Game News Dragon Age II Gamestar Review Tidbits

[ExEverest]

87% is virtually today's equivalent of a 45% back in the 80's games publications.
Virtual music to my ears. If the sales flop as well, it will be real incline in motion.

Then which score would they give an actual 87% by 80's standards (one's bound to come out sooner or later), 129%? Just saying, maybe the game is that good, and you're mistaking your subjectivity for objectivity, and when a game you don't find good gets a good score you say 'corruption & bias!', and when a game you find good gets a good score, then you say 'they're finally starting to see reason!'. Perhaps it isn't, and perhaps it is. Perhaps the most reasonable course of action would be to with-hold judgement on the accuracy of the review until you have a completed copy of the game in front of you.

 

[Admiral jimbob]

Even the goblins who wander out of the Bioware Livejournal Pride Parade Festival Forums to defend the game can only offer plaintive shrugs and an "it might be okay, really, honest". It's a heartwarming sight.

 

[DragoFireheart]

87% is virtually today's equivalent of a 45% back in the 80's games publications.
Virtual music to my ears. If the sales flop as well, it will be real incline in motion.

Then which score would they give an actual 87% by 80's standards (one's bound to come out sooner or later), 129%?

They'd give a high grade regardless because that is how they get paid.

 

[ExEverest]

87% is virtually today's equivalent of a 45% back in the 80's games publications.
Virtual music to my ears. If the sales flop as well, it will be real incline in motion.

Then which score would they give an actual 87% by 80's standards (one's bound to come out sooner or later), 129%?

They'd give a high grade regardless because that is how they get paid.

Precisely, so how can one argue the point that all titles with an 87% must actually be 45s, if they could also be actual 87s?

 

[ExEverest]

Even the goblins who wander out of the Bioware Livejournal Pride Parade Festival Forums to defend the game can only offer plaintive shrugs and an "it might be okay, really, honest". It's a heartwarming sight.

I take it you're implying that I'm a BW fanboy, based on no reason other than that of me not finding the assessments of the review terribly objective?

 

[Gord]

I think it's something like this:

 

[Admiral jimbob]

Even the goblins who wander out of the Bioware Livejournal Pride Parade Festival Forums to defend the game can only offer plaintive shrugs and an "it might be okay, really, honest". It's a heartwarming sight.

I take it you're implying that I'm a BW fanboy, based on no reason other than that of me not finding the assessments of the review terribly objective?

You joined today and have yet to make a post that's not an attempt to balance out the Codex's negativity regarding DA2. I'm pretty sure you're not a lurker from the old Interplay forums that only just got around to joining and only stumbled into DA2 threads by coincidence, but do correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[DragoFireheart]

Precisely, so how can one argue the point that all titles with an 87% must actually be 45s, if they could also be actual 87s?

By reading the fucking review? The subtle hints they hide all over the review? Game companies are too lazy to actually read it and only care about the 87% since that's what only retards will look at. People with even a shred of intelligence will read the review.

 

[Volourn]

And, they will realize by reading the review that said reviewer is likely a fukkin' retart whether the score is 25%, 60%, 80%, or 100%.

Make up your own fukkin' mind, and don't kiss the fukkin' azz of those reviewers just b/c they agree withn you then turn around and claim those who have a different opinion than you do were 'bought off'.

Intellectual dishonesty is part of the Codex so i cna't be surprised.

 

[Xor]

- If you choose not to import and use one of the 3 predefined "lore backgrounds" instead, the backstory is explained in a short cutscene of the final moments (Landsmeet+Archdemon fight) of DA:O.

What, it has a savegame import feature? I guess they decided that since it was a popular feature of ME they have to do that with every game now. I really hope this doesn't become a trend because I can't see most companies doing more than superficial crap with it.

What? Save game feature is a staple in RPGs and a good feature in games in the same setting. I can't believe you think this is something they came up with in ME. They had it in Baldurs gate and it was in KOTOR too. Many of the old school games had it. If you want to hate on it, focus on how it is used instead.

I'm well aware it's been done before. I probably should have phrased my reply better.

In previous games that had a savegame import feature, the feature is usually used to continue the same character (or characters), and not to toggle a few variables related to the previous game. In Baldur's Gate 2 you can continue the character you played the first game with, which I thought was a pretty cool idea when I first played it. In Ultima V, you can import your Ultima IV character and get a head start with an XP boost. I know Wizardry 8 had an import feature from 7, but I've never used it so I have no idea exactly what it changes.

With Mass Effect, the purpose of importing a savegame seems to change from continuing the same character (even though you're still Shepard, you might as well not be - you can change your appearance and class to basically make a completely new character) to showing consequences to the choices in the first game. DA2 has abandoned continuing the same character altogether because you're playing that Hawke douche.

The new purpose of the savegame import seems to be superficial. It basically represents Bioware's new attitude; instead of making every game self-contained, they split their games up into series, and instead of having choices impact the game they're made in, they're referenced briefly in the sequel. It also encourages people who pick up the series on the 2nd or 3rd game to buy and play the first two.

Also, I don't remember KOTOR having an import feature, and KOTOR2 didn't have one either. Maybe you're remembering that you can specify Revan's gender and alignment during the first convo with Atton?

 

[Radisshu]

ALPHA PROTOCOL!

 

[ExEverest]

You joined today and have yet to make a post that's not an attempt to balance out the Codex's negativity regarding DA2. I'm pretty sure you're not a lurker from the old Interplay forums that only just got around to joining and only stumbled into DA2 threads by coincidence, but do correct me if I'm wrong.

I hope you don't find me pedantic, but I don't think I attempted to balance out anything, just provided some criticisms of the opinions existent. I think me balancing would be 'Well, I liked it so far'. You are correct on the account of me posting only on matters of DA2, but then again, that is the major RPG release of the month. I just thought that some of the opinions floating around here were established upon preconceptions derived from the marketing campaign and initial interviews, and now exacerbated by a certain portion of the demo and an inability to test the demo on higher difficulties-so I thought it best to inject, what I think to be, reason, in the discussion; not fanboy-ism.

Precisely, so how can one argue the point that all titles with an 87% must actually be 45s, if they could also be actual 87s?

By reading the fucking review? The subtle hints they hide all over the review? Game companies are too lazy to actually read it and only care about the 87% since that's what only retards will look at. People with even a shred of intelligence will read the review.

The quote above says 'all' titles. All that will come out (and all that have after the 80s, I suppose). You do make a valid point in the case of this DA2 review, but I do think there are other plausible interpretations. The review could've only provided criticisms, expecting everything to go right (concentrating on what went wrong, rather than what was right-a method of criticism) or concentrating on things that stuck out i.e. the translated review I saw on the BW forums was comprised of largely negative paragraph text, supplemented with what I thought to be a reasonable conclusion containing positive as well as negative points. Either way, the interpretation of a review is a little subjective and should be treated with skepticism, no? (Actually, in this case I guess it's, the interpretation of an interpretation, of a review).

 

[Carlos' Bitch1]

ExEverest wrote

What is this...?

Then which score would they give an actual 87% by 80's standards (one's bound to come out sooner or later), 129%?

No, they woudn't. They would give it 50% or below today because it would be too difficult for them. Or not enough cutscenes and gay elf romances included. Or too many skills and numbers to deal with. Or too much thinking involved. The list goes on.

Perhaps the most reasonable course of action would be to with-hold judgement on the accuracy of the review until you have a completed copy of the game in front of you.

Haha...no no, my experience with these things, along with the information at hand is sufficient for me to make a correct judgement of this...rpg?

Edit: Hang on. A 'completed' copy of the game? What do you mean by this? That I need to complete the game first? Or that the demo wasn't really what the game would be like? Haha, haven't heard that one for a while now.

 

[Carlos' Bitch1]

And, they will realize by reading the review that said reviewer is likely a fukkin' retart whether the score is 25%, 60%, 80%, or 100%.

Make up your own fukkin' mind, and don't kiss the fukkin' azz of those reviewers just b/c they agree withn you then turn around and claim those who have a different opinion than you do were 'bought off'.

Intellectual dishonesty is part of the Codex so i cna't be surprised.

Not surprised to see you open your trap, now that a Bioware stalwart has appeared. Perhaps Gromnir will rush in and make a nice troika. Now that would be fun.

