Posted May 21, 2011
Just found this on the Bio-Boards and thought I might share it :P
http://social.bioware.com/forum/BioWare-General/Off-Topic/Bioware-fans-downvoting-TW2-Metacritic-user-score-why-7431765-1.html
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/the-witcher-2-assassins-of-kings/user-reviews?dist=negative
http://social.bioware.com/forum/BioWare-General/Off-Topic/Bioware-fans-downvoting-TW2-Metacritic-user-score-why-7431765-1.html
Before I open the floodgates, I bought every Bioware game at launch. I love Bioware, but it's not the end-all be-all of game companies. If anything, I like Bioware more than CDProjekt Red because I've been a longstanding fan of the Bioware RPGs and only recently bought TW1 and 2.
If you check out the user reviews for The Witcher 2 on Metacritic, all of the zero scoring users gave DA2 a 10/10 or 9/10. Why? Was DA2 the second coming of Christ and The Witcher 2 is trite dribble where you'd rather eat fresh horse **** than play it? As a disclaimer, I haven't played TW2 very much (only about 5 hours), but I did play through Dragon Age 2 for 70 hours. Anyone who gives DA2 a 10/10 should give TW2 at least 5/10 or higher because so much is similar. Both are RPGs, so that's worth at least a point, right? Both have pretty good stories, characters, voice acting, etc. On the graphics side, TW2 blows DA2 away both artistically and technically, but graphics don't make the game.
It seems that either DA2 fanboys are butthurt and want to destroy any competing game, or the review scale has lost most of what it meant when I grew up. In my day, 10/10 was a masterpiece, and 0/10 was something so broken, buggy, and downright terrible that playing it worsened your day. But now? People give 10/10 to games they like, and 0/10 to games they don't like. I guess that's the point of a subjective review system, but opinions should have no weight in a review score, only with how you formulate your arguments justifying any given score, and I've yet to see one of TW2's naysayers come up with better arguments than "I don't like this game, therefore it is **** incarnate".
And it's true, if you go there and click most of the people's usernames that gave it a "0" or "1", almost all of them voted Dragon Age 2 a "10". If you check out the user reviews for The Witcher 2 on Metacritic, all of the zero scoring users gave DA2 a 10/10 or 9/10. Why? Was DA2 the second coming of Christ and The Witcher 2 is trite dribble where you'd rather eat fresh horse **** than play it? As a disclaimer, I haven't played TW2 very much (only about 5 hours), but I did play through Dragon Age 2 for 70 hours. Anyone who gives DA2 a 10/10 should give TW2 at least 5/10 or higher because so much is similar. Both are RPGs, so that's worth at least a point, right? Both have pretty good stories, characters, voice acting, etc. On the graphics side, TW2 blows DA2 away both artistically and technically, but graphics don't make the game.
It seems that either DA2 fanboys are butthurt and want to destroy any competing game, or the review scale has lost most of what it meant when I grew up. In my day, 10/10 was a masterpiece, and 0/10 was something so broken, buggy, and downright terrible that playing it worsened your day. But now? People give 10/10 to games they like, and 0/10 to games they don't like. I guess that's the point of a subjective review system, but opinions should have no weight in a review score, only with how you formulate your arguments justifying any given score, and I've yet to see one of TW2's naysayers come up with better arguments than "I don't like this game, therefore it is **** incarnate".
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/the-witcher-2-assassins-of-kings/user-reviews?dist=negative