it? Obviously I don't know for a fact that people do it, but that's like asking an atheist whether they know for a fact that God doesn't exist. It isn't something I myself can prove, it's just something that seems so likely to me that I basically consider it a fact anyway.

  25. #150
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,186
    Originally Posted by knox140
    No, it doesn't, but I don't exactly expect anyone to take my word as gospel on here. It is just an assumption on my part, my bad for not making that more clear earlier I suppose. But even then, it just seems pretty obvious to me that people would do it. People know that most developers will check the Metacritic score for their own game, and they know that they are free to rate a game 0 if they don't like it for some reason, whether that's because it's on iOS when it should be on PC, whether it's a Call of Duty game, or whether the developers got rid of a voice actor they really liked. Are you really saying that out of the millions upon millions of gamers out there, there aren't people who would take advantage of Metacritic's rating system to convey their distaste with a game even if they haven't played it? Obviously I don't know for a fact that people do it, but that's like asking an atheist whether they know for a fact that God doesn't exist. It isn't something I myself can prove, it's just something that seems so likely to me that I basically consider it a fact anyway.
    I see your point. It didn't occur to me as it's not something I'd ever do, and if a review is poorly written or lacks detail I tend to skip it anyway.

    There are games that based purely on videos or word of mouth, I've decided I'm almost certain not to like, without having to experience it. But I'd never attempt to review them.

Page 6 of 30 First First ... 234567891016 ... Last