That being said, it does sound like they're trying to tell a more personal story with the protagonist this time, so maybe the voice is important. But that would definitely not be my reason for going full-VO in a game.
Isn't that the same excuse that they gave for Dragon Age 2?
That being said, it does sound like they're trying to tell a more personal story with the protagonist this time, so maybe the voice is important. But that would definitely not be my reason for going full-VO in a game.
Isn't that the same excuse that they gave for Dragon Age 2?
B ioware was attempting to recreate Sheppard from Mass Effect when they released Hawke and DA2. Which worked for the story they were telling with that game regardless if you liked Hawke's multiple personalities or not.
It is different than the open world concept where your character can be anything that you want that Fallout 4 is offering.
@deltago - LOL. I get what you were saying. What I was referring too was the whole 'on the rails' feel of DA2. When people complained about that, the developers said they were trying to tell '... a more personal story with the protagonist.' or words very close to that effect.
The multiple personality issue aside the game also suffered from really dumbed down ahem, streamlined combat/skill tree mechanics and the over reuse of the same floor plans over and over again.
After reading a bunch of negative ''user reviews''(never trust ''official reviews''), i've decided to give Bethesda the middle finger and choose other RPG videogames for Christmas.
After reading a bunch of negative ''user reviews''(never trust ''official reviews''), i've decided to give Bethesda the middle finger and choose other RPG videogames for Christmas.
I'm not a huge fan of the 'all or nothing' philosophy of 'Always/never' trust X opinions... Read the opinions and look for what you might like (or dislike) about a game. Then judge based on the content not the absolute number value. Some "Official reviews" are spot on and some "user reviews" are significantly jaded or biased because they have an axe to grind or because it is "Popular" to be controversial.
Ignoring information that is available merely because it is popular to knock the source isn't always the best solution. Nor is drinking the cool-aid merely because it is an unpaid source a good idea.
Well, that's a bit disappointing. And me with just having wrapped up my Dark Souls obsession for the time being. I was hoping for a brand new obsession.
I've never understood the "read a review, not buying it" mentality. Nowadays official reviews are biased due to publisher funding, and user reviews have always been untrustworthy. If one is interested in a game they should simply try it themselves before making an uninformed opinion based on someone else's information.
That being said, I don't plan on buying the game because I don't have much interest in it, but I'm not going to let reviews dictate my opinions on it. I wasn't a huge fan of Fallout 3, so naturally I'm not fawning over 4. I am somewhat interested in the timeline placement of this game, as I've seen screenshots where everything looks pre-fallout, so that could be interesting... still not enough to warrant a purchase in my eyes, however.
There's a point there. However, research is a tool available for consumers. While it is true that no review is going to be 100% non-biased, that isn't to say that there isn't good information out there.
For me, I try not to look at the 'Numbers' or whatever aggregate value placed on a review (other than some indicator of weight) but read the reviews for content. If a reviewer pans a game due to factors that I simply don't care about, I will not 'Necessarily' put a lot of stock in it. Nor will I make any decision based on one single review. However, if I see several different reviews from different sources, all stating factors that I DO value and all pretty much saying the same thing (although in different words so that they aren't cut and pastes), I do weigh that information.
As it stands, I haven't decided for all times if I won't get the game, merely that initial reviews have made me a bit more skeptical. The next few days will yield yet more research on my end including reviewing videos on gameplay. Then I'll decide.
But yes, basing an all or nothing decision on one (or even just a limited selection of) reviews doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Nor does excluding readily available information, albeit taken with a grain of salt.
One of the benefits of following specific gaming sites is that you can look at a review, read its conclusion, and then assess that review's usefulness based on what you know about the reviewer. For example, I could read any Kevin VanOrd review and know which parts to ignore and which elements were things that I knew I'd agree with. I'm starting to develop a similar sense with Peter Brown.
Don't take what you read wholesale; think about it critically, based on what you know about the reviewer, their intended audience, yourself as a gamer, etc. Just because Alexa Ray Correia loved the newest Assassin's Creed game doesn't mean you will; just because Danny O'Dwyer hated it doesn't mean it's not worth playing.
(All of these names I'm mentioning are from GameSpot.)
That's just my two cents. Know your source; in many ways that will get you better and more reliable information than just looking at a bunch of posts in the Steam user review section.
Ignore reviews. If you want to play the game for yourself then buy it and play it; you will decide for yourself whether you like it or you do not. If you don't want to risk the money because you aren't certain you will like it then don't buy it. The "zomg this is the best game ever!" folks are probably paid to say that just like the "I can't believe they released this POS! I hate ! They ruined it!" folks were paid to say that (or are just trolls).
I couldn't upgrade the computer yet so I am going to wait even though I have been waiting for this game for quite some time. I'll just wander around the Capitol Wasteland or the Mojave until then.
Ignore reviews. If you want to play the game for yourself then buy it and play it; you will decide for yourself whether you like it or you do not.
If I did this, I would have a whole heck of a lot MORE games on my 'To play list' than I already do now.