Actually, it would be HA! GOOD FUN!

Oh, forgot to ask. What did you think of the DA2 demo? :D

 

[ExEverest]

What is this...?
Then which score would they give an actual 87% by 80's standards (one's bound to come out sooner or later), 129%?

Reductio ad absurdum.

No, they woudn't. They would give it 50% or below today because it would be too difficult for them. Or not enough cutscenes and gay elf romances included. Or too many skills and numbers to deal with. Or too much thinking involved. The list goes on.

Totally missed my point. Imagine there was a smart reviewer *gasp*, who was used to grading things with 87s when they deserved 45s, and he/she stumbled across a game that would normally deserve 87, while he was limited to giving it a 100. Would he give it a 100? But that wouldn't be a fair representation of the quality of the game, if the 45s got a 42 point boost. He/she would have to give it a 42 point boost in order to be fair. Except he/she couldn't. My point is, on the basis of a score alone, it's incredibly difficult to tell whether the reviewer is being truthful in his/her assessment, or whether they're being biased.

Perhaps the most reasonable course of action would be to with-hold judgement on the accuracy of the review until you have a completed copy of the game in front of you.

Haha...no no, my experience with these things, along with the information at hand is sufficient for me to make a correct judgement of this...rpg?

Interesting point. I take the definition of a good game to be that of a game that you yourself enjoy (it is a subjective medium), and even if you had absolutely zero credible evidence of it's final appeal to you (i.e. when the final product is in your hands/pc), if you had somehow managed to convince yourself of it's lack of appeal, that might very well mean that the final product won't appeal to you, and in that sense your assessment would be correct. I still think that what you've interpreted so far from reviews and what you've seen in the demo doesn't warrant a (what I think to be) fair assessment of the entire game. (Unless you're a member of BW's inner circle, or something similar, in which case you've seen quite a lot, I would think, and your assessment wouldn't be wholly based on prior experience and interpretations, thus, imo, fair).

Edit: Hang on. A 'completed' copy of the game? What do you mean by this? That I need to complete the game first? Or that the demo wasn't really what the game would be like? Haha, haven't heard that one for a while now.

Means what it says. I trust you can read.

 

[Carlos' Bitch1]

Reductio ad absurdum.

Parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus

Totally missed my point. Imagine there was a smart reviewer *gasp*, who was used to grading things with 87s when they deserved 45s, and he/she stumbled across a game that would normally deserve 87, while he was limited to giving it a 100. Would he give it a 100? But that wouldn't be a fair representation of the quality of the game, if the 45s got a 42 point boost. He/she would have to give it a 42 point boost in order to be fair. Except he/she couldn't. My point is, on the basis of a score alone, it's incredibly difficult to tell whether the reviewer is being truthful in his/her assessment, or whether they're being biased.

I don't think you understand the gaming media today; most reviewers really, really enjoy the CRPG's that are being put out now. They wax lyrical about the 'old' games from 5 years ago, or the 'ancient' games from the turn of the century, or thereabouts, and get at least half their facts wrong.

There may be a few of the old set still running around in head offices, but they are just there for a job now. Advertising wags the dog, and they do what they can to shift numbers. 15 years or so ago, they might have been writing reviews. The new kids do that now. And the new kids doing these reviews honestly do not like the 'old' or 'ancient' games. They find them too difficult, too ugly, not emotional enough.

Your last point does make sense, however, you obviously took my comment far too seriously. The fact the game didn't get a 95 plus is hilarious and indicative of something. What did they give the first Dragon Age game?

I take the definition of a good game to be that of a game that you yourself enjoy (it is a subjective medium), and even if you had absolutely zero credible evidence of it's final appeal to you (i.e. when the final product is in your hands/pc), if you had somehow managed to convince yourself of it's lack of appeal, that might very well mean that the final game won't appeal to you, and in that sense your assessment would be correct. I do think that what you've interpreted so far from reviews and what you've seen in the demo doesn't warrant a (what I think to be) fair assessment of the entire game.

