Hopefully CPY will crack it in three months, having EA remove Denuvo from future updates, so they appear in warez form since the game needs polishing obviously...
At this point, I'm convinced it was made by 12 year olds or that they tried to parody BioWare. Not sure why either would be the case, but I refuse to believe adults with experience made this as a serious product.
As a gamer who thought (we're almost in 2020, holy shit!) gaming would be about higher standards and quality control in the future, I've been worried about the state of things for a long time.
There are no third-party organs of quality control providing oversight even on the horizon; both into the actual software, but also looking into pre-/post-PR methods applied by the publishers; and also in terms of the treatment of workers/the hours they have to work at some of these studios are high-pressure/poorly compensated, threatened to be replaced easily etc. That means there are no sanctions to stop most of this from happening.
That we are still exposed to bullshots, fake presentations and developers are allowed to pretty much lie on camera and on public access TV with no legal consequences is nothing short of astounding. They are privileged indeed. There are no ratified world or even regional online software purchase consumer protection laws.
As gaming gets more and more weaved into modern culture, we still can't help being in awe of these developers and publishers who for some reason can't stop fucking us over and stealing our money. This isn't some tiny industry. This isn't some shoe-shiner on the corner. This stuff is huge. The money flowing everywhere, and gaming is tied to all sorts of activities now, not just hardware, but all sorts of activities, sports, clothing, furniture, food and whatnot else. There's money. Everywhere. While other industries have more rules and most countries have domestic laws concerning physical products, the digital stuff is like the wild west I'd say.
In the era of Indie-games going ham on Steam, Kickstarters and Early Access - and Beta tests which aren't really beta tests but just PR events: We pay more than ever for our video games and computers. We demand LESS and accept more mistakes, are more forgiving and forgetful, and patient for patches and updates; with Rome 2 they were still "trying" to fix it (with a tiny patch crew) a year later; a game people paid a lot for, just as an example.
I think it is impossible for gamers to 'rally'. Like with other industries, it has to be handled in a political and legislative arena.
However, I just want to point out that lying in advertisements has been the standard since advertisements were invented. I'm not saying it should be ignored or condoned, don't get me wrong. I'm saying it's the same for every ad.
That's why I'm always a bit surprised by the level of outrage when it's "discovered" that the final game doesn't look like the announcement trailers.
I'm like: "woa dude... are you telling me that an ad is presenting a product in a more inviting way than it actually is? No way duuuude!".
I mean, real McDonald burgers are way smaller and shittier than how they appear on TV.
Phones are slower and with shittier looking screens than how they appear in promo videos.
Cars are not as silent, spacious and comfortable as they appear in ads.
Ads lie. That's it. It has always been the case. Why would you expect it to be different in the gaming industry.
I mean, you can make an entire movie trailer with scenes that ARE NOT ACTUALLY IN THE MOVIE, and no one gives a fuck.
Again, let me stress this: I'm not saying it's a good thing or that it should be ignored! I'm just remarking on how there seems to be a higher level of outrage for these things in the gaming world. Maybe it's a good thing, maybe it can be channeled into changing the industry. I surely hope so.
with people like this in their team its no wonder its turned into absoulte shit
Shits contract didn't get renewed and he was just a codemonkey with no importance. However even the Bioware producer is anti white and fully supported this donkey.
Funny thing is if anyone contacted EA about this you get hordes of Indian support employees spamming you forms and crap about anti cheating etc.
After the reviews are in and dust has settled, it looks like all that remains is just a very mediocre game.
If 75+ on Metacritic is mediocre, sure. To me, that's decent to quite good.
I have a feeling it will gain a little momentum after a few months, once people get over the need to bash for the sake of it.
Strange that DA:I got such a warm reception, as it was worse in most ways - in my opinion - and the core gameplay (combat) is vastly superior in ME:A.
So, why did DA:I get 85+ on Metacritic? I'll never know.
Thats not how this works, fanboy. User score will be well below that, and you know it. Just as it is with DA:I. You've got paid shills left and right, of course the critic score will be high.
After the reviews are in and dust has settled, it looks like all that remains is just a very mediocre game.
If 75+ on Metacritic is mediocre, sure. To me, that's decent to quite good.
I have a feeling it will gain a little momentum after a few months, once people get over the need to bash for the sake of it.
Strange that DA:I got such a warm reception, as it was worse in most ways - in my opinion - and the core gameplay (combat) is vastly superior in ME:A.
So, why did DA:I get 85+ on Metacritic? I'll never know.
Thats not how this works, fanboy. User score will be well below that, and you know it. Just as it is with DA:I. You've got paid shills left and right, of course the critic score will be high.
I'm talking about professional critics - not emotionally fueled haters. So, that's exactly how it works.
User reviews for Bioware/Bethesda games are as useful as Donald Trump in a serious debate.
Again, critics rated DA:I 85+ - which makes little sense given this context.
After the reviews are in and dust has settled, it looks like all that remains is just a very mediocre game.
If 75+ on Metacritic is mediocre, sure. To me, that's decent to quite good.
I have a feeling it will gain a little momentum after a few months, once people get over the need to bash for the sake of it.
Strange that DA:I got such a warm reception, as it was worse in most ways - in my opinion - and the core gameplay (combat) is vastly superior in ME:A.
So, why did DA:I get 85+ on Metacritic? I'll never know.
Maybe DA:I was technically a better game? Dunno i didn't play it myself but i can't remember seeing so much shit about it, the worst thing about was it's bad mmoish quest design and sometimes shitty writing but i wasn't a total mess from start to finish like this game seems to be.
I really like Mass Effect: Andromeda, but I don’t know that you will.
[...]
Does this sound like a mess? Because it’s a total goddamned mess.
[...]
This all sucks. It’s cumbersome and slow, and discourages the use of some gameplay elements that are given fairly prominent placement.
[...]
Once I did actually get to play the game, rather than struggle with a fair bit of extemporaneous build-up, things improved.
[...]
Let’s be clear: I’m conflicted about Mass Effect: Andromeda. There’s a lot of roughness throughout the game, and the technical issues, while not game-breaking, are often incredibly distracting.
But it’s my time with the cast that I’m still thinking about, and the mysteries about the world that haven’t been answered that make me feel like I’m waiting once again for a new Mass Effect game. And if I’m judging a game by where it leaves me, Andromeda succeeds, even if it stumbled getting there.
After the reviews are in and dust has settled, it looks like all that remains is just a very mediocre game.
If 75+ on Metacritic is mediocre, sure. To me, that's decent to quite good.
I have a feeling it will gain a little momentum after a few months, once people get over the need to bash for the sake of it.
Strange that DA:I got such a warm reception, as it was worse in most ways - in my opinion - and the core gameplay (combat) is vastly superior in ME:A.
So, why did DA:I get 85+ on Metacritic? I'll never know.
Maybe DA:I was technically a better game? Dunno i didn't play it myself but i can't remember seeing so much shit about it, the worst thing about was it's bad mmoish quest design and sometimes shitty writing but i wasn't a total mess from start to finish like this game seems to be.
Not in my experience.
DA:I had similarly weak facial animations and odd expressions - and I never managed to create a character that looked very good.
It had its share of performance issues, that's for sure.
Story was "meh" - which is more or less what the ME:A story seems to be.
But most people didn't really enjoy the combat, but I kinda liked it. That said, ME:A combat is much more fun and interesting.
While I've only played ME:A for ~10 hours - I like it more than DA:I - which I also quite liked.
That said, neither of them are really that great.
Last edited by Casus on Mon, 20th Mar 2017 13:26; edited 1 time in total
After the reviews are in and dust has settled, it looks like all that remains is just a very mediocre game.
If 75+ on Metacritic is mediocre, sure. To me, that's decent to quite good.
I have a feeling it will gain a little momentum after a few months, once people get over the need to bash for the sake of it.
Strange that DA:I got such a warm reception, as it was worse in most ways - in my opinion - and the core gameplay (combat) is vastly superior in ME:A.
So, why did DA:I get 85+ on Metacritic? I'll never know.
The way I gauge if this game is worth my money is this:
If trolls are saying it's the worst game ever and the professional reviewers are giving it ~75 then the reality is likely to be inbetween - an average middling game.
I don't think it will gain momentum. Launch always attracts the biggest mindshare.
After the reviews are in and dust has settled, it looks like all that remains is just a very mediocre game.
If 75+ on Metacritic is mediocre, sure. To me, that's decent to quite good.
I have a feeling it will gain a little momentum after a few months, once people get over the need to bash for the sake of it.
Strange that DA:I got such a warm reception, as it was worse in most ways - in my opinion - and the core gameplay (combat) is vastly superior in ME:A.
So, why did DA:I get 85+ on Metacritic? I'll never know.
The way I gauge if this game is worth my money is this:
If trolls are saying it's the worst game ever and the professional reviewers are giving it ~75 then the reality is likely to be inbetween - an average middling game.
I don't think it will gain momentum. Launch always attracts the biggest mindshare.
I don't mean momentum in terms of rating, but in terms of popularity.
You have to look at games in context.
For "underdogs" - most hardcore gamers tend to overrate games. For big shiny AAA games by Bioware - the vocal minority will destroy it no matter what. Same goes for Bethesda games, if slightly less so. Unless we're talking Codex - as they're even more blinded by hatred than the average Bioware obsessed nerd-rager.
Now, I DID expect critics to rate it at 80+ - which is a cause for concern.
In this case, I'm actually estimating the critics to be just about right in terms of the average score.
But, obviously, it depends on personal preferences.
I'm a huge sci-fi fan - and I tend to focus more on exploration/progression than story or characters.
That will skew my opinion of the game.
Much like I never found Witcher 3 all that good - because it kinda sucks in those particular ways.
For Witcher 3 or "story/character" fans - ME:A is most likely not that good. Still, the combat/progression should make it decent for most people - really.
Last edited by Casus on Mon, 20th Mar 2017 13:34; edited 1 time in total
I really like Mass Effect: Andromeda, but I don’t know that you will.
[...]
Does this sound like a mess? Because it’s a total goddamned mess.
[...]
This all sucks. It’s cumbersome and slow, and discourages the use of some gameplay elements that are given fairly prominent placement.
[...]
Once I did actually get to play the game, rather than struggle with a fair bit of extemporaneous build-up, things improved.
[...]
Let’s be clear: I’m conflicted about Mass Effect: Andromeda. There’s a lot of roughness throughout the game, and the technical issues, while not game-breaking, are often incredibly distracting.
But it’s my time with the cast that I’m still thinking about, and the mysteries about the world that haven’t been answered that make me feel like I’m waiting once again for a new Mass Effect game. And if I’m judging a game by where it leaves me, Andromeda succeeds, even if it stumbled getting there.
Now if only we saw some backlash in sales too maybe EA and the other major companies would try to make good games instead of games that pander to X/YZ crowds
boundle (thoughts on cracking AITD) wrote:
i guess thouth if without a legit key the installation was rolling back we are all fucking then
Now if only we saw some backlash in sales too maybe EA and the other major companies would try to make good games instead of games that pander to X/YZ crowds
What is "good" though? You can't really make an objectively good game - someone will always be pissed about some element or other. You have to pick a market segment and cater to their needs/desires, usually at the expense of someone else. Presumably their bean counters determined that this approach would provide the best return on investment. I doubt we'll ever see sales figures, but we'll have to wait for an EA financial call in the next 6-12 months to get some indication of how their plan worked out.
Now if only we saw some backlash in sales too maybe EA and the other major companies would try to make good games instead of games that pander to X/YZ crowds
What is "good" though? You can't really make an objectively good game - someone will always be pissed about some element or other. You have to pick a market segment and cater to their needs/desires, usually at the expense of someone else. Presumably their bean counters determined that this approach would provide the best return on investment. I doubt we'll ever see sales figures, but we'll have to wait for an EA financial call in the next 6-12 months to get some indication of how their plan worked out.
This game will sell like hot cakes. Every ME fag will buy it. Simple.
Games are for gamers. That's your market. That's your audience.
Even a candycrush fag will not deny that some FPShit games are decent.
Even some pokefags will tell you that binding of issac is an ok game.
If you make a good game: regardless of political views/gender issues/what the fuck evers people will play it.
Hell people loved that furry side scroller game from way back. And it was made by a guy in a rabbit costume waiting to get fucked by a guy in a fox costume. Does it matter? No.
It was a decent entry in the metrovania genre.
If you want to tackle current social politics make sure you do it right. Make sure that it isn't the CORE of your game. No one here cares. Not a soul gives a fuck if a game has a tranny in it or a black president or a strong female character. As long as they're written properly and the execution is good. it's not here from what I've seen. It's laughably stereotypical and an insult to a lot people. (My guess is half the people working on it were embarrassed by majority of the game and couldn't say shit in fear of SocialFAGS accosting a black because he/she\xe\xi/it didn't not like how their people were portrayed)
That's the problem with games like these that focus more on pushing their beliefs onto others rather than establishing a good game first. And this is also a problem with certain game journos who can't say shit about a game that'll get them blasted and hated.
But I will tell you this: Every ME fag that will buy this game will not LOVE it. And every LGBTQFAG that they aimed this game for will not buy it.
Code:
Mass Effect: Andromeda is disappointing in many aspects (not just the visual ones), even if sci-fi mood, exploration, crafting and multiplayer are well done.
8/10
Code:
Mass Effect: Andromeda is a paradox: it's both disappointing and excellent. A mammoth title, it delivers tons of great content, but hamstrings itself with a poor first few hours, a few horrible systems, and some uninspired scenarios. Even so, it's pretty great!
8/10
Code:
Mass Effect: Andromeda is a great game, but far from being perfect. It will satisfy the expectacions of the fans but fails on delivering a master piece with errors in almost every aspect of the game.
9/10
Code:
Andromeda is superb, easily jettisoning Ryder and crew ahead of Commander Shepard and his team.
9/10
Code:
Andromeda's combat soars but its storytelling sputters, making the series' first venture into uncharted space a shaky but occasionally satisfying new adventure.
6/10
Code:
Games have to fit into our lives, and that's not always fair. Mass Effect: Andromeda might've worked a decade ago on the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, but it doesn't work in a world that is delivering games like Horizon: Zero Dawn, Nier: Automata, and The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild. In this reality, BioWare's latest role-playing game is old, broken, and often boring.
Worst of all, it's going to disappoint fans of the Mass Effect series.
5.5/10
A lot of people are afraid of scoring it accordingly. Beauty of this... a lot of journos will be the reason gaming journalism will be less and less trusted if they continue reviewing POS like this with high scores. You'll see in 5 days after kids buy this game and play it... the backlash will be AMAZING. Gamegate 2.0
Sin317 wrote:
I win, you lose. Or Go fuck yourself.
Last edited by WaldoJ on Mon, 20th Mar 2017 14:14; edited 1 time in total
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