I agree that generally the most vocally loud 'noise maker' reviews are generally outliers and not to be paid much heed. But equally, just because some loudmouth says "it's a turd" doesn't mean that it ISN'T, merely that people will be loud.
I like what @Dee said. "Know your reviewers" and read lots of different ones. Assess what is being said against how you feel, particularly if they give examples. And if you see trends in reviews, particularly those that make coherent sense and aren't just trolling/ecstatic responses, pay closer attention to them.
Another avenue is to check out online gameplay footage. That will give the viewer the chance to experience (albeit 2nd hand) actual gameplay without having to put your money down.
After reading a bunch of negative ''user reviews''(never trust ''official reviews''), i've decided to give Bethesda the middle finger and choose other RPG videogames for Christmas.
Here's a review for you, it's good. It's fun, it is basically a better fallout 3. It has problems, but I'm 18 hrs in since yesterday and only not playing now because steam is being stupid.
The only things I don't like about this game so far are Dogmeat counts as a companion and the map seems kinda small. I've already explored like a third of it. Also you have to give your companions more than 1 ammo, which makes sense, but almost leads to pointless micro management. another thing is the voice acting on the protagonist, it's really lame. They should of given us some choices, he sounds like a wimp, an annoying wimp.
The first batch of reviews will always be heavily negative. These players/critics are not enjoying the game enough to continue playing it so they stop and rant because they feel like they wasted their money.
The second batch is usually fanboyism attempting to counter the negativity being spread.
The next batch are those that have played the game extensively are now able to critic it properly. They will echo the concerns of some of the negative reviews but parlay it with things that they enjoyed and kept them playing.
The best reviews are always user reviews scored between 6-8. Read those ones only.
Comments
It is different than the open world concept where your character can be anything that you want that Fallout 4 is offering.
The multiple personality issue aside the game also suffered from really dumbed down ahem, streamlined combat/skill tree mechanics and the over reuse of the same floor plans over and over again.
Ignoring information that is available merely because it is popular to knock the source isn't always the best solution. Nor is drinking the cool-aid merely because it is an unpaid source a good idea.
That being said, I don't plan on buying the game because I don't have much interest in it, but I'm not going to let reviews dictate my opinions on it. I wasn't a huge fan of Fallout 3, so naturally I'm not fawning over 4. I am somewhat interested in the timeline placement of this game, as I've seen screenshots where everything looks pre-fallout, so that could be interesting... still not enough to warrant a purchase in my eyes, however.
For me, I try not to look at the 'Numbers' or whatever aggregate value placed on a review (other than some indicator of weight) but read the reviews for content. If a reviewer pans a game due to factors that I simply don't care about, I will not 'Necessarily' put a lot of stock in it. Nor will I make any decision based on one single review. However, if I see several different reviews from different sources, all stating factors that I DO value and all pretty much saying the same thing (although in different words so that they aren't cut and pastes), I do weigh that information.
As it stands, I haven't decided for all times if I won't get the game, merely that initial reviews have made me a bit more skeptical. The next few days will yield yet more research on my end including reviewing videos on gameplay. Then I'll decide.
But yes, basing an all or nothing decision on one (or even just a limited selection of) reviews doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Nor does excluding readily available information, albeit taken with a grain of salt.
They did have beta testers for this, right?
Don't take what you read wholesale; think about it critically, based on what you know about the reviewer, their intended audience, yourself as a gamer, etc. Just because Alexa Ray Correia loved the newest Assassin's Creed game doesn't mean you will; just because Danny O'Dwyer hated it doesn't mean it's not worth playing.
(All of these names I'm mentioning are from GameSpot.)
That's just my two cents. Know your source; in many ways that will get you better and more reliable information than just looking at a bunch of posts in the Steam user review section.
I couldn't upgrade the computer yet so I am going to wait even though I have been waiting for this game for quite some time. I'll just wander around the Capitol Wasteland or the Mojave until then.
I agree that generally the most vocally loud 'noise maker' reviews are generally outliers and not to be paid much heed. But equally, just because some loudmouth says "it's a turd" doesn't mean that it ISN'T, merely that people will be loud.
I like what @Dee said. "Know your reviewers" and read lots of different ones. Assess what is being said against how you feel, particularly if they give examples. And if you see trends in reviews, particularly those that make coherent sense and aren't just trolling/ecstatic responses, pay closer attention to them.
Another avenue is to check out online gameplay footage. That will give the viewer the chance to experience (albeit 2nd hand) actual gameplay without having to put your money down.
The first batch of reviews will always be heavily negative. These players/critics are not enjoying the game enough to continue playing it so they stop and rant because they feel like they wasted their money.
The second batch is usually fanboyism attempting to counter the negativity being spread.
The next batch are those that have played the game extensively are now able to critic it properly. They will echo the concerns of some of the negative reviews but parlay it with things that they enjoyed and kept them playing.
The best reviews are always user reviews scored between 6-8. Read those ones only.