No, I have played Bioware games before, including some of the New versions after Baldur's Gate 1 and 2...I know I don't like them, and I am certain I won't like Dragon Age 2. Quite certain. It is about what kind of games a person enjoys, that is true: I don't like these kinds of games, and think they are rubbish. The current game in question cuts out even more RPG mechanics, and I would no doubt therefore find it even more distasteful.

Have you ever tried allowing yourself to be humped by a Shetland pony? Wait just a moment; perhaps if you could convince yourself of the appeal...

Means what it says. I trust you can read.

Thought so. Hilarious. Confirmed Bio fanboy it is then.

 

[kris]

The new purpose of the savegame import seems to be superficial. It basically represents Bioware's new attitude; instead of making every game self-contained, they split their games up into series, and instead of having choices impact the game they're made in, they're referenced briefly in the sequel. It also encourages people who pick up the series on the 2nd or 3rd game to buy and play the first two.

Also, I don't remember KOTOR having an import feature, and KOTOR2 didn't have one either. Maybe you're remembering that you can specify Revan's gender and alignment during the first convo with Atton?

Right. Still I prefer this over not having any importion of save games at all. I readily agree I would like it the BG way, but with the near God status you achieved in the first game I knew that was to much to hope for.

True about KOTOR2.

 

[Xor]

Interesting point. I take the definition of a good game to be that of a game that you yourself enjoy (it is a subjective medium), and even if you had absolutely zero credible evidence of it's final appeal to you (i.e. when the final product is in your hands/pc), if you had somehow managed to convince yourself of it's lack of appeal, that might very well mean that the final product won't appeal to you, and in that sense your assessment would be correct. I still think that what you've interpreted so far from reviews and what you've seen in the demo doesn't warrant a (what I think to be) fair assessment of the entire game. (Unless you're a member of BW's inner circle, or something similar, in which case you've seen quite a lot, I would think, and your assessment wouldn't be wholly based on prior experience and interpretations, thus, imo, fair).

What exactly would be a "fair assessment of the game", according to you? Surely you have some method for determining whether or not you should purchase a game. Does it involve playing the demo, or reading reviews? I can't think of very many other ways one could come up with any sort of objective determination other than torrenting the game on release and giving it a full playthrough before deciding to buy it or not.

 

[Carlos' Bitch1]

What exactly would be a "fair assessment of the game", according to you? Surely you have some method for determining whether or not you should purchase a game. Does it involve playing the demo, or reading reviews? I can't think of very many other ways one could come up with any sort of objective determination other than torrenting the game on release and giving it a full playthrough before deciding to buy it or not.

No, no...the demo is clearly not indicative of the full game!

Reviews are all subjective, you shouldn't listen to those!

Torrenting is evil. Don't break the law citizen.

That leaves...purchasing the game. Then, and only then can you make a full, credible assessment of the media in question. Even then, I wouldn't call your musings complete without adding on the DLC components. You do realise this game was built with that in mind, and an X-Box controller; how can you be sure you have really experienced the game unless you have one of those?

After that you ask? Why, mods. Mods always fix every game up. If you play without the essential mods...well, I couldn't really take your thoughts on the game seriously.

Regards,

ExEverest

Edit: Sorry, forgot to add in my Latin comment.

Credo ut intelligam

 

[ExEverest]

Parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus

Deflect if you must, it won't help anyone in the long run.

I don't think you understand the gaming media today; most reviewers really, really enjoy the CRPG's that are being put out now.

I don't think I do. And neither do I think that you do. I'm sure we may have an idea as to what trends might be in place, but you're equating an opinion of a single reviewer with an aggreggate of hundreds. You'll have to forgive me if I don't trust some guy on the internet on sociological assessments encompassing thousands of individuals.

Your last point does make sense, however, you obviously took my comment far too seriously. The fact the game didn't get a 95 plus is hilarious and indicative of something. What did they give the first Dragon Age game?

And how do you know that the person reviewing wasn't being honest when he thought that DA2 was a worse game than Origins by exactly 5 points? Why does it need to be indicative of 'something'? I'm just saying that it's entirely possible that this person thought that despite certain noticeable shortcomings, the majority of the game was done right, or even done so well that it offset the majority of gripes in the end. I'm also saying that reading between the lines is a tricky business, especially when informational and emotional bias enter the picture-and maybe shouldn't be trusted as an accurate way of assessing hidden motivations.

No, I have played Bioware games before, including some of the New versions after Baldur's Gate 1 and 2...I know I don't like them, and I am certain I won't like Dragon Age 2. Quite certain. It is about what kind of games a person enjoys, that is true: I don't like these kinds of games, and think they are rubbish. The current game in question cuts out even more RPG mechanics, and I would no doubt therefore find it even more distasteful.

Have you ever tried allowing yourself to be humped by a Shetland pony? Wait just a moment; perhaps if you could convince yourself of the appeal...

And if you'd convince yourself hard enough, you'd probably enjoy it. If you didn't like Origins and thought that it was already too far, however, and if you prize stats and strategy above all else, then yes, I think yours is a reasonable conclusion to come to. I didn't realize how distraught you were w/ BW's new RPG's, I reckoned you a run-of-the-mill 'DA2 is different from DA:O? But how can you improve on perfection?' person. If I'm mistaken I do apologize.

Thought so. Hilarious. Confirmed Bio fanboy it is then.

I don't think so. 'Tis sad. Sad that a person who appears to otherwise be in full command of the english language can't get their head around a simple adjective.

 

[ExEverest]

What exactly would be a "fair assessment of the game", according to you? Surely you have some method for determining whether or not you should purchase a game. Does it involve playing the demo, or reading reviews? I can't think of very many other ways one could come up with any sort of objective determination other than torrenting the game on release and giving it a full playthrough before deciding to buy it or not.

The only way I think one can have a fair assessment of the game is to play it through to completion. Having an idea what the gameplay/story might be like is a different issue, in my opinion. I have no problem with people saying that 'I think it'll be bad/good', but I do have a problem when they say 'I know it'll be bad' based on a demo/review saying that it's good. And even so, even if the person says 'I know it'll be good' based on a positive review, I don't think he or she is giving a fair assessment, as they have no idea whether the reviewer they read had standards and tastes similar to theirs, etc.

 

[ExEverest]

What exactly would be a "fair assessment of the game", according to you? Surely you have some method for determining whether or not you should purchase a game. Does it involve playing the demo, or reading reviews? I can't think of very many other ways one could come up with any sort of objective determination other than torrenting the game on release and giving it a full playthrough before deciding to buy it or not.

No, no...the demo is clearly not indicative of the full game!

Reviews are all subjective, you shouldn't listen to those!

Torrenting is evil. Don't break the law citizen.

That leaves...purchasing the game. Then, and only then can you make a full, credible assessment of the media in question. Even then, I wouldn't call your musings complete without adding on the DLC components. You do realise this game was built with that in mind, and an X-Box controller; how can you be sure you have really experienced the game unless you have one of those?

After that you ask? Why, mods. Mods always fix every game up. If you play without the essential mods...well, I couldn't really take your thoughts on the game seriously.

Regards,

ExEverest

Edit: Sorry, forgot to add in my Latin comment.

Credo ut intelligam

That was pretty funny, I'll admit. Inaccurate, but...

 

[Volourn]

"Oh, forgot to ask. What did you think of the DA2 demo?"

Why ask a question you alreayd know the answer to, don't want to know the answer to, and will praise or trash the answer anyways depending on whether or not you agree with said answer?

R00fles!

 

[J_C]

I have no problem with people saying that 'I think it'll be bad/good', but I do have a problem when they say 'I know it'll be bad' based on a demo/review saying that it's good.

LOL, history is repeating itself. When I arrived to the Codex, I said something similar, and had a similar argument. Don't worry newfag, soon you will leave your current attitude behind, and will bath in the Codex's infinite hate. Let the hate flow through you! Join us, and you will know true POWER! If you don't, you won't last long on the site.

 

[ExEverest]

LOL, history is repeating itself. When I arrived to the Codex, I said something similar, and had a similar argument. Don't worry newfag, soon you will leave your current attitude behind, and will bath in the Codex's infinite hate. Let the hate flow through you! Join us, and you will know true POWER! If you don't, you won't last long on the site.

Who says I want to stay? The only thing this kind of bias provides is complacency at the expense of objectivity and knowledge. i.e. short term benefit vs. long term. I would much rather have the latter